A report from the International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy 
Global Bioeconomy 
Policy Report (IV):
A decade of bioeconomy policy 
development around the world

A report from the International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy 
Global Bioeconomy 
Policy Report (IV):
A decade of bioeconomy policy 
development around the world

4
Preface ..................................................................................................................................................	
7
	
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................	
8
	
Understanding of Bioeconomy.......................................................................................................	
9
	
Methodology .......................................................................................................................................	
9
Overview & Emerging Policy Initiatives ................................................................	
12
	
Overview ...............................................................................................................................................	
13
	
Emerging Policy Trends ....................................................................................................................	
14
	
	
Stakeholder-driven Initiatives.....................................................................................	
14
	
	
Multilateral Policy Dialogue .....................................................................................................	
14
	
	
Macro-regional Actors and Policy Initiatives .......................................................................	
16
Update: Bioeconomy Policies around the World ........................................	
18
	
Africa .....................................................................................................................................................	
20
	
	
South Africa.................................................................................................................	
24
	
Americas ..............................................................................................................................................	
30
	
	
Costa Rica .....................................................................................................................................	
34
	
	
USA ..................................................................................................................................................	
40
 
Asia/Pacific ..........................................................................................................................................	
48
	
	
Japan ..............................................................................................................................................	
52
	
	
Malaysia .........................................................................................................................................	
58
	
	
Thailand .........................................................................................................................................	
64
Content

5
	
Europe ...................................................................................................................................................	
70
	
	
Austria ............................................................................................................................................	
74
	
	
EU ....................................................................................................................................................	
80
	
	
Finland ...........................................................................................................................................	
88
	
	
France ............................................................................................................................................	
94
	
	
Germany ........................................................................................................................................	 100
	
	
Ireland ............................................................................................................................................	 108
	
	
Italy...............................................................................................................................	 114
	
	
Latvia...........................................................................................................................	 122
	
	
Nordics.........................................................................................................................	 128
	
	
Norway.........................................................................................................................	 134
	
	
Spain............................................................................................................................	 140
	
	
United Kingdom...........................................................................................................	 146
Summary ............................................................................................................................................	 152
 
The Evolving Definition of the Bioeconomy ...............................................................................	 153
 
Bioeconomy Strategy Goals Then and Now ..............................................................................	 154
 
Role of the Circular Economy .........................................................................................................	 155
 
Core Elements of Bioeconomy Policy Strategies .....................................................................	 156
 
Prioritization and Specialization in Policy Strategies .............................................................	 156
 
Proposed Policy Measures ..............................................................................................	 158
 
 
A. Research and Innovation Promotion.....................................................................	 158
 
 
B. Infrastructure Investments ....................................................................................	 159
 
 
C. Industry and Commercialization ...........................................................................	 159
 
 
D. Bioeconomy-Friendly Framework Conditions .......................................................	 160
 
 
E. Demand-side Measures ........................................................................................	 160
	
	
F. Education and Capacity Building .......................................................................................	 160
	
	
G. Good Governance ..................................................................................................................	 161
Outlook .................................................................................................................................................	 164
 
Bioeconomy Policies around the World.................................................................................................	 166
 
About the International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy (IACGB).........................................	 169

6

7
Over the past decade, the concept of the bioeconomy 
has become more visible and important in the policy 
process worldwide. Almost 60 countries around the 
world are pursuing bioeconomy-related policies. This 
study focuses on the dynamic development of 19 
dedicated national and macro-regional bioeconomy 
policy strategies over the past decade. By adopting 
bioeconomy strategies, governments are laying the 
foundation for policy support and investment which 
in turn enables pioneering research, facilitates the 
development of new and advanced technologies, 
supports education and capacity building, drives 
forward industrialization processes, creates aware­
ness and helps stimulate consumer demand. 
In addition to national policy initiatives, we are wit­
nessing the increasing engagement of macro-region­
al and international actors in bioeconomy develop­
ment across the globe. New dynamics in bioeconomy 
policy development are evolving outside of govern­
ments, with stakeholder-driven and industry-driven 
strategies on the rise. These emerging initiatives 
represent excellent examples of the great extent to 
which the bioeconomy is gaining importance globally 
and is why this report devotes a special chapter to 
these new and emerging policy trends.
In 2015, the first Global Bioeconomy Summit in 
Berlin highlighted the essential contribution of a 
sustainable bioeconomy to achieving the UN Sus­
tainable Development Goals and today we see this 
relationship solidified in many dedicated policy 
strategies around the world. In 2018, the second 
Global Bioeconomy Summit concluded that there is 
no one solution that fits all: Political strategies point 
to different opportunities and pursue key objectives 
depending on their prevailing industrial and eco­
nomic profiles and natural resource potential. Now, 
we are observing the increasing recognition that 
the strength of the bioeconomy lies in its diversity. 
Regional strategies that create synergies from local 
specialization are gaining momentum and national 
strategies continue to capitalize on thematic priori­
tization and specializations.
In 2020, the world is facing systemic climate, biodi­
versity, economic and health crises. We, the chairs 
of the International Advisory Council on Global Bio­
economy, along with many others around the world, 
see opportunities in the bioeconomy for helping to 
solve these global crises. 
For the first time, the third Global Bioeconomy Sum­
mit will be held in an interactive and virtual format 
from 16th to 20th November 2020. The International 
Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy has commis­
sioned this report to provide an overview of exist­
ing bioeconomy policy strategies and instruments 
around the world that seek to stimulate, support and 
steer transformation dynamics towards a sustain­
able bioeconomy. It builds on and further develops 
key insights from three previous reports on bioecon­
omy policy strategies assembled by the Secretariat 
of the German Bioeconomy Council.1,2,3 Covering 
roughly a decade of global policy development, we 
believe that this report will help monitor bioeconomy 
policies, identify gaps in current strategies and pro­
grams, and above all, stimulate discussions as to 
how the bioeconomy can contribute to societal and 
economic transformation, and best serve to rebuild 
a healthy planet. 

Berlin, November 2020,
Preface
Prof. Dr. Joachim von Braun
Prof. Dr. Christine Lang
Co-Chairs of the International
Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy
1 
German Bioeconomy Council. (2015). Bioeconomy Policy (Part I): Synopsis 
and Analysis of Strategies in the G7. Available at https://gbs2020.net/wp-
content/uploads/2020/04/BOER_Laenderstudie_1_.pdf [03.11.20]
2 
German Bioeconomy Council. (2015). Bioeconomy Policy (Part II): Synopsis 
of National Strategies around the World. Available at https://gbs2020.net/
wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Bioeconomy-Policy_Part-II.pdf [03.11.20]
3 
German Bioeconomy Council. (2018). Bioeconomy Policy (Part III): Update 
Report of National Strategies around the World. Available at 
https://gbs2020.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/GBS_2018_
Bioeconomy-Strategies-around-the_World_Part-III.pdf [03.11.20]
References

8
Introduction 
This report was conducted in preparation for the ­
Global Bioeconomy Summit 2020. It brings to­
gether key insights from three previous reports on 
bioeconomy policy strategies assembled by the 
Secretariat of the German Bioeconomy Council4,5,6, 
and provides one overview document of existing 
bioeconomy policy strategies and instruments 
around the world. The report centers on countries ­
with a dedicated bioeconomy strategy. The only re­
port of its kind, it encompasses roughly a decade 
of global policy development and seeks to reveal 
how far we have come, where work still needs to 
be done, and where we are headed.

9
Methodology
While the term bioeconomy has become mainstream 
in policy papers and strategies globally, currently 
there is no common definition for the political con­
cept of bioeconomy. Furthermore, the bioeconomy 
is not a static notion and its meaning is continually 
evolving. For the purpose of this report, the bioecon­
omy has been defined in line with the Communiqué 
of the GBS2018 as “the production, utilization and 
conservation of biological resources, including re­
lated knowledge, science, technology, and innova­
tion, to provide sustainable solutions (information, 
products, processes and services) within and across 
all economic sectors and enable a transformation to 
a sustainable economy.7 The bioeconomy therefore 
encompasses the traditional bioeconomy sectors, 
such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries and aqua­
culture, as well as related processing and service 
industries, such as food, paper, textiles, building 
and construction, chemistry, and bio-pharma. Key 
enabling and converging technologies, such as bio-, 
nano- and information technologies, are vitally im­
portant to the knowledge-based bioeconomy which 
uses biobased processes and principles in engineer­
ing and across industrial applications.
Understanding of the Bioeconomy
The methodology of this study relies on internet-
based desk research of officially adopted policy 
strategies and roadmaps in the period from 2010 
to 2020. The authors reviewed national, macro-re­
gional and regional policy strategies on bioeconomy 
development. The report’s findings are based on 
publicly available government documents, such as 
publications from ministries, government agencies 
and affiliated councils, and research institutions. 
Secondary literature, for example, from international 
organizations and networks, conference material 
and presentations, has been used to cross-check 
and complement background information. In addi­
tion, we benefited from expert consultations with 
members of the International Advisory Council on 
Global Bioeconomy (IACGB). 
While there is no universally agreed definition of a 
policy strategy, the authors drew from various sourc­
es8 to form a common contemporary understanding 
of the term as having four defining elements: 1) long-
term consequences; 2) a significant relationship 
to a given mission or central purpose; 3) a defined 
acting subject; and 4) concerns actual choices and 
prioritization. 
The report centers on countries with a dedicated 
bioeconomy strategy. In order to determine the 
alignment, credibility, relevance, purpose, design, 
specialization, and adaptability of the dedicated bio­
economy strategies, a number of review questions 
were adapted from Miedzinski, McDowall & Fahnen­
stock (2018).9 These review questions help illuminate 
the goals, qualitative and quantitative targets, and key 
priorities of bioeconomy strategies. Comprehensive 
approaches for promoting transformation in research 
and innovation policy tend to include a bundle of mea­
sures addressing the supply-side and demand-side 
of the economy.10 Using this framework, the authors 
categorized bioeconomy development into the supply- 
side measures of “promoting research and innova­
tion”; “infrastructure development”; “capacity building 
and education”; and “supporting commercialization”. 
On the demand-side, measures related mainly to in­
formation campaigns and awareness building as well 
as to market stimulation by public lead-buyers and 
tax policies. Regulatory measures for improving the 
“framework conditions” can address the supply-side 
and the demand-side. Governments also increasingly 
propose measures to ensure “good governance” and 
also to support “international collaboration” in the 
bioeconomy. For each country reviewed, the authors 
sought to summarize and categorize the most impor­
tant policy measures for promoting bioeconomy de­
velopment in the dedicated strategies. The analysis 
seeks to illuminate the extent to which policy goals are 
translated into concrete measures and action plans. 
This study, however, can neither judge the degree of 
implementation of the strategies and measures nor 
their effectiveness.

