This article provides useful information for universities offering forestry programs and facing the growing demand for bioeconomy education. An explorative survey on bioeconomy perception among 1400 students enrolled in 29 universities across nine European countries offering forestry programs was performed. The data have been elaborated via descriptive statistics and cluster analysis. Around 70% of respondents have heard about the bioeconomy, mainly through university courses. Students perceive forestry as the most important sector for bioeconomy; however, the extent of perceived importance of forestry varies between countries, most significantly across groups of countries along a North–South European axis. Although differences across bachelor and master programs are less pronounced, they shed light on how bioeconomy is addressed by university programs and the level of student satisfaction with this. These differences and particularities are relevant for potential development routes towards comprehensive bioeconomy curricula at European forestry universities with a forestry focus.

There is a need for societal transformation towards bioeconomy, which promotes the replacement of non-renewable natural resources with renewable ones. Slovakia has considerable potential for bioeconomy development, yet this potential remains untapped. This article evaluates the public perception regarding the individual properties of renewable and non-renewable materials and their relation to the potential for bioeconomy development in Slovakia. It is found that Slovak consumers prefer natural renewable materials, regardless of other influencing factors, and realise the need for transformation towards a more sustainable economy.

The paper builds on previous international research done by Masiero et al. (2020). It applies on Slovak national level and expands the previous study with different study programs. The societal transformation towards bioeconomy provides an opportunity for changing current economy and societies into more sustainable ones with mitigation of the environmental pressures at hearts. Such societal transition requires involvement of all stakeholders in bio-economy discussion and decision-making process and studying their perceptions of bioeconomy. Amongst all the stakeholders, future generation is particularly important, as it is important to understand bioeconomy perception by the generation of stakeholders that will manage this area in the near future. For that reason, we focus our attention on students of three bioeconomy related areas at the Technical University in Zvolen (forestry studies, wood processing studies and natural resources management studies). We were able to identify significant differences in bioeconomy perception between analyzed categories. The familiarity with the concept is quite high, as more then two thirds have heard about bioeconomy before the survey was conducted. As the main information sources were selected news, university courses and social media. The study program had a greater impact on perceived importance of forests within bioeconomy than the type of study. Overall, students perceive development of forest-based bioeconomy as favouring sustainable forest management.

Within the concept of bioeconomy at Slovak level, forestry is often seen as a key sector. For that reason, the concept of forest-based bioeconomy gained a specific importance. To this concept is on the European level already paid increasing attention not only in research, but also in politics. Whether or not the forest-based bioeconomy will have a success in Slovakia is greatly dependent on stakeholders´ perception and attitude towards the concept. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to identify stakeholders´ perception of forest-based bioeconomy. To achieve this, we identified 13 stakeholders from various, bioeconomy-related, sectors that were suitable for qualitative interviewing. The respondents are representants of public and private organizations and are active in relevant areas. The study was conducted using structured interview consisting of 12 questions. Respondents in general tend to lean towards forest-based bioeconomy, as they feel that it brings more opportunities (for the forest and wood-processing sector, economy, industry, nature protection) than risks. However, a threat has presented itself during the study, being the fact that forest stakeholders do not feel to be sufficiently involved in bioeconomy discussion. For the bioeconomy to fulfil its role as an all-purpose weapon, there is an urgent need for more precise policy guidance and for involving of all relevant stakeholders into discussion.

Research background: The European Union has laid the foundations of European bioeconomy by publishing Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe in 2012 and A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment in 2018. These publications have inspired individual countries to develop their national bioeconomy strategy. Purpose of the article: The lack of engagement in the area of bioeconomy appears to be a problem, as individual national strategies differ vastly amongst the countries. For successful bioeconomy development, there is a need to identify and address the differences in these strategies. That is why, we aim our attention at comparing European and Slovak bioeconomy legislative and at analysing to what extent have Slovak legislative implemented aspects of the European legislative. Methods: The methodology of this study relies on document analysis of officially adopted policy strategies and roadmaps in the EU and Slovak Republic. The paper aims at defining the concept of bioeconomy, its relevance for the society and identifying the differences in European and Slovak strategic documents. Findings & Value added: Since Slovakia is a part of EU, it largely transmits the key areas of EU strategies to its own national strategy. Nevertheless, while comparing strategic documents on the two levels, disparities can be find resulting from specific prerequisites, economic situation and other circumstances. The main difference being the extend to what bioeconomy is addressed. While EU places a great importance to this concept, Slovakia does not aim as much attention to it.