Skip to main content

The Bioeconomy in emerging economies: a study of the critical success factors based on Life Cycle Assessment and Delphi and Fuzzy-Delphi methods



The aim of this research was to identify and analyze the critical success factors for Bioeconomy development in Brazil, considering Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a contributing driving force, and propose guidelines and a roadmap for national policies in emerging economies.


To achieve this goal, a Delphi method was used with Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) experts in Brazil. The answers obtained in the final round were analyzed through the Fuzzy Delphi method. Based on these findings and using the existing literature, a set of guidelines and a roadmap were created for public policies development.

Results and discussion

From the nine critical success factors (CSF) mentioned by the experts during the Delphi survey, seven were selected for the Fuzzy Delphi step. The mapped factors were related to database, data regionalization, professionals training, public policies, public resources, market issues, and cases reporting. Debates about these CSF’s were carried out, and guidelines and a roadmap were proposed for public policies in emerging economies.


The interface between LCA and the Bioeconomy represents a recent field of knowledge with a great synergy, although studies on this topic are still scarce. The present study contributes to overcome this gap, and the proposed guidelines and roadmap bring relevant information to expand the literature with tangible ways of moving towards sustainable development economies with special attention for emerging economies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Source: Authors

Fig. 2

Source: Adapted from Lehmann et al. (2015)

Fig. 3

Source: Authors

Fig. 4

Source: Authors

Fig. 5


  1. ABNT ISO (2019) ABNT NBR ISO 14027 - Rótulos e declarações ambientais—Desenvolvimento de regras de categoria de produto (Environmental labels and declarations - Development of product category rules)

  2. Asada R, Krisztin T, di Fulvio F et al (2020) Bioeconomic transition?: projecting consumption-based biomass and fossil material flows to 2050. J Ind Ecol 24:1059–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Avesani M (2020) Sustainability, sustainable development, and business sustainability. In: Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment for Decision-Making. Elsevier, pp 21–38

  4. Basto-Pereira M, Furtado SIF, Silva RJP et al (2015) Performance indicators for clinical practice management in primary care in Portugal: Consensus from a Delphi study. Eur J Gen Pract 21:52–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Belton I, MacDonald A, Wright G, Hamlin I (2019) Improving the practical application of the Delphi method in group-based judgment: a six-step prescription for a well-founded and defensible process. Technol Forecast Soc Change 147:72–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bodjanova S (2006) Median alpha-levels of a fuzzy number. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157:879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bouzon M, Govindan K, Rodriguez CMT, Campos LMS (2016) Identification and analysis of reverse logistics barriers using fuzzy Delphi method and AHP. Resour Conserv Recycl 108:182–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bracco S, Calicioglu O, Gomez San Juan M, Flammini A (2018) Assessing the contribution of bioeconomy to the total economy: a review of national frameworks. Sustainability 10:1698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brazil (2019) Ordinance No. 121, of June 18, 2019—institutes the Bioeconomy Brazil Program—sociobiodiversity, defining objectives and thematic axes. Brazil

  10. Brazil (2017) Law No. 13,576, OF 12.26.2017 - DOU 12.27.2017—provides for the National Biofuels Policy (RenovaBio) and makes other provisions. Brazil

  11. Brundtland GH (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Oslo

  12. Bui TD, Tsai FM, Tseng ML, Ali MDH (2020) Identifying sustainable solid waste management barriers in practice using the fuzzy Delphi method. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cazeri GT, Anholon R, Ordoñez REC, Novaski O (2017) Performance measurement of green supply chain management: a literature review and gaps for further research. Brazilian J Oper Prod Manag 14:60.