10
References
4 
German Bioeconomy Council. (2015). Bioeconomy Policy (Part I): Synopsis 
and Analysis of Strategies in the G7. Available at https://gbs2020.net/wp-
content/uploads/2020/04/BOER_Laenderstudie_1_.pdf [03.11.20]
5 
German Bioeconomy Council. (2015). Bioeconomy Policy (Part II): Synopsis 
of National Strategies around the World. Available at https://gbs2020.net/
wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Bioeconomy-Policy_Part-II.pdf [03.11.20]
6 
German Bioeconomy Council. (2018). Bioeconomy Policy (Part III): Update 
Report of National Strategies around the World. Available at 
https://gbs2020.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/GBS_2018_
Bioeconomy-Strategies-around-the_World_Part-III.pdf [03.11.20]
7	
International Advisory Council of the Global Bioeconomy Summit 2018. 
(2018). Communiqué: Innovation in the Global Bioeconomy for Sustainable 
and Inclusive Transformation and Wellbeing. Available at https://gbs2018.
com/fileadmin/gbs2018/Downloads/GBS_2018_Communique.pdf 
[26.10.20]
8	
Arthur F. Lykke Jr. (1998). “Towards an Understanding of Military Strategy,” 
Military Strategy Theory and Application and Proactive Governance: Policy 
and Strategy Design in the Context of Accelerating Change. (n.d.). Available 
at https://www.worldgovernmentsummit.org/docs/default-source/
publication/2017/policy-and-strategy-design-in-the-context-of-accelerating_
en_web-version.pdf?sfvrsn=f712180a_0 [26.10.20]
9	
Miedzinski, M., McDowall, W. & Fahnenstock, J. (2018). Paving the pathways 
towards sustainable futures? A critical review of STI policy roadmaps as 
policy instruments enabling sustainability transitions. Conference Paper.
10	 Kahlenborn, W., Mewes, H., Knopf, J. et al. (2013). Treiber und Hemmnisse 
für die Transformation der deutschen Wirtschaft zu einer „Green Economy“. 
Available at https://www.borderstep.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/
Fichter_Kahlenborn-GE-Studie-2013.pdf [02.11.20]
Bioeconomy-related strategies can be understood 
as those with a strong link to bioeconomy develop­
ment, namely in the areas of biotechnology, bioen­
ergy, biomass, biobased economy/industry. To keep 
the scope of the study within workable limits, politi­
cal strategies in the traditional bioeconomic areas, 
such as the primary production sector (agriculture/
forestry/marine), as well as research and innovation 
strategies were only considered if they prioritized 
bioeconomy or innovative, biobased approaches. 
The same logic was applied to policy strategies 
relating to the overriding objectives of sustainabil­
ity, green and blue growth, and circular economy. 
Bioeconomy-related strategies were characterized 
as have the following perspectives: High-Tech (i.e. 
strategies focusing on biotechnology or converg­
ing technologies); Research and Innovation (i.e. 
research and innovation strategies with a focus on 
the bioeconomy), Bioenergy (i.e. strategies focus­
ing on “traditional” and “modern” bioenergy); Blue 
Economy (i.e. policy strategies relating to the ocean 
economy or marine biotechnology and innovation); 
Green Economy (i.e. policy strategies focusing on 
biobased innovations in particular, such as “nature-
based solutions”); Biobased Economy (i.e. policy 
strategies that specifically mention the biobased 
economy, or focuses on economic development in 
certain sectors of the bioeconomy); Circular Bio­
economy (i.e. policy strategies that focus strongly 
on the circular use of biobased/biological resources 
or directly refer to the term “circular bioeconomy”); 
Forest Bioeconomy (i.e. strategies that focus on 
converting renewable forest-based resources into 
value-added products and services); Bioeconomy 
(holistic) (i.e. strategies that holistically pursue bio­
economy development); Bioeconomy (i.e. bioecon­
omy documents other than strategies); Bioeconomy 
(regional) (i.e. regional bioeconomy strategies). It 
must be noted that there are no single, accepted 
definitions of these perspectives. Furthermore, this 
analysis does not by any means strive to be fully 
comprehensive, rather it seeks to provide a general 
overview document of existing bioeconomy policy 
strategies and instruments around the world.

Overview &
Emerging Policy Trends

13
Overview­
An analysis of a decade of bioeconomy policy devel­­
opment shows that more and more countries world­
wide have developing dedicated bioeconomy policy 
strategies. At the time of publication, 19 countries 
and macro-regions (Austria, Costa Rica, EU, Finland, ­
France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Malay­
sia, Nordic Countries, Norway, South Africa, Spain, 
Thailand, UK, US, East Africa)11 have published ­ded­
icated bioeconomy strategies. Since 2018, nine 
strategies have been published (Austria, Costa Rica, 
EU, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Nordics, UK), four 
of which (EU, Germany, Italy, Japan) have updated 
their strategy papers since their initial publication. 
In parallel, ­macro-regional bioeconomy policy strat­
egies are gaining momentum and helping to foster 
national policy initiatives. The publication of the EU 
Bioeconomy Strategy in 2012 provided a decisive 
push for the development of national bioeconomy 
strategies in Europe. In East Africa, national efforts 
to develop dedicated bioeconomy policy initiatives 
were stimulated by the publication of the Regional ­
Bioeconomy Strategy for Eastern Africa, e.g. in Ke­
nya, Tanzania and Uganda. Macro-regional policy 
strategies are not only adding value and supporting ­
national policy efforts, they also help create syner­
gies by integrating national approaches, facilitate 
macro-regional collaboration, and provide a shared ­
regional vision for bioeconomy development. In rec­
ognition of the local character of the bioeconomy, 
regional strategies, predominantly in Europe and 
Latin America, have also increased. 
The bioeconomy continues to be advanced in many 
bioeconomy-related policies such as research and 
innovation, biotechnology, bioenergy, biobased and 
green economy strategies. Currently, almost 60 ­
countries around the world are pursuing bioecon­
omy-related policies, however, the diffuse nature 
of these initiatives and their dynamic development 
imply potentially higher numbers. This analysis, like 
its predecessors,12,13,14 is to be regarded as a living 
document that does not claim to be complete, but 
instead is continually evolving. Given the dynamic ­
development of dedicated bioeconomy policy strate­
gies over the past decade, this report concentrates ­
on these holistic strategies as opposed to analyz­
ing bioeconomy development in more fragmented 
bioeconomy-related strategies. 
The dynamic development of the bioeconomy is 
thus not restricted to the development of holistic 
dedicated policy strategies. Some countries, such 
as Portugal, Canada, and Finland, have chosen to 
make use of their national comparative advantages 
by specializing in certain aspects of the bioeconomy 
such as the “blue bioeconomy” or the “forest-based 
bioeconomy”. Especially in European countries, but ­
also in Asian and Latin American countries, bio­
economy development is increasingly linked to the 
concept of the “circular bioeconomy”. However, the 
relationship between these two concepts remains 
underdeveloped.
New dynamics in bioeconomy policy development 
are also not limited to national policy making. In 
some countries, it is stakeholders from science, 
civil society and industry­ who are leading the pro­
motion of bioeconomy development and strongly 
promoting their country’s vision of the bioeconomy 
(e.g. Argentina, Canada, Portugal). Furthermore, 
bioeconomy development is increasingly driven by 
the engagement of international actors­ and inter­­
national collaboration efforts. The following chap­
ter summarizes these emerging policy initiatives 
beyond dedicated strategies and shows the extent 
to which the bioeconomy has gained importance 
around the globe.

14
Emerging Policy Trends
Stakeholder-driven Initiatives­
Although stakeholder involvement has played a ma­
jor role in bioeconomy development for many years, 
more recently, dedicated bioeconomy strategies have 
been developed outside of government. Just as more 
countries are taking the initiative to start developing 
national strategies at the request of stakeholders (e.g. 
from industry, science, and civil society organizations), 
we also see the emergence of stakeholder-driven and 
industry-driven strategies. These strategies do not 
represent official strategic government documents, ­
but rather seek to provide a common vision for bio­
economy development and to raise awareness among 
political decision-makers. It remains to be seen how 
these approaches will be integrated into existing public 
policy frameworks.
Portugal uniquely developed the “Blue BioEconomy 
Roadmap for Portugal”15­ in 2019, a stakeholder road­
map endorsed by the Ministry of Sea. With the roadmap, ­
Portugal looks to be at the forefront of blue bioecono­
my in Europe by 2030, contributing to the transition of 
the Portuguese economy towards a more competitive 
model focused on sustainable innovation. A new “Blue 
Bioeconomic Development Model” is proposed which is 
defined as the knowledge-based production and use of 
blue bioresources to provide products, processes, and ­
services. The roadmap was developed by BLUEBIO ALLI­
ANCE, a non-profit Portuguese association representing 
all players in the marine bioresources and blue biotech 
value chain, and CIIMAR, The Interdisciplinary Centre 
of Marine and Environmental Research in Portugal and ­
funded through the BLUE and GREEN project under Ho­
rizon 2020. The action plan comprehensively covers the 
areas of science, technology and logistics, cooperation, 
communication and marketing, market and consumer 
demand, funding and cost of operations, and legal and 
regulatory, and proposes a short (2019/20), medium ­
(2021/25) and long- term (2026/30) action plan de­
pending on the urgency and complexity of the matter. 
How these actions will be taken up in the policy process 
is not clearly defined. 
In Argentina, the long process to develop a national 
bioeconomy strategy resulted in the publication of a 
collective stakeholder strategy in 2019, “Bioeconomy 
as a Strategy for the Development of Argentina,”16 from ­
over 50 stakeholders representing academia, the pub­
lic and private sector, and the territories. The strategy 
proposes a new geopolitical vision for the country with 
the bioeconomy at the core of its new development 
model. According to the document, the bioeconomy 
represents a new production profile, where the country 
is no longer exclusively a supplier of commodities, but ­
more comprehensibly uses its resources and capa­
bilities to diversify and develop new value chains. It 
emphasizes the hierarchy of value-added production 
schemes versus quantity production schemes and ­
recognizes that solving the problem of poverty is es­
sential to environmental sustainability.
Canada­ has also taken a different path to develop­
ing its bioeconomy in the form of an industry-driven 
national strategy, “Canada’s Bioeconomy strategy”.17 
Bioindustrial Innovation Canada (BIC) in partnership ­
with BioDesign, an industry-led consortium of compa­
nies, associations, academic and research institutions ­
from several sectors, developed the strategy and pre­
sented it to the Canadian government in May 2019. It ­
represents the vision of more than 400 industry repre­
sentatives from across the country and serves as a call 
to action for the government and industry to seize the 
opportunities of an industrial bioeconomy. The strategy 
focuses primarily on Canada’s competitive advantages 
in the agriculture and forestry sectors, and access to 
biomass, and links the bioeconomy to the challenge 
of climate change mitigation. It further recognizes the 
role of innovation clusters and ecosystems, a modern 
regulatory system, and commercializing innovation to 
enable the growth of larger companies. As a result of 
industry efforts, the Canadian government invested 
USD 200,000 in BIC, under the Canadian Agricultural 
Adaptation Program, to build the national bioeconomy 
strategy. The aim was to help establish clear roles for ­
the government to provide the regulatory operating en­­
vironment and infrastructure necessary for the adop­
tion of biobased processes and products.18 
Multilateral Policy Dialogue ­
Over the past decade, more and more multilateral bio­
economy policy initiatives have been launched under

