Abstract
Bioenergy holds significant promise to mitigate the climate-related problems associated with fossil fuel use in heat, electricity, and transportation fuel production. Many governments are encouraging bioeconomy growth with new policies. International trade between bioenergy producing and consuming nations has increased over the years. Developed countries with significant greenhouse gas emission (GHG) emission reduction goals are replacing fossil fuels with bioenergy, creating new export commodities for developing nations. However, increased bioeconomy development can put local social, economic, and environmental conditions in bioenergy producing areas at risk. To minimize the potentially adverse impacts of bioenergy development on existing socioeconomic and environmental conditions, several sustainability certification programs have recently been developed. However, there may be significant differences in how actors across multiple scales, including international non-governmental organizations, state and national governments, and local community members perceive a sustainable bioeconomy. In this chapter, we look specifically at two bioenergy development cases, one in the context of economic development in Latin America (jatropha-based bioenergy development in Yucatan, Mexico) and another in the context of a post-industrialized nation (wood-based bioenergy development in Wisconsin, USA) to understand how different actors view sustainability. Our conclusions suggest that, first, developing a sustainable bioeconomy requires addressing sustainability in all stages in the supply chain, and that, second, community perceptions matter in developing a sustainable bioeconomy, thus there is value in a bottom-up approach to policymaking.
Keywords
- Bioenergy development
- Bioenergy policy
- Public perceptions of bioenergy
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Aguilar FX, Song N, Shifley S (2011) Review of consumption trends and public policies promoting woody biomass as an energy feedstock in the US. Biomass Bioenerg 35(8):3708–3718
Bain C (2011) Local ownership of ethanol plants: what are the effects on communities? Biomass Bioenergy 35(4):1400–1407
Banerjee A, Schelly C, Halvorsen KE (2017) Understanding public perceptions of wood-based electricity production in Wisconsin, United States: place-based dynamics and Social Representations. Environ Sociol 23:1–13
Becker DR, Larson D, Lowell EC (2009) Financial considerations of policy options to enhance biomass utilization for reducing wildfire hazards. Forest Policy and Economics 11(8):628–635
Becker DR, Moseley C, Lee C (2011) A supply chain analysis framework for assessing state-level forest biomass utilization policies in the United States. Biomass Bioenerg 35(4):1429–1439
Biernacki P, Waldorf D (1981) Snowball sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociol Methods Res 10(2):141–163
Dale VH, Efroymson RA, Kline KL, Langholtz MH, Leiby PN, Oladosu GA, Davis MR, Downing ME, Hilliard MR (2013) Indicators for assessing socioeconomic sustainability of bioenergy systems: a short list of practical measures. Ecol Ind 26:87–102
Delmas MA, Montes-Sancho MJ (2011) US state policies for renewable energy: context and effectiveness. Energy Policy 39(5):2273–2288
Dimitropoulos A, Kontoleon A (2009) Assessing the determinants of local acceptability of wind-farm investment: a choice experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands. Energy Policy 37(5):1842–1854
Dodds A (2012) Comparative public policy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Dornburg V, van Dam J, Faaij A (2007) Estimating GHG emission mitigation supply curves of large-scale biomass use on a country level. Biomass Bioenerg 31(1):46–65
Drezner DW (2001) Globalization and policy convergence. Int Stud Rev 3(1):53–78
DSIRE; Database for State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (2016) Incentives/policies by State: federal: policies for renewables and efficiency. Available online 6 June 2016 http://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program?state=WI
Durst PB, McKenzie PJ, Brown CL, Appanah S (2006) Challenges facing certification and eco-labelling of forest products in developing countries. Int For Rev 8(2):193–200
Eastmond A, Garcia C, Fuentes A, Becerril-Garcia J (2014) Mexico. In: Solomon BD, Bailis R (eds) Sustainable development of biofuels in Latin America and the Caribbean. Springer, New York, pp 203–222
Ekardt F, Von Bredow H (2012) Extended emissions trading versus sustainability criteria: managing the ecological and social ambivalences of bioenergy. Renew Energy Law Policy Rev, 49–69