  14. CNI (2013) Bioeconomia: uma agenda para o Brasil. Brasília

  15. CNI (2020) Bioeconomia e a Indústria Brasileira

  16. Cosme N, Hauschild MZ, Molin C et al (2019) Learning-by-doing: experience from 20 years of teaching LCA to future engineers. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24:553–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cristóbal J, Matos CT, Aurambout JP et al (2016) Environmental sustainability assessment of bioeconomy value chains. Biomass Bioenerg 89:159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Curran MA (2013) Life Cycle Assessment: a review of the methodology and its application to sustainability. Curr Opin Chem Eng 2:273–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. D’Amato D, Gaio M, Semenzin E (2020) A review of LCA assessments of forest-based bioeconomy products and processes under an ecosystem services perspective. Sci Total Environ 706:135859.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dietz T, Börner J, Förster J, von Braun J (2018) Governance of the Bioeconomy: a global comparative study of national Bioeconomy Strategies. Sustainability 10:3190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Etse D, McMurray A, Muenjohn N (2021) Comparing sustainable public procurement in the education and health sectors. J Clean Prod 279:123959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. European Commission (2020) Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions into our lives. Accessed 23 Oct 2020

  23. European Commission (2018a) A new bioeconomy strategy for a sustainable Europe. Accessed 23 Oct 2020

  24. European Commission (2018b) A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment. Accessed 23 Oct 2020

  25. Flostrand A, Pitt L, Bridson S (2020) The Delphi technique in forecasting– A 42-year bibliographic analysis (1975–2017). Technol Forecast Soc Change 150:119773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fritschy C, Spinler S (2019) The impact of autonomous trucks on business models in the automotive and logistics industry–a Delphi-based scenario study. Technol Forecast Soc Change 148:119736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Global Bieconomy Summit (2020) Global Bioeconomy Policy Report (IV): a decade of bioeconomy policy development around the world. International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy. Accessed 12 Feb 2021

  28. Govindan K, Rajeev A, Padhi SS, Pati RK (2020) Supply chain sustainability and performance of firms: a meta-analysis of the literature. Transp Res Part E Logist Transp Rev 137:101923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Grisham T (2009) The Delphi technique: a method for testing complex and multifaceted topics. Int J Manag Proj Bus 2:112–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G et al (2011) Life Cycle Assessment: past, present, and future. Environ Sci Technol 45:90–96.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hassan M, Ali M, Aktas E, Alkayid K (2015) Factors affecting selection decision of auto-identification technology in warehouse management: an international Delphi study. Prod Plan Control 26:1025–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ishikawa A, Amagasa M, Shiga T et al (1993) The max-min Delphi method and fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy integration. Fuzzy Sets Syst 55:241–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. ISO (2009a) ABNT NBR ISO 14040 - Gestão ambiental - Avaliação do ciclo de vida - Princípios e estrutura (Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

  34. ISO (2009b) ABNT NBR ISO 14044 - Gestão ambiental - Avaliação do ciclo de vida - Requisitos e orientações (Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelines). Brazil

  35. Kühnen M, Hahn R (2019) From SLCA to positive sustainability performance measurement: a two-tier Delphi study. J Ind Ecol 23:615–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lehmann A, Finkbeiner M, Broadbent C, Balzer RT (2015) Policy options for life cycle assessment deployment in legislation. In: Sonnemann G. MM (eds) (ed) LCA Compendium—the complete world of life cycle assessment. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 213–224

  37. Linstone HA, Turoff M (2002) The Delphi method: techniques and applications. Online edi. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Advanced Book Program, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lozano R, Barreiro-Gen M (2019) Analysing the factors affecting the incorporation of sustainable development into European Higher Education Institutions’ curricula. Sustain Dev 27:965–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Machado PG, Cunha M, Walter A et al (2020) The potential of a bioeconomy to reduce Brazilian GHG emissions towards 2030: a CGE-based life cycle analysis. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefining 14:265–285.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Mardani A, Jusoh A, Zavadskas EK (2015) Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications—two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Syst Appl 42:4126–4148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Martins VWB, Rampasso IS, Anholon R et al (2019) Knowledge management in the context of sustainability: literature review and opportunities for future research. J Clean Prod 229:489–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mendel J, John R (2002) Type-2 fuzzy sets made easy. IEEE Trans fuzzy Syst 10:117–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Mutel C, Liao X, Patouillard L et al (2019) Overview and recommendations for regionalized life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24:856–865.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Nogueira C (2019) Contradictions in the concept of sustainable development: an analysis in social, economic, and political contexts. Environ Dev 30:129–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. OECD (2019) Development Co-operation Report 2019: a fairer, greener, safer tomorrow. OECD, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  46. Osiro L, Lima-Junior FR, Carpinetti LCR (2014) A fuzzy logic approach to supplier evaluation for development. Int J Prod Econ 153:95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Patouillard L, Collet P, Lesage P et al (2019) Prioritizing regionalization efforts in life cycle assessment through global sensitivity analysis: a sector meta-analysis based on ecoinvent v3. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24:2238–2254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Philp JC, Ritchie RJ, Guy K (2013) Biobased plastics in a bioeconomy. Trends Biotechnol 31:65–67.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rampasso IS, Anholon R, Silva D et al (2019) Analysis of the perception of engineering students regarding sustainability. J Clean Prod 233:461–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Ronzon T, Sanjuan AI (2019) Friends or foes? A compatibility assessment of bioeconomy-related Sustainable Development Goals for European policy coherence J Clean Prod 119832