15
the lead of supra- and international organizations as 
well as multi-stakeholder initiatives. Since 2015, three 
main attempts have been made to establish structures ­
for multilateral policy dialogue to foster the develop­­
ment of a sustainable bioeconomy: the UN FAO Inter­
national Working Group on Sustainable Bioeconomy 
(ISBWG), the European Commission’s International 
Bioeconomy Forum, and the BioFuture Platform. 
In 2016, the BioFuture Platform, a government-led, 
multi-stakeholder initiative, was launched during 
COP22 in Marrakesh with 20 signatory governments 
seeking policy cooperation and mutual learning in the 
development of a low-carbon bioeconomy.19 In 2019, 
the International Energy Agency (IEA) took over the 
role of facilitator (i.e. secretariat) after the government 
of Brazil’s interim tenure expired. Since its inception, 
many ministerial level meetings and summits have 
been held, with the aim of promoting more consistent 
international collaboration and dialogue to fulfill the 
social and economic potential of advanced low carbon ­
fuels and the new bioeconomy, facilitating the upscal­
ing of markets, and promoting the recognition of their 
unique climate and environmental benefits.20 
In 2016, the European Commission initiated an ­Inter­
national Bioeconomy Forum (IBF), a mechanism for 
long-term R&D collaboration among global players in 
the bioeconomy.21­ Co-chaired by Canada and the Eu­
ropean Commission, the forum is organized in ad-hoc 
working groups which currently cover four areas: Plant 
Health, Information and Communication Technology in 
Precision Food Systems, the Forest Bioeconomy, and 
Microbiome.22 ­
In 2015, a UN FAO-led ISBWG was established to sup­
port countries with the development of sustainable 
and circular bioeconomy strategies, action plans and 
programs, in line with the Sustainable Development 
Goals and the Paris Agreement and other Multilateral ­
Environmental Agreements (MEAs). The ISBWG repre­
sents an international, multi-stakeholder expert group 
which currently includes 35 members representing 
countries, regions, researchers and innovators, the 
private sector, NGOs and international organizations 
from all five continents.The first milestone of the group ­
was the design and agreement of the Aspirational Prin­
ciples and Criteria for a Sustainable Bioeconomy in 
November 2016.23 The Working Group serves as a 
platform for international knowledge- and experience-
sharing concerning three main areas: 1) share lessons 
learnt and good practices on the potential benefits 
and risks of food system bioinnovations, e.g. on the ­
use of food loss and waste, plastic alternatives, micro­
biome applications, and alternative proteins; 2) provide 
guidance to national and regional stakeholders in the 
development of sustainable and circular bioeconomy 
strategies, e.g. supporting Uruguay in the drafting of ­
the National Bioeconomy Vision and Strategy; 3) sup­
porting bioeconomy monitoring and evaluation, e.g. 
the European Commission uses the 10 aspirational ­
principles and 24 criteria to build its bioeconomy moni­
toring framework.24­
In addition to these mechanisms, we observe the in­
creasing role of ­South-South and Triangular Coop­
eration­ (SSC and TrC) in supporting multilateral co­
operation in the bioeconomy. The 2030 Agenda on 
Sustainable Development explicitly called for enhanced ­
SSC and TrC on access to science, technology and in­
novation, and knowledge-sharing.25 SSC and TrC on the 
bioeconomy is increasing at the policy level with many 
developing countries working to define bioeconomy 
strategies, but also at the implementation level with 
a growing number of SSTC projects in the area of the 
bioeconomy.26 The ISBWG is considered an important ­
South-South and Triangular Cooperation (SSTC) plat­­
form within the UN FAO that supports the dissemina­
tion of sustainable bioeconomy in developing countries. 
The German Development Cooperation (GIZ GmbH), 
for example, is actively involved in bioeconomy policy 
development in Ecuador27, Costa Rica28, and in Africa 
with the BioInnovation Africa program.29 The objective 
of the BioInnovation Africa program is to establish a 
European-African cooperation for biodiversity-based 
innovations and products, based on equitable benefit-
sharing for biodiversity conservation. Policy dialogues 
on bioeconomy in Latin America, Asia and Africa are ­
also supported by Sweden’s innovation agency VIN­­
NOVA, as well as by the Swedish International Develop­
ment Cooperation Agency (Sida), and are implemented ­
by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), the Re­
search Institutes of Sweden (RISE) and the Gothenburg 
Centre for Sustainable Development (GMV).30 
More recently, the bioeconomy was recognized as a 
policy priority in the Declaration of the G20 Meeting 
of Agriculture Ministers in Argentina in 2018 for its 
contribution to sustainable soil use, food security, ICT 
application, and meeting ambitious environmental

16
goals.31 However, many questions remain as to how 
the G20 can better promote a sustainable bioeconomy 
and stable food systems. Other international meeting 
activities also continue to address core issues for a 
sustainable bioeconomy, albeit in more fragmented ­
policy fields, such as sustainable agriculture and for­
estry, and renewable energies. For example, the IPCC ­
highlighted many bioeconomy-related response op­
tions to climate change, particularly referring to land ­
management (agriculture, forests, soils, other eco­
systems) and value chain management (demand and 
supply options).32 
Macro-regional Actors and 
Policy Initiatives­
In addition to national and international efforts, an in­
creasing number of regions are active in bioeconomy 
policy. In particular, macro-regional policy approaches ­
have emerged among neighboring countries with simi­
larities in their resource endowment and economic 
conditions.
In Eastern Africa, the BiSEA project was established 
to develop a regional, innovation-driven bioeconomy 
strategy. The project is implemented by the ­East Af­­
rican Science and Technology Commission (EAST­
ECO), the African Technology Policy Studies Network 
(ATPS), the Scinnovent Center, Bio-Innovations Ltd, 
and the Africa Centre of the Stockholm Environment 
Institute (SEI). The East African Regional Strategy, 
developed in close consultation with regional science ­
councils and commissions, as well as relevant min­­
istries and stakeholders from all BioInnovate coun­
tries (Ethiopia, Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and 
Uganda and South Sudan), was published in October 
2020.33 ­
In Europe, the European Union also encourages vari­
ous cross-border initiatives. The ­Central and East­
ern European Bioregions Forum was established as 
a follow-up to the European Bioeconomy Congress 
2016 in Lodz, where Central and Eastern European 
Regions and stakeholders from business, academia 
and civil society published the Lodz Declaration of 
Bioregions.34 The declaration presented a strategic ­
document for bioeconomy development in local “bio­
communities”, including biovillages, biocities and 
bioregions, such activities, however, have virtually 
ceased. The Central-Eastern European Initiative for ­
Knowledge-based Agriculture, Aquaculture and For­
estry in the Bioeconomy (BIOEAST)­ is further promot­
ing a strategic vision for bioeconomy development in 
Eastern Europe, including countries like the Czech 
Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and Estonia, as 
well as in South East European countries like Bulgaria, 
Romania, Slovenia, and Croatia.35 In 2020, a position 
paper on the “Bioeconomy and Green Investments”36 
was published which saw emerging opportunities ­
linked to the local processing and biorefining of avail­
able biomass, including organic waste streams. In 
this macro-region, another initiative, the Danube-
INCO.Net project, promotes the development of a 
macro-regional research, technology and innovation 
(RTI) strategy. The initial outcome of several strategy ­
workshops and open innovation events was the pub­
lication of recommendations for the development of 
a Danube RTI-bioeconomy strategy in 2017.37 
The Bioeconomy Strategic Working Group (BSW) 
was established as a thematic working group under 
the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research ­
(SCAR). It aims to facilitate informal exchanges be­
tween European Member States on regional, national 
and European activities, to implement strategies, 
and encourage research and innovation (e.g. needs, 
hurdles, challenges, organizational matters, etc.) in 
the broad area of the bioeconomy. BSW’s ambition ­
is to be the central platform in Europe overseeing dif­
ferent initiatives at national and European level and 
translating this into actions.38 
In Northern Europe, the Nordic Council of Ministers, an 
official body for inter-governmental cooperation in the ­
Nordic Region has also promoted bioeconomy develop­
ment on a macro-regional level since 2012. The Nordic ­
Council of Ministers consists of the Ministers for Nor­
dic cooperation (involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, 
Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and 
Åland) and 10 ministerial councils which cover different ­
sectors and are supported by 16 committees of se­
nior officials.39 The bioeconomy is high on the political 
agenda of several annual programs for the Presidency 
of the Nordic Council of Ministers. In addition, specific 
actions have been taken in the North-West Atlantic, the 
Arctic region, and the Baltic Sea Region.
In Latin America and the Caribbean, macro-regional 
bioeconomy development is increasingly driven by the

