4.6 Article

Bridging the Gaps for a Circular' Bioeconomy: Selection Criteria, Bio-Based Value Chain and Stakeholder Mapping

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su10061695

Keywords

value chain; multi-criteria decision analysis; circular economy; value chain-mapping; bioeconomy

Funding

  1. project STAR-ProBio
  2. European Union's Horizon 2020 program and innovation programme [727740, BB-01-2016]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bio-products and bio-based value chains have been identified as one of the most promising pathways to attaining a resource-efficient circular economy. Such a valorization and value-addition approach incorporates an intricate network of processes and actors, contributing to socio-economic growth, environmental benefits and technological advances. In the present age of limited time and funding models to achieve ambitious sustainable development targets, whilst mitigating climate change, a systematic approach employing two-tier multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can be useful in supporting the identification of promising bio-based value chains, that are significant to the EU plans for the bio-economy. Their identification is followed by an elaborate mapping of their value chains to visualize/foresee the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges attributable to those bio-based value chains. To demonstrate this methodology, a systematic review of 12 bio-based value chains, prevalent in the EU, sourcing their starting material from biomass and bio-waste, has been undertaken. The selected value chains are mapped to visualize the linkages and interactions between the different stages, chain actors, employed conversion routes, product application and existing/potential end-of-life options. This approach will help chain-actors, particularly investors and policy-makers, understand the complexities of such multi-actor systems and make informed decisions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available