  51. Rowe G, Wright G (2001) Expert opinions in forecasting: the role of the delphi technique. In: Armstrong J.S. (eds) (ed) Principles of forecasting. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. Springer, Boston, MA

  52. Ryberg MW, Bjerre TK, Nielsen PH, Hauschild M (2020) Absolute environmental sustainability assessment of a Danish utility company relative to the Planetary Boundaries. J Ind Ecol 1:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Seidel C (2016) The application of life cycle assessment to public policy development. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:337–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Shen L, Olfat L, Govindan K et al (2013) A fuzzy multi criteria approach for evaluating green supplier’s performance in green supply chain with linguistic preferences. Resour Conserv Recycl 74:170–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Shumal M, Taghipour Jahromi AR, Ferdowsi A et al (2020) Comprehensive analysis of municipal solid waste rejected fractions as a source of Refused Derived Fuel in developing countries (case study of Isfahan- Iran): Environmental Impact and sustainable development. Renew Energy 146:404–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Singh PK, Sarkar P (2020) A framework based on fuzzy Delphi and DEMATEL for sustainable product development: A case of Indian automotive industry. J Clean Prod 246:118991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Smetana S (2020) Life cycle assessment of specific organic waste–based bioeconomy approaches. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem 23:50–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Toppinen A, Amato D D’, Stern T (2020) Forest-based circular bioeconomy: matching sustainability challenges and novel business opportunities? For Policy Econ 110

  59. Toppinen A, Mikkilä M, Lähtinen K (2019) ISO 26000 in Corporate sustainability practices: a case study of the forest and energy companies in Bioeconomy. In: Idowu S., Sitnikov C. ML (eds) (ed) ISO 26000 - A Standardized View on Corporate Social Responsibility. Springer, Cham, pp 95–113

  60. UN (2015) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Accessed 2 May 2019

  61. UN (2019) Megadiverse Brazil: giving biodiversity an online boost. Accessed 8 Nov 2020

  62. WBCSD (2019) CEO Guide to the Circular Bioeconomy. 4–25

  63. WBCSD (2017) CEO guide to the circular economy: the future of business is circular

  64. Wen B, Musa N, Onn CC et al (2020) Evolution of sustainability in global green building rating tools. J Clean Prod 259:120912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8:338–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—II. Inf Sci (Ny) 8:301–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Zanon LG, Munhoz Arantes RF, Calache LDDR, Carpinetti LCR (2020) A decision making model based on fuzzy inference to predict the impact of SCOR® indicators on customer perceived value. Int J Prod Econ 223:107520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) under grants 302722/2019–0, 307536/2018–1 and 305442/2018–0; Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), under grant 2019/16996–4; and by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001, under process 88887.464433/2019–00.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Izabela Simon Rampasso.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Communicated by Sonia Valdivia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rampasso, I., Quelhas, O.L.G., Anholon, R. et al. The Bioeconomy in emerging economies: a study of the critical success factors based on Life Cycle Assessment and Delphi and Fuzzy-Delphi methods. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26, 1254–1266 (2021).

Download citation


  • Green economy
  • Life cycle management
  • Bioeconomy
  • Emerging economies
  • Delphi method