17
11	 The East African Regional Strategy was not published in time to be included 
in this report’s analysis. East African Science and Technology Commission 
(EASTECO) et al. (2020), The East African Regional Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://bioeconomyconference.easteco.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/
summary.pdf [26.10.20]
12 German Bioeconomy Council. (2015). Bioeconomy Policy (Part I): Synopsis 
and Analysis of Strategies in the G7. Available at https://biooekonomierat.de/
fileadmin/Publikationen/berichte/BOER_Laenderstudie_1_.pdf [10.12.20]
13 German Bioeconomy Council. (2015). Bioeconomy Policy (Part II): Synopsis 
of National Strategies around the World. Available at 
https://biooekonomierat.de/fileadmin/Publikationen/berichte/Bioeconomy-
Policy_Part-II.pdf [10.12.20]
14 German Bioeconomy Council. (2018). Bioeconomy Policy (Part III): 
Update Report of National Strategies around the World. Available at 
https://biooekonomierat.de/fileadmin/Publikationen/berichte/GBS_2018_
Bioeconomy-Strategies-around-the_World_Part-III.pdf [10.12.20]
15	 Vasconcelos, V., Moreira-Silva, J. & Moreira, S. (eds). (2019). Blue 
Bioeconomy Roadmap for Portugal - BLUEandGREEN. Available at https://
www2.ciimar.up.pt/pdfs/resources/roadmap_digital_hGBit_.pdf [26.10.20]
16	 Accastello, V et al. (2019). La Bioeconomía como Estrategiapara el Desarrollo 
Argentino. Available at https://fibamdp.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/la-
bioeconomicc81a-como-estrategia-para-el-desarrollo-argentino.pdf [26.10.20]
17	 Bioindustrial Innovation Canada (BIC). (2019). Canada’s Bioeconomy 
Strategy: Leveraging our Strengths for a Sustainable Future. Available at 
https://canadabiodesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/b22338_913
d63ade932490091eb5ae9b2edaad5.pdf [26.10.20]
18	 Government of Canada. (2019). Government Invests in Canada’s First 
National Bioeconomy Strategy to Help Grow a Clean Economy. Available 
at https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2019/05/
government-invests-in-canadas-first-national-bioeconomy-strategy-to-help-
grow-a-clean-economy.html [26.10.20]
19 BioFuture Platform. Available at http://www.biofutureplatform.org [26.10.20]
20 BioFuture Platform. (2016). Launch Statement. Available at https://
c4c70c1f-2927-42e5-9e36-d0ba89574795.filesusr.com/ugd/dac106_642
06fc2871c42f1af59517d6d54d5fc.pdf?index=true [26.10.20]
21 European Commission. Bioeconomy Policy. Available at https://ec.europa.
eu/research/bioeconomy/index.cfm?pg=policy&lib=ibf [26.10.20]
22	 Government of Canada. (2019). International Bioeconomy Forum. Available 
at https://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/scientific-collaboration-and-research-
in-agriculture/international-engagement/international-bioeconomy-
forum/?id=1552307410662 [26.10.20]
23	 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2019). 
Towards sustainable bioeconomy guidelines. Available at 
http://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/CA5145EN [26.10.20]
24	 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (n.d.). 
Circular Bioeconomy. Available at http://www.fao.org/climate-change/
our-work/areas-of-work/bioeconomy/en/ [26.10.20]
25	 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2016). 
FAO’s south-south and Triangular Cooperation Strategy in Action. Available at 
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i6249e.pdf [26.10.20]
26 United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation. (2019). South-South and 
Triangular Cooperation on the Bioeconomy in light of the Paris Agreement 
and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Available at https://
www.unsouthsouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Bioeconomy-
Publication_visualization-for-website.pdf [26.10.20]
27	 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. 
(n.d.). Protecting Ecuador’s natural heritage and using natural resources 
sustainably. Available at https://www.giz.de/en/worldwide/73634.html 
[26.10.20]
28	 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. 
(n.d.). Securing the future – strengthening biological corridors. Available at 
https://www.giz.de/en/worldwide/35382.html [26.10.20]
29	 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. (n.d.). 
Promoting European-African business partnerships for biodiversity conservation. 
Available at https://www.giz.de/en/worldwide/78516.html [26.10.20]
30	 Stockholm Environment Institute. (n.d.). Sowing the seeds of bioeconomic 
transition. Available at https://www.sei.org/featured/sowing-the-seeds-of-
bioeconomic-transition/ [26.10.20].
31	 G20 Meeting of Agriculture Ministers. (2018). Declaration. Available at 
http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2018/2018-07-28-agriculture.html [26.10.20]
32 IPCC. (2019). Climate Change and Land. Available at https://www.ipcc.ch/site/
assets/uploads/2019/08/4.-SPM_Approved_Microsite_FINAL.pdf [26.10.20]
33	 The East African Regional Strategy was not published in time to receive 
an in-depth analysis in this report. East African Science and Technology 
Commission (EASTECO) et al. (2020), The East African Regional 
Bioeconomy. Available at https://bioeconomyconference.easteco.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/10/summary.pdf [26.10.20]]
34	 Bioeconomy Congress EBCL 2016. (2016). Lodz Declaration of Bioregions.
Available at https://scanbalt.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/LODZ-
BIOCOMMUNITIES-DECLARATIONfinalEN6.pdf [26.10.20] 
35 BIOEAST. (2018). BIOEAST Vision Paper. Available at https://bioeast.eu/
download-category/vision-paper/ [01.03.18].
36 BIOEAST. (2020). Bioeconomy and Green Investments: Unique opportunity 
to tackle the crisis in the Central and Eastern European countries. 
Available at https://bioeast.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/BIOEAST-
Position-2020-06-10.pdf [11.09.20]
37 Danube-INCO.NET. (2017). 10 Recommendations: Towards a Danube 
Region Bioeconomy Concept. Available at https://danube-inco.net/
object/document/18760/attach/10_Recommendations_for_Fostering_
Bieconomy_in_the_Danube_Region.pdf [26.10.20]
38	 Bioeconomy Strategic Working Group (BSW). (n.d.). What we do. Available at 
https://www.scar-swg-sbgb.eu/ [26.10.20]
39 Mathisen, M. (2019). Nordic Bioeconomy Programme. Available at https://
colloque.inrae.fr/bioeconomy2019/content/download/4055/44494/
version/1/file/04.+M-MATHISEN+nordic_bioeconomy_strategy.pdf [11.09.20]
40	 Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA). (n.d.). Bioeconomy. 
Available at https://www.cepal.org/en/topics/bioeconomy [26.10.20]
41	 Argentina.gob.ar. (2019). Un simposio para el desarrollo latinoamericano 
de la Bioeconomía. Available at https://www.argentina.gob.ar/noticias/un-
simposio-para-el-desarrollo-latinoamericano-de-la-bioeconomia [26.10.20]
References
United Nations regional commission, the Economic 
Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 
(UN ECLAC) which organizes joint events to promote 
exchange on policy making and successful private 
sector and research initiatives. UN ECLAC strives to 
better align existing initiatives and to further develop 
joint bioeconomy policies and programs.40 It carries 
out technical assistance missions on the design of ­
the national bioeconomy strategy in Costa Rica, Uru­
guay, and Argentina. The ­Latin American Bioecon­
omy Network was established in 2019 within the 
framework of the First Latin American Bioeconomy 
Symposium, organized by the Argentinian Ministry of 
Science, Technology and Productive Innovation, UN 
ECLAC, the International Labor Organization (ILO), the ­
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Or­
ganization (UNESCO), the Inter-American Institute for 
Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA)­ and the Interdisci­
plinary Center for Studies in Science, Technology and ­
Innovation (CIECTI). It aims to promote the bioecono­
my as a regional development strategy, generating an 
exchange of experiences and fostering collaborative 
projects.41 IICA is particularly involved in bioeconomy 
development in the region with its Bioeconomy and ­
Production Development Program. IICA develops poli­
cy briefs and guidelines for action at country-level and ­
specifically assisted Costa Rica, Uruguay, and Ecua­
dor in their strategy development and, among other 
things, helped with the design and implementation of 
a bioeconomy observatory in Argentina.

18
Bioeconomy Policies 
around the world

19

Africa
20
There is fast evolution of bioeconomy initiatives in 
Africa. South Africa published a dedicated bioecon­
omy strategy in 2013 an in 2020, a dedicated mac­
ro-regional bioeconomy strategy for Eastern Africa 
was published, the first of its kind on the continent 
of Africa.42 Seven eastern African countries (Burundi, 
Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, South Sudan, and 
Uganda), with the support of the Bioresources Innova­
tions Network for Eastern Africa Development (BioIn­
novate Africa), came together to develop a regional 
innovation-driven bioeconomy strategy that enables 
the pooling of resources to address shared regional 
priorities. The program is supported by Sweden and 
focuses on promoting bioinnovation policies that en­
able technology transfer and business development.
The BioInnovation Africa43 program fosters equitable 
business partnerships that contribute to biodiversity 
conservation. In its first three-year phase, 2019 to 
2022, BioInnovation Africa will focus on Cameroon, 
Madagascar, Namibia, and South Africa, countries 
rich in biodiversity, with support from Germany. The 
German government also supports the BiomassWeb 
project44 in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria, 
which aims to increase productivity and efficiency 
across the whole system of producing, processing, 
and trading biomass.
While not covered in depth in this analysis, many 
other bioeconomy-related policy initiatives have 
emerged over the years. Most of the bioeconomy-
related activities center on bioenergy/biofuel pro­
duction (e.g. Ghana, Mali, Senegal, Nigeria, Mozam­
bique, Uganda, Kenya).45 Countries such as Kenya 
and Mauritius focus on bioprospecting policies in 
order to benefit from their unique biodiversity and 
on commercializing knowledge about traditional 
bioresources. The Eastern African countries Ethiopia, 
Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania have adopted national 
biotechnology strategies. Mauritius has taken a dif­
ferent path and developed a comprehensive Ocean 
Economy strategy. Namibia has a research and in­
novation strategy which integrates key issues for 
bioeconomy development.