Ekins P (2004) Step changes for decarbonising the energy system: research needs for renewables, energy efficiency and nuclear power. Energy Policy 32(17):1891–1904
Eltham DC, Harrison GP, Allen SJ (2008) Change in public attitudes towards a Cornish wind farm: implications for planning. Energy Policy 36(1):23–33
Evans AM, Perschel RT, Kittler BA (2013) Overview of forest biomass harvesting guidelines. J Sustain For 32(1–2):89–107
Halvorsen KE, Barnes JR, Solomon BD (2009) Upper Midwestern USA ethanol potential from cellulosic materials. Soc Nat Resour 22(10):931–938
Halvorsen KE, Selfa TA, Becker DS, Hinrichs C (eds) (2011) Special issue: socioeconomic dimensions of U.S. bioenergy. Biomass Bioenergy 35(4)
Heichel S, Pape J, Sommerer T (2005) Is there convergence in convergence research? An overview of empirical studies on policy convergence. J Eur Publ Policy 12(5):817–840
Herrick S, Kovach J, Padley E, Wagner C, Zastrow D (2009) Wisconsin’s forestland woody biomass harvesting guidelines. WI DNR Division of Forestry and Wisconsin Council on Forestry, Madison, WI
Junginger M, Goh CS, Faaij A (eds) (2013) International bioenergy trade: history, status & outlook on securing sustainable bioenergy supply, demand and markets, vol 52. Springer Science & Business Media
Kivimaa P, Mickwitz P (2011) Public policy as a part of transforming energy systems: framing bioenergy in Finnish energy policy. J Clean Prod 19(16):1812–1821
Laird FN, Stefes C (2009) The diverging paths of German and United States policies for renewable energy: sources of difference. Energy Policy 37(7):2619–2629
Lantiainen S, Song N (2015) Review and comparative analysis of US and EU public policies promoting wood energy. In: Dell G, Egger C (eds) World sustainable energy days next 2014. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp 89–94
Lipp J (2007) Lessons for effective renewable electricity policy from Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom. Energy Policy 35(11):5481–5495
Manning P, Taylor G, Hanley ME (2015) Bioenergy, food production and biodiversity—an unlikely alliance? GCB Bioenergy 7(4):570–576
Sagar AD, Kartha S (2007) Bioenergy and sustainable development? Annu Rev Environ Resour 32:131–167
Selfa T, Bain C, Moreno R, Eastmond A, Sweitz S, Bailey C, Pereira GS, Souza T, Medeiros R (2015) Interrogating social sustainability in the biofuels sector in Latin America: tensions between global standards and local experiences in Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia. Environ Manage 56(6):1315–1329
Solomon BD, Barnes JR, Halvorsen KE (2007) Grain and cellulosic ethanol: history, economics, and energy policy. Biomass Bioenerg 31(6):16–25
Solomon BD, Banerjee A, Acevedo A, Halvorsen KE, Eastmond A (2015) Policies for the sustainable development of biofuels in the pan American region: a review and synthesis of five countries. Environ Manage 56(6):1276–1294
Sorda G, Banse M, Kemfert C (2010) An overview of biofuel policies across the world. Energy Policy 38(11):6977–6988
Teddlie C, Yu F (2007) Mixed methods sampling a typology with examples. J Mixed Methods Res 1(1):77–100
Tongco MDC (2007) Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Res Appl 5:147–158
Wiser R, Porter K, Grace R (2005) Evaluating experience with renewables portfolio standards in the United States. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 10(2):237–263
Witzel A (2000) The problem-centered interview. For Qual Soc Res 1(1)
Wüstenhagen R, Wolsink M, Bürer MJ (2007) Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 35(5):2683–2691
Zoellner J, Schweizer-Ries P, Wemheuer C (2008) Public acceptance of renewable energies: Results from case studies in Germany. Energy Policy 36(11):4136–4141
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the National Science Foundation’s Partnerships in International Research and Education (PIRE) Program
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Banerjee, A., Schelly, C.L., Halvorsen, K.E. (2018). Constructing a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Multi-scalar Perceptions of Sustainability. In: Leal Filho, W., Pociovălișteanu, D., Borges de Brito, P., Borges de Lima, I. (eds) Towards a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Principles, Challenges and Perspectives. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73028-8_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73028-8_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73027-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73028-8
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)
