Conceptualizing controversies in the EU circular bioeconomy transition

Abstract

The transition towards a circular bioeconomy (CBE) in the European Union is not without contestation. In particular, research has highlighted potential trade-offs of the large-scale production of bio-resources, for instance with environmental quality goals. To date, however, it remains underexplored in the CBE literature how controversies develop throughout a transition process. To address this gap, this paper explores where controversies are situated in a transition, how they change throughout, and how they influence the transition process. First, we suggest that controversies can be situated on and between different system layers within a transition. Second, we offer an explanation of how controversies evolve, as actors confirm, integrate, disintegrate and polarize underlying storylines. Third, these controversies can have both productive and unproductive outcomes while they unfold throughout a transition. We illustrate this understanding with the example of biorefineries as CBE key technology and discuss a research agenda on controversies in sustainability transitions.

Does the micro become macro in developing economies? A study to trace sustainable circular replacements for emerging world's green development

“…The European Union, Japan, and the United States are global bioscience leaders and have enabled circular policies in their national interests (El‐Chichakli et al, 2016; Starke et al, 2022). Developing economies are trying hard to catch up with the developed world's biotechnology competitiveness and performance to build biopharmaceutical clusters.…”

“…Scholarly work revolving around regular interaction modules is elaborated in our study. That includes educational design concerning changing consumers' attitudes unknowingly towards circular and negative premiums about sustainability, which needs undivided attention (Starke et al, 2022; Paris et al, 2023).…”

“…Even the employment of circular bio‐economies‐associated policies materializes at macro, meso, and micro action levels (Ghisellini et al, 2016; Sharma & Malaviya, 2023; Starke et al, 2022). However, it is a question of whether or not it possesses divergent indicators at each level rather than pursuing a “one size fits all” policy at all the action levels.…”

“…Our study partly borrows the meaning of micro indicators from the scholarly work of eminent researchers where a company and a consumer are synonymous with micro‐levels (Ghisellini et al, 2016; Sharma & Malaviya, 2023; Starke et al, 2022). The spotlight on conceptualizing controversies about European Union development concerning CBE is observed in developed world scholarly work, profitably followed by establishing ecosystem services confined to green development (Sharma & Malaviya, 2023).…”

“…If not, what else is necessary to achieve circular bio-economies (Salvador et al, 2020)? At the individual level, do patriotism (Eberle, 2019), brotherhood (Maglio, 2019), intrusive thought processes (Foxon, 2011), community-building initiatives (Salvador et al, 2020), regional development (Adeleye et al, 2020;D'Amato & Korhonen, 2021), sustainable leadership (Tudoran & Condrea, 2020), psychological safety (Davidson, 2016) Even the employment of circular bio-economies-associated policies materializes at macro, meso, and micro action levels (Ghisellini et al, 2016;Sharma & Malaviya, 2023;Starke et al, 2022). However, it is a question of whether or not it possesses divergent indicators at each level rather than pursuing a "one size fits all" policy at all the action levels.…”