Country
Perspective
Document Name
East Africa
Bioeconomy (holistic)
The Eastern African Regional Bioeconomy Strategy (2020)
Ethiopia
High-Tech
High-Tech
Bioenergy
Green Economy
High-Tech
Biotechnology Investment and Marketing Strategy (2017)
National strategy and plan of action for pharmaceutical 
manufacturing development in Ethiopia (2015 – 2025) (2015)
Ethiopia Biomass Energy Strategy (BEST) (2013)
Ethiopia’s Climate Resilient Green Economy Strategy (2011)
National Biotechnology Research and Development Goal (2009)
Ghana
Green Economy
Bioenergy
Green Economy Strategy and Implementation Plan 2016 – 2030 
(2017)
National Bioenergy Strategy in Ghana (2014)
Kenya
High-Tech
Bioenergy
High-Tech
National Bioprospecting Strategy (2011)
Strategy for developing the Bio-Diesel Industry in Kenya (2008)
A National Biotechnology Development Policy (2006)
Malawi
Bioenergy
Malawi Biomass Energy Strategy (2008)
Mali
Bioenergy
Bioenergy
Strategie Nationale de Développement des Biocarburants en Mali 
(2009)
Statégie Nationale pour le Développement des Energies 
Renouvelables (2006)
21
Click on strategy name to access the online document
See further policy strategies on the next page →

22
Mauritius
Blue Economy
Ocean Economy (2013)
Mozambique
Green Economy
Bioenergy
Bioenergy
Green Economy Action Plan 2013 – 2014 (2012)
Mozambique Biomass Energy Strategy (BEST) (2012)
Politica e Estrategia de Biocombustiveis (2009)
Namibia
Research & Innovation
National Programme on Research, Science, Technoloy and 
Innovation (2015)
Nigeria
Bioenergy
Nigerian Biofuel Policy and Incentives (2007)
Rwanda
Green Economy
Bioenergy
Green Growth and Climate Resilience - National Strategy 
on Climate Change and Low Carbon Development (2011)
Rwanda Biomass Energy Strategy (BEST) (2009)
Senegal
Bioenergy
Lettre de Politique de Développement du Secteur de L’Energie 
(2008, 2012)
National Biofuels Strategy (2006)
South Africa
Bioeconomy (holistic)
The Bio-Economy Strategy (2013)
Tanzania
High-Tech
Biomass Energy Strategy (BEST) Tanzania (2014)
National Biotechnology Policy (2010)
Uganda
Bioenergy
High-Tech
Bioenergy
Biomass Energy Strategy Uganda (2014)
National Biotechnology and Biosafety Policy (2008)
The Renewable Energy Policy For Uganda (2007)
42	 The East African Regional Strategy was not published in time to receive 
an in-depth analysis in this report. East African Science and Technology 
Commission (EASTECO) et al. (2020), The East African Regional 
Bioeconomy. Available at https://bioeconomyconference.easteco.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/10/summary.pdf [26.10.20]
43	 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. (n.d.). 
BioInnovation Africa. Available at https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz2019-
en-bioinnovation-africa.pdf [03.11.20]
44	 Center for Development Research University of Bonn. (n.d.). BiomassWeb. 
Available at http://biomassweb.org  [14.10.20]
45	 Oguntuase, O. (2020). Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development in 
Africa – State of Production Determinants and Future Directions. Available 
at https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/ers/13/1/article-p1.xml 
[04.11.20]
References

24
South Africa
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Out of all the African countries, South Africa stands 
out with a dedicated bioeconomy strategy. The gov­
ernment published the “South Africa Bio-Economy 
Strategy”46 in 2013 to foster the transition towards 
a knowledge-based bioeconomy. As a country well-
endowed with natural resources and one of the high­
est levels of biodiversity in the world, South Africa 
focused early on biodiversity and uniquely included 
health and medical aspects in its strategy. Based on 
the experiences of two former initiatives, the “Na­
tional Biotechnology Strategy” (2001)47 and the 
“Ten-Year Innovation Plan” (2008), the dedicated 
bioeconomy strategy seeks to guide bioscience re­
search and innovation investments, as well as de­
cision-making, within a high-level framework. Many 
other policies seek to move the country towards a 
“green economy” and, more recently, policies have 
been adopting a circular-economy approach.
Starting in 2018, the Department of Science and 
Innovation (DSI), in partnership with its entity, the 
Technology Innovation Agency (TIA), and AfricaBio, 
has hosted a yearly BioAfrica Convention to show­
case bio-innovations from the broader biotech com­
munity of the African continent.
With regard to policy recommendations, in 2018 
the Academy of Sciences of South Africa48 reviewed 
the regulatory and ethical issues as well as the im­
pacts of genome editing, both in terms of breeding 
and in human genomics, and the National Advisory 
Council on Innovation (NACI) provided advice on the 
country’s bioeconomy strategy, most recently on 
the approach to monitor the performance of the 
bioeconomy.49
Furthermore, the South African government is ac­
tive in international collaboration. It is involved in 
the Southern Africa Innovation Support Program 
(SAIS), a regional initiative funded by the Ministry 
for Foreign Affairs of Finland, in partnership with 
STI Ministries of Botswana, Namibia, Tanzania and 
Zambia, and the Southern African Development 
Community (SADC) Secretariat, all supporting the 
growth of new businesses through strengthening 
innovation ecosystems and promoting cross-border 
collaboration (e.g. through pilot programs in South 
Africa, such a biotech startup incubator run by CiTI 
and TechVillage). Furthermore, the Southern Africa 
Network for Biosciences (SANBio), a regional initia­
tive supported by South Africa and Finland, focuses 
on bio-innovations and a variety of capacity develop­
ment and collaborative projects.

25
The South African bioeconomy strategy was offi­
cially launched in 2014 and it effectively replaced 
the National Biotechnology Strategy of 2001. The 
bioeconomy strategy was very closely linked to the 
National Development Plan (NDP).
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
South Africa’s bioeconomy strategy was published 
by the Department of Science and Technology (now 
the Department of Science and Innovation DSI) in 
2013. Although the ministry plays a crucial role 
in leading the implementation of the strategy, the 
policy was defined as an inter-agency effort. The De­
partments of Trade and Industry, Health, Agriculture, 
Forestry and Fisheries, and Environmental Affairs 
are involved in this by coordinating their research, 
development and innovation activities. The strat­
egy also aims to involve relevant non-governmental 
stakeholders, such as industry, community-based 
organizations, not-for-profit companies, academia, 
and science councils. No information is provided on 
the strategy development process.
The South African bioeconomy definition refers to 
“activities that make use of bioinnovations, based
on biological sources, materials and processes to 
generate sustainable economic, social and environ­
mental development.” It encompasses biotechno­
logical activities and processes that translate into 
economic outputs, particularly those with industrial 
application.
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The vision is for South Africa’s bioeconomy to be­
come a significant contributor to the country’s econ­
omy by 2030, in terms of gross domestic product 
(GDP). The strategy further seeks to 1) make the 
country more competitive internationally (especially 
in the industrial and agricultural sectors), 2) create 
more jobs, 3) enhance food security, 4) and create 
a greener economy as the country shifts towards a 
low-carbon economy. The strategy often highlights 
the need to integrate both a technology push and a 
market-pull approach, in order to enhance the coun­
try’s socio-economic development.
The strategy is clearly built upon the lessons learned 
from existing programs and strategies, such as the 
National Biotechnology Strategy and ‘Farmer to 
Pharma’ concept (one of the “Grand Challenges” of 
the Ten-Year Innovation Plan of 2008), which were 
too narrowly focused. The new strategy looks to 
shift the focus from developing the biotechnology 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

26
The Bioeconomy Strategy identifies three priority 
areas for research and development – agriculture, 
health and industry/the environment.
Representing about 12 percent of the GDP, the agro-
industrial sector is considered as having the highest 
economic impact among the three bioeconomy-relat­
ed sectors. In the agricultural sector, the bioecono­
my strategy foresees sustainable intensifying agri­
cultural production and processing. Biotechnology, 
including responsible genetic engineering, should 
generally help to improve the heat resistance and 
drought tolerance of crops and address the chal­
lenges caused by climate change, diminishing water 
resources, and grazing land, as well as halt the loss 
of biodiversity. South Africa is currently leading the 
continent in agricultural biotech, with more than 80 
percent of its maize and soya genetically modified. 
Optimizing energy crops is also considered impor­
tant in order to foster the development of the biofuel 
industry. R&D support for agricultural biosciences 
and technologies is an integral part of the strategy. 
Furthermore, it is intended to strengthen autonomy 
in the development of animal vaccines and indig­
enous crops (such as fortified sorghum, rooibos 
and honey bush). The strategy also seeks to better 
capitalize on the country’s biodiversity, and capture 
niche consumer markets for natural products. 
In the health sector, the strategy seeks to better re­
spond to key challenges, such as child mortality, HIV 
and malaria infections. Discovery and bioprospect­
ing play a major role in developing new drugs, vac­
cines, diagnostics, and medical devices (especially 
in TBC and HIV). This also includes exploring oppor­
tunities in indigenous knowledge systems (IKS). 
The largely informal market for natural and plant 
medicines should also be developed. This requires 
capacity-building in process engineering and manu­
facturing.
The strategy further focuses on support for research, 
development and innovation in biobased chemicals 
and industrial biotechnology. Improving the local 
capacity in industrial biotechnology, such as the lo­
cal manufacturing of enzymes and biofuels, should 
increase the acceptance of more environmentally 
sustainable inputs and practices by South Africa’s 
heavy industries. Given the significant problems re­
lated to water scarcity, especially in dry areas, the 
strategy further promotes improvements in waste­
water treatment. 
The bioeconomy strategy is not restricted to foster­
ing the biotechnology sector but seeks to develop a 
comprehensive bioeconomy, which involves several 
cross-sectional technologies and knowledge areas. 
Information and communication technology (ICT), 
nanomaterial research and manufacture, bio-entre­
preneurship, social sciences as well as intellectual 
property management are specifically mentioned as 
important knowledge areas. 
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
sector to developing a bioeconomy, where the bio­
technology sector joins forces with the ICT sector, 
environmental agencies and the social sciences to 
create holistic solutions for the agriculture, health 
and industrial sectors.
Published before the SDGs and proliferation of the 
circular economy concept, there is no direct connec­
tion made to these themes. 
The strategy document provides strategic objec­
tives, interventions and potential impacts for the 
three priority areas for research and development – 
agriculture, health and industry/the environment. 
There are no overall targets set, but targets are set 
on individual programs that are implemented in each 
of the sectors. No additional budget is specified.

27
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
While the strategy calls for a significant increase in 
additional resources, especially in research and de­
velopment activities, no budget is provided. For the 
implementation of the strategy, the document refers 
to various funding programs, e.g. the Department of 
Higher Education and Training funding for academic 
institutions, as well as science-based innovation 
and patent support. In general, the various strategic 
interventions proposed represent a comprehensive 
approach to supporting the bioeconomy. 
The strategy calls for a variety of investments in re­
search and innovation. In order to enhance the inno­
vation system, it calls for increased state investment 
in life science incubators, science parks and pilot 
facilities for demonstration purposes. The strategy 
points to funding for large research infrastructure 
and platforms to raise the country’s production of 
patents in life sciences. In agriculture, for example, 
it seeks to establish a network of agro-innovation 
hubs to enhance technology transfer. With regard to 
industry, a number of RDI interventions have been 
developed as a result of the 2014 strategy. These 
are aligned with the strategic thematic areas of bio-
products, bio-based chemicals, bio-based materials, 
bioenergy and bioremediation and include technol­
ogy flagship programs relating to biomanufacturing 
and bioprocessing, biorefineries, biocatalysis, mi­
crobial bioprospecting and bio-based remediation 
technologies.
Infrastructure support is largely focused on the re­
search environment. To de-risk the RDI value chain 
and to localize biomanufacturing capabilities, several 
upscaling and pilot demonstration infrastructures 
have been established, including the Bio-manufactur­
ing Industry Development Centre (BIDC), Biorefinery 
Industry Development Facility (BIDF), Supercritical 
Carbon Dioxide Encapsulation Facility (SCEF), Indus­
trial Biocatalysis Hub and Umbogintwini Bioprocess­
ing Platform.
In particular, the strategy underlines the importance 
of having highly skilled labor involved in the devel­
opment of its national bioeconomy. Training and 
education for scientists, engineers and technicians 
along bioeconomy value-chains is considered of 
highest priority in order to create a sufficient knowl­
edge base. Furthermore, it is considered necessary 
to develop “technopreneurs” who convert diverse 
technologies into innovative biobased products. 
Education and training should therefore become 
integrated into research and innovation policies. 
In general, programs to enhance commercialization 
of technologies should be developed. The strategy 
defines that a Bio-Innovation Venture Capital Fund 
should be established as a mechanism to attract 
public and private capital. The fund would require 
about R2 billion, of which R300 million to R400 mil­
lion (15 to 20 percent) would be provided by the 
government over a period of three years. While not 
directly dedicated to bio-innovations, more recently 
an Innovation Fund was established with an alloca­
tion of R1.5 billion (USD 90 million in 2020).
The strategy mentions the creation of an enabling 
environment for venture capital where the Tech­
nology Innovation Agency stimulates investment 
through venture capital and foreign investment. In 
early 2010, the biotechnology innovation centers 
were incorporated into the Technology Innovation 
Agency, which was established to address the “in­
novation chasm” and the fragmentation of funding 
instruments. The agency also incorporated the In­
novation Fund.
The strategy suggests that private-sector funding 
as well as in-kind capital could be sourced through 
corporate social investment programs. 
With regard to demand-side measures, the strategy 
supports initiatives to promote public understand­
ing of the technologies underlying the bioeconomy. 
Activities include participation in, or hosting of, inter­
national conferences and other relevant forums, as 
well as electronic marketing through the creation of 
a South African bioportal that provides information 
on relevant technology skills, opportunities, prod­
ucts and linkages in the bioeconomy. 
The strategy suggests that further legislation will 
help create demand for green products and facilitate 
the introduction of new bioproducts. In addition, un­

28
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
locking the value of indigenous crops, coupled with 
consumer demand for “natural” products, should 
help capture niche markets.
The document also mentions a variety of bioecon­
omy-friendly framework conditions. Intellectual 
property (IP) management is highlighted as a prior­
ity issue and calls for the country to implement a 
strategy in order to exploit expired, expiring or unen­
forceable patents to produce bioproducts locally at 
a fraction of the cost of importation. Other actions 
include expanding the National Intellectual Property 
Management Office (NIPMO) to improve intellectual 
property brokering and trading, both nationally and 
internationally.
The strategy calls for a review of regulations regard­
ing new bioproducts, and the mechanisms and bod­
ies responsible for the enforcement of these regula­
tions. In addition, the regulatory landscape should 
address the ethical implications of all innovations 
(e.g. GMO usage, bioprospecting using indigenous 
knowledge, confidentiality of genetic information). 
In order to support the pharmaceutical industry, the 
strategy employs an import-replacement technique, 
with the aim of replacing up to 25 percent of cur­
rent imports within a decade of implementation. 
This would support programs, such as “Farmer to 
Pharma” one of the five Grand Challenges of South 
Africa’s Ten-Year Innovation Plan. By capitalizing on 
natural biodiversity and applied biotechnologies, 
this program promotes the commercial use of lo­
cal, indigenous and underutilized plants and animal 
breeds in ways that protect genetic resources, re­
spect local communities’ intellectual property rights 
and support nature conservation. With regard to the 
smaller human vaccine sector, an import replace­
ment target of 20 percent or more is suggested. 
The strategy makes clear that its success hinges on 
coordination efforts, a key good governance mea­
sure. Committees have been created to oversee 
the Strategic Health Innovation Partnership (SHIP) 
programme and the Agricultural Bio-innovation Part­
nership Programme (ABIPP). A consortium commit­
tee is overseeing investments in the IKS arena. A 
committee is also currently being established for 
the Industry and Environment programme (Strategic 
Industry Bio-Innovation Programme - SIIP). 
Fostering international partnerships that help ex­
pand and improve research and innovation is en­
couraged, however it is noted that this international­
ization should not reduce research into local priority 
issues. In addition, emphasis is places on social 
inclusions and working with Indigenous Knowledge 
Systems (IKS) as an important crosscutter contribut­
ing to the activities within these three sectors.
DSI as the lead agent of the strategy is tasked with 
facilitating the strategy’s broad implementation, how­
ever it should be guided and monitored by interde­
partmental stakeholder groups. This interdepartmen­
tal structure will function as a subcommittee of the 
Economic Sectors and Employment Sector Cluster of 
government. DSI will develop implementation frame­
works, which will guide all associated stakeholders in 
developing implementation plans.
18 key quantitative output indicators (related to indus­
try, market, knowledge transmission and application, 
as well as knowledge base and human resources) are 
provided to track and monitor the strategy. Although 
the strategy envisions the bioeconomy being a signifi­
cant contribution to South Africa’s GDP by 2030, the 
indicators only refer to knowledge and skills (full-time 
equivalent researchers, scientific publications, and 
bioeconomy-related publications) and financial support 
(gross expenditure on research and development as a 
percentage of GDP).
However, these systematic metrics have not yet been 
implemented. In 2018, the National Advisory Council 
on Innovation (NACI) developed a set of indicators 
that can be used to measure and monitor the bio­
economy’s contribution to South Africa’s GDP at both 
sectoral and national level. The new performance

29
REFERENCES
46 	 Department of Science and Technology. (2013). The Bio-Economy Strategy. 
Available at http://www.pub.ac.za/files/Bioeconomy%20Strategy.pdf 
[21.08.20]
47	 Government of South Africa. (2001). A National Biotechnology Strategy 
for South Africa. Available at: https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/
gcis_document/201409/biotechstrat0.pdf [21.08.20]
48  	 Department of Science and Technology. (2018). Human Genetics 
and Genomics in South Africa: Ethical, Legal, and Social 
Implications. Available at http://research.assaf.org.za/bitstream/
handle/20.500.11911/106/2018_assaf_ethical_genetics_genomics_
consensus.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [21.08.20]
49 	 Department of Science and Technology. (2018). National Advisory Council 
on Innovation. Innovation for a better future. Annual report 2018/2019. 
Available at  https://static.pmg.org.za/NACI_Annual_Report_201819.pdf 
[21.08.20]
50	 Department of Science and Technology. (2018). National Advisory Council 
on Innovation. Innovation for a better future. Annual report 2018/2019. 
Available at  https://static.pmg.org.za/NACI_Annual_Report_201819.pdf 
[21.08.20]
51.	 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2018). Assessing 
the contribution of bioeconomy to countries’ economy. A brief review of 
national frameworks. Available at http://www.fao.org/3/I9580EN/i9580en.
pdf  [21.08.20]
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
No
indicators include: output, employment, exports, in­
vestment, and innovation.50 The NACI study defines 
two high-level components: metrics for that portion 
of the economy resulting from the bioeconomy activi­
ties/sectors, and metrics for innovation that provide 
a key input to the development of the bioeconomy.51 
However, the DSI will still have to find appropriate so­
cial and environmental indicators. A new bioeconomy 
metrics report based on these recommendations is 
anticipated to be published in 2020.

Americas
30
Latin America and the Caribbean 
In recent years, the concept of the bioeconomy 
has gained significant political importance in Latin 
America and the Caribbean. While various bioecon­
omy-related policy strategies are being developed, 
notably with the support of macro-regional orga­
nizations, this has only slowly translated into the 
adoption of dedicated national bioeconomy strate­
gies in the region. Countries including Argentina, 
Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Puerto Rico, Uruguay, 
and Argentina have been working for years on dedi­
cated strategies; however, the process of adopting 
these strategies has been slow. The first and only 
country to publish a dedicated national strategy 
was Costa Rica in August 2020. In Argentina, the 
culmination of a process to develop a dedicated na­
tional bioeconomy strategy resulted in the publica­
tion of a collective stakeholder strategy in 2019. 
In general, policy strategies that refer to bioecono­
my development are characterized mainly by capi­
talizing on the relevant country’s large quantity of 
natural resources. Bioeconomy is promoted par­
ticularly as an alternative model for sustainable 
development and green growth. Latin America and 
the Caribbean (LAC) have also made important 
progress in areas such as bioenergy, agricultural 
biotechnology, low-carbon agriculture, the utili­
zation of biodiversity, and ecosystem services.52 
For example, Brazil and Argentina are among the 
leaders in bioenergy production and are among 
the top five users of genetically modified crops. 
Bioeconomy development in Brazil has been domi­
nated by progress in the bioenergy sector. The larg­
est Brazilian state, Amazonas, however, has made 
significant headway in advancing tropical forestry-
based bioeconomy.53

31
Other countries are making headway towards de­
veloping dedicated bioeconomy strategies. For 
example, a multisectoral process is underway in 
Uruguay to design a national Sustainable Bioecon­
omy Strategy (EBS) as part of the “Uruguay 2050” 
National Development Strategy, under the authority 
of the Office of the President. Colombia is devising 
a proposal to capitalize on the bioeconomy as part 
of its “Mission of Experts,” a group of 34 leading 
national and international experts, whose objective 
is to produce a roadmap and recommendations 
for prioritizing science and technology. Ecuador is 
currently in the process of consolidating its regula­
tory, institutional, and political framework in order 
to establish the conditions necessary for develop­
ing a public policy for the bioeconomy. Starting in 
2017, a Working Group on Bioeconomy was set 
up within the Ministry of Environment which has 
assumed a strong biodiversity-based approach to 
the bioeconomy.54
North America 
The USA came to the forefront in 2012 with a holistic 
dedicated bioeconomy strategy which uniquely em­
phasized the role of biotechnology, the importance of 
biomedicine, and its application for defense purpos­
es. Since then a more agricultural and bioresources-
based vision developed, driven by individual federal 
agencies. While recent coordinating activity within the 
White House and bills in the house and senate look 
to strengthen America’s bioeconomy, this has not yet 
translated into a replacement for the 2012 National 
Bioeconomy Blueprint. Canada has taken a different 
path to developing its bioeconomy in the form of an 
industry-driven national strategy. The strategy focuses 
primarily on access to biomass in agriculture.

32
52	 United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 
(ECLAC) et al. (2020). The Outlook for Agriculture and Rural Development in 
the Americas: A Perspective on Latin America and the Caribbean: 2019-2020. 
Available at http://repositorio.iica.int/bitstream/handle/11324/8214/
BVE19040295i.pdf;jsessionid=9E976018A9053FD5CDE0BCB98ACD25B8?s
equence=10 [26.10.20]
53 Instituto Escolhas. (2019). A new economy for the Amazonas state: Manaus 
Free Trade Zone and Bioeconomy. Available at http://www.escolhas.org/
wp-content/uploads/2019/12/A-New-Economy-for-the-Amazon_Manaus-
Free-Zone-and-Bioeconomics_Executive-Sumary_2020.pdf [26.10.20]
54	 United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the 
Caribbean (ECLAC) et al. (2020). The Outlook for Agriculture and Rural 
Development in the Americas: A Perspective on Latin America and the 
Caribbean: 2019-2020. Available at http://repositorio.iica.int/bitstream/
handle/11324/8214/BVE19040295i.pdf;jsessionid=9E976018A9053FD5
CDE0BCB98ACD25B8?sequence=10 [26.10.20]
References
Country
Perspective
Document Name
Argentina
Bioeconomy 
(stakeholder)
Bioeconomy
High-Tech
Bioeconomy (regional)
Research & Innovation
La Bioeconomía como Estrategia para el desarrollo argentino (2019)
Bioeconomía Argentina (2017)
Biotecnología argentina al año 2030: Llave estratégica para un modelo 
de desarrollo tecno-productivo (2016)
Plan Provincial de Bioeconomía Buenos Aires (2016)
Argentina Innovadora 2020 (2012)
Brazil
Bioenergy
Research & Innovation
Research & Innovation
High-Tech
Plano Decenal de Expansao de Energia 2023, 2029 (2014, 2020)
Plano de Ação em Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação em Bioeconomia / 
Action Plan in ST&I in Bioeconomy 2018 (2018)
Estratégia National de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Inovacao 2016 – 2019 
(2016)/ National Strategy on Science, Technology and Innovation
Biotechnology Strategy (2007)
Canada
Forestry
Canada’s Bioeconomy Strategy Leveraging our Strengths for a 
Sustainable Future (2019)
Growing Forward 2 (2018)
A Forest Bioeconomy Framework for Canada (2017)
Colombia
High-Tech
Colombia Green Growth Roadmap (2018)
Colombia Bio (2016)
Plan nacional Dedesarrollo 2014-2018 (2015)
Programa Nacional de Biocomercio Sostenible (PNBS) 2014 – 2024 (2014)
Politica para el Desarrollo Commercial de la Biotecnología a partir del 
Uso Sostenible de la Biodiversidad (2011)
Costa Rica
Bioeconomy (holistic)
National Bioeconomy Strategy – Costa Rica 2020 – 2030 (2020)
Ecuador
Biobased Economy
Guidlines for the Promotion of Bio-Entrepreneurship (2019)
Mexico
Bioenergy
Bioenergy
Estrategia de Transición para Promover el Uso de Tecnologías y 
Combustibles más Limpios (2016, 2020)
Estrategia Intersecretarial de los Bioenergéticos (2009)
Paraguay
High-Tech
High-Tech
Estrategia Nacional y Plan de Acción para la Conservación de la 
Biodiversidad del Paraguay 2015 – 2020 (2015)
Politica y Programa Nacional de Biotecnoloía Agroprecuaria y 
Forestal del Parauay (2011)
Uruguay
High-Tech
Estrategia Nacional de Desarrollo Uruguay 2050 (2019)
Plan Sectorial de Biotechnología 2011 –2020 (2012)
Uruguay Agro inteligente 2010 – 2015 (2010)
USA
Bioeconomy (holistic)
The Bioeconomy Blueprint (2012)
Click on strategy name to access the online document

34
Costa Rica
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Costa Rica is a frontrunner when it comes to sustain­
able development. Since the abolition of the army in 
1948, the government of Costa Rica has promoted 
pioneering political reforms in environmental pro­
tection and conservation. Since the 1980s, further 
policies have been adopted to open up trade and to 
diversify production, along with internationally recog­
nized initiatives in areas relevant to the bioeconomy, 
such as biodiversity, forestry, climate change, sustain­
able agriculture, clean energy, sustainable tourism, 
among others.
For example, in 1996, the country passed a Biodiver­
sity Law55 with the aim of promoting the conservation 
and ecologically sustainable use of biodiversity and 
the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the 
utilization of genetic resources across all economic 
sectors and parts of society. The political focus on 
biodiversity conservation and protection has since 
been maintained by the adoption of National Biodi­
versity Policies.56
In 2008, the Costa Rican government approved the 
National Biofuels Program57 to promote the progres­
sive substitution of fossil fuels by renewable energy 
sources with the aim of increasing social develop­
ment and contributing to the reduction of greenhouse 
gases.
In 2010, the Law for Integral Waste Management 
was passed to encourage market development for 
by-products, recoverable materials, and recyclable 
and biodegradable products, as well as to promote 
innovations and technological transfer for integrated 
waste management.
In 2015, the government published the Strategy for 
Low-Carbon Livestock,58 to increase productivity of 
the country’s livestock farmers while reducing green­
house gas emissions.
By adopting the Law on the Development, Promo­
tion and Encouragement of Organic Agriculture,59 
the government agreed to develop comprehensive 
training and education programs on good practices 
in organic agriculture, to support research in this area 
and to establish certification systems for national 
organic products.
With the publication of the National Policy on a 
Knowledge-Based Society and Economy60 in 2017, 
the government looked to maximize well-being 
through the production, distribution and use of all 
types of knowledge. In addressing the knowledge-
based economy, the document specifically referred to 
the term bioeconomy, which includes “economic ac­
tivities based on innovation and biotechnology for the 
production of biological products and processes.”
In addition, Carlos Alvarado, the current President, 
announced plans to fully decarbonize the country’s 
economy and make it the first carbon-neutral na­

35
The policy strategy explicitly highlights the wider con­
text in which it emerges. It describes its relationship 
to superordinate and national policy development 
and outlines how far the strategy aligns with exist­
ing policy initiatives in related policy areas. It par­
ticularly aligns with Agenda 2030 for Sustainable 
Development, the Convention on Biological Diversity, 
the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and the 
Convention to Combat Desertification. Furthermore, 
it aligns with various public policy frameworks, includ­
ing the National Policy on Productive Development 
(Vision Costa Rica 2050), the National Development 
Plan 2019 – 2022, the National Biodiversity Strat­
egy, the National Decarbonization Plan 2018 – 2050, 
the National Policy on Sustainable Production and 
Consumption 2018 – 2030, the National Science 
and Innovation Strategy, and the National Digitaliza­
tion Strategy 2018 – 2022, amongst others65. It is 
further stated, that the new bioeconomy strategy 
provides a reference framework to complement the 
National Policy on Entrepreneurship 2030, which is 
also a guiding framework to promote a sustainable 
economic recovery.66
For Costa Rica, the bioeconomy represents an op­
portunity to converge productive development poli­
cies and environmental policies developed over the 
last seven decades. It aims to reconcile the objec­
tives for productive development and for the protec­
tion, knowledge and sustainable use of the country’s 
biological wealth.
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
tion in the world. In order to support the country’s 
contribution to the Paris Agreement, the government 
launched a Decarbonization Plan61 in February 2019. 
The ambitious plan aims to reduce the country’s net 
emissions of carbon dioxide to zero by 2050 and 
promote the country’s modernization through green 
growth.62
In August 2020, the government published the Nation­
al Bioeconomy Strategy – Costa Rica 2020 – 203063 
at a launch event attended by the President, making 
Costa Rica the first country in Latin America and the 
Caribbean to adopt a dedicated national bioeconomy 
strategy. In parallel, the Ministry of Science and Tech­
nology signed a Memorandum of Understanding with 
UNDP with the aim of strengthening the mobilization 
of technical and financial resources to encourage the 
development of bio-businesses within the framework 
of the National Bioeconomic Strategy and the Finance 
for Biodiversity Initiative (BIOFIN).64
The strategy was developed as an inter-ministerial 
effort and is based on a preceding multi-stakeholder 
development process, including various consulta­
tions of experts and representatives from science 
and technology, both public and private, and inter-
organizational processes. 
The process was coordinated by an inter-ministerial 
committee on bioeconomy (CIB), composed of repre­
sentatives from the Ministry of Science, Technology 
and Communications (MCTIC); the Ministry of Agricul­
ture and Livestock (MAG); the Ministry of Environment 
and Energy (MINEA); and the Ministry of Economy, 
Industry and Trade (MEIC). The formulation process, 
which started in 2017, was supported by the Econom­
ic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 
(ECLAC) and the Inter-American Institute for Coopera­
tion on Agriculture (IICA) and financial support was 
given by the cooperation program with the Federal 
Republic of Germany (ECLAC-BMZ/GIZ Program).67

36
The bioeconomy policy strategy pursues a 10-year 
vision to promote high value-added sustainable 
production in all regions of the country, which is 
based on the fair and equitable use of biodiversity, 
the circular utilization of biomass and the country’s 
biotechnological progress. 
Strategic objectives mentioned in the strategy include: 
1) making Costa Rica a model country in sustainable 
development, taking advantage of its biological re­
sources to promote social inclusion and equity, bal­
anced territorial development, conservation, knowl­
edge and sustainable use of biodiversity, and national 
competitiveness, 2) making the bioeconomy one of 
the pillars of the productive transformation of Costa 
Rica by promoting innovation, value creation, diversi­
fication and sophistication of the country’s economy, 
applying the principles of the circular bioeconomy and 
seeking to decarbonize production and consumption 
processes, 3) promoting the convergence between 
the country’s wealth in biological resources and the 
use of national capacities in biological sciences for 
the valorization of that wealth.
The strategy is scheduled to be implemented in 
three phases: momentum (2020 – 2022); scaling 
up (2022 – 2026) and consolidation (2026-2030).68 
The strategy distinguishes between three types of 
goals: 1) short-term goals (2020 – 2022), including 
establishing an institutional basis for the develop­
ment of the bioeconomy in Costa Rica, preparing 
action plans for the implementation of the strategy, 
identifying a set of strategic projects, and identifying 
and managing the resources to start the implemen­
tation of a set of the identified strategic projects; 
2) mid-term goals (2022 – 2026), including consoli­
dating the institutional and legal frameworks for 
bioeconomy development, expanding the scope 
of implementation of regional bioeconomy action 
plans, and identifying and implementing a second 
round of regional strategic bioeconomy projects 
and initiatives, focused on high value-added sec­
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The strategy’s definition of the bioeconomy refers 
to the Communiqué of the Global Bioeconomy 
Summit 2018, in which the bioeconomy comprises 
“the production, utilization, conservation and res­
toration of biological resources, including related 
knowledge, science, technology, and innovation, 
to provide information, products, processes and 
services in all economic sectors aiming towards a 
sustainable bioeconomy.”
The definition represents a comprehensive under­
standing of bioeconomy, including the whole range 
of biological resources and knowledge to provide 
products and services in all sectors of trade and 
industry within the framework of an economic sys­
tem fit for the future. In this respect, biological re­
sources include: 1) cultivated and natural biomass, 
2) residual biomass from the agricultural, fishing 
and aquaculture, forestry and agro-industrial sec­
tors, 3) biomass that can be recovered from ur­
ban residues, 4) waste-waters from livestock and 
human activities, but also 5) terrestrial and ma­
rine biodiversity, including biochemical elements, 
genes, proteins, and microorganisms of interest for 
research and commercial applications.
Scientific and technological development is recog­
nized as a fundamental catalyst for the transfor­
mation of the country. The strategy therefore em­
phasizes the following three key elements of the 
bioeconomy: 1) the promotion and application of sci­
entific knowledge in biological and life sciences, 2) 
the application of traditional and modern knowledge 
about biological resources, processes and principles 
in the development of new products, processes and 
services, and 3) the use of technologies applicable 
to knowledge, transformation and emulation of bio­
logical resources, processes and principles.
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

37
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
tors; 3) long-term goals (2026 – 2030), including 
consolidating the bioeconomy as a model for fossil 
decarbonization and the sustainable development of 
Costa Rica, and consolidating Costa Rica as a model 
country in the development of the bioeconomy in the 
context of high biodiversity.
Action plan development should start in 2020. Its 
main objective should be to implement the propos­
als set out in the strategy with a ten-year horizon 
(to 2030). The action plan should be carried out on 
the basis of a participatory process that includes all 
relevant bioeconomy stakeholders. 
Moreover, the strategy reacts to the global Covid-
19 pandemic and the associated global economic 
downturn and the challenges to many production 
systems by recognizing the potential of bioeconomy 
to produce more efficiently, to reinvent the coun­
try’s economy, and to maintain value chains that 
sustain jobs and livelihoods, while ensuring the sus­
tainable use and rehabilitation of nature in the face 
of climate change.69 The focus of the strategy is to 
increase the resilience and sustainable use of the 
country’s biodiversity. 
The strategy document further highlights the active 
involvement of societal actors. Its prioritization of gen­
der equity and the creation of opportunities for the 
country’s youth and indigenous communities presents 
a unique addition to bioeconomy policy-making.
Within the strategy, the bioeconomy is mentioned as 
a form of the circular economy, “which seeks the use 
of biological resources in the most productive and 
efficient way (…)” The strategy document uses the 
term “circular bioeconomy” to emphasize that the 
concept goes beyond seeking efficiency in the use 
of fossil resources, but rather aims to replace them. 
According to the strategy, a circular bioeconomy con­
tributes to reducing the carbon footprint of produc­
tion processes and generates new market niches for 
consumers concerned with minimizing their impact 
on the environment. 
The strategy document defines five strategic axes 
with respective lines of action: 1) bioeconomy for ru­
ral development, 2) biodiversity and development, 3) 
biorefinery of residual biomass, 4) advanced bioecon­
omy, and 5) urban bioeconomy and green cities.
It recognizes that agricultural, fishing and forestry 
activities are fundamental to the development of 
rural areas. The strategy emphasizes the need to di­
versify production and to generate new value chains 
and networks. Priority should be given to promot­
ing sustainable primary industries (e.g. through re­
search and innovation in precision agriculture and 
sustainable aquaculture) and fostering new value-
added rural agro-industry that produces food and 
ingredients by valorizing local resources.
With regard to biodiversity and development, the 
strategy highlights the government’s efforts and 
commitment to environmental protection and con­
servation, while also emphasizing terrestrial and 
marine biodiversity resources as a new engine for 
inclusive, sustainable development with high value-
added and low greenhouse gas emissions. Interest­
ingly, the role of ecosystem services is stressed 
(e.g. virtual tourism and sustainable eco-tourism 
in protected wildlife areas and biological corridors). 
Furthermore, the document considers the sustain­
able use and commercialization of biodiversity, for 
example through bioprospecting activities, as hold­
ing great potential for economic development, but 
also for biodiversity protection and conservation.
Within strategic axis three, “biorefinery and residual 
biomass,” the focus is on promoting the integral use 
and valorization of residual biomass from agricultural, 
agro-industrial, forestry and fishing processes to pro­
duce energy and a wide range of bioproducts. Biorefin­
ing should contribute to generating new value chains 
and networks in primary production. The production of 
bioenergy based on residual biomass is highlighted as 
an alternative for private consumption on farms and 
rural households. Furthermore, the production of bio-
inputs and biobased materials should be promoted,

38
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
i.e. to produce nutrients for biofertilizers and protein 
for animal feed, and to replace fossil-based products 
or those with a high environmental impact.
Strategic axis four, “advanced bioeconomy,” high­
lights the importance of biotechnology, nanotech­
nology and digital technologies, as well as their 
convergence. The strategy demonstrates the wide 
range of technologies, which can contribute to the 
sustainable use of biological resources, including 
the so-called omics technologies, synthetic biology, 
biochemical engineering, and green chemistry, as 
well as tools arising from interdisciplinary and tech­
nological convergence, such as bioinformatics, bio­
diagnostics and biomonitoring. 
The strategy seeks to promote synergies between 
the Costa Rican scientific capabilities in order to 
encourage the development of new, innovative and 
sustainable products, applications and platforms. 
The highly innovative approach of the strategy to 
promote the urban bioeconomy and green and intel­
ligent cities is unique in comparison to other exist­
ing policy strategies. Costa Rica is one of the first 
countries in the world which intends to focus and 
further develop the concept of a bioprincipled city. 
The government intends to develop and experiment 
with the sustainable management and valorization 
of solid waste residues, inter-urban biological cor­
ridors, as well as urban design approaches inspired 
by biological principles, processes and systems. The 
strategy intends to identify intermediate and small 
cities whose municipalities might be interested in 
applying the concept of a bioprincipled city in their 
urban development plans.
The strategy document emphasizes the cross-cutting 
priority “Research, Development and Innovation” 
and the need to generate economies of scale and 
avoid duplication. In this respect, the strategy focus­
es on establishing shared platforms to encourage 
the collaboration between public and private sec­
tor R&D, to promote entrepreneurship (e.g. through 
incubation and accelerator programs), to support 
ventures in the piloting and development phases, 
and to foster collaboration for technology transfer. 
Interestingly, the strategy pursues a broad concept 
of innovation which spans technological, social and 
economic innovations.
Costa Rica’s strong commitment to investing in 
education and training is outlined within the cross-
cutting priority “Education and Capacity Develop­
ment.” The strategy highlights the importance of 
building a knowledge-based society, to ensure qual­
ity education and universal access. A focus is put 
on environmental education, e.g. through regional 
platforms for virtual tourism. Moreover, internship 
programs with companies and centers of excellence 
should be established for young people and women 
interested in biobusinesses. 
The cross-cutting priority “Market Access” highlights 
the importance of promoting commercialization 
by stimulating local markets and guaranteeing ac­
cess to international markets for bioeconomy goods 
and services, among others. The strategy document 
recognizes the need for new incentives, regulations 
and financing options for the different stages of the 
production chain. Special contests and fairs should 
contribute to fostering a favorable business climate 
for the bioeconomy.
The cross-cutting priority “Communication with Soci­
ety” focuses on increasing the involvement and em­
powerment of the entire population, for example by 
supporting networks at the local, regional, national 
and international level. The demand side remains 
relatively unaddressed in the strategy document. 
The focus is on raising public awareness for through 
actions such as the promotion of the bioprincipled 
city concept.
In order to promote bioeconomy-friendly frame­
work conditions, the strategy highlights the need 
to strengthen existing mechanisms for the manage­
ment of ecosystem services, especially in the area

39
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The strategy proposes the creation of a National Bio­
economy Council, as a multi-stakeholder body to sup­
port strategy implementation. The council will be sup­
ported by a technical secretariat and may establish 
ad-hoc working groups to address identified bottle­
necks limiting the implementation of the strategy.
Moreover, the development of a dedicated 10-year 
action plan should ensure monitoring and evaluation 
of the strategy implementation. Comparative stud­
ies should further monitor the country’s progress in 
terms of the bioeconomy development.
No
of forestry, biodiversity and eco-tourism (e.g. nation-
wide payment for the environmental services sys­
tem, PES). In addition, legislation should be updated, 
e.g. with regard to promoting the sustainable use of 
biodiversity, fostering the use of residual biomass in 
primary industries and the agro-industry, and facili­
tating the use of biological materials and principles 
in construction. It further emphasizes the need to 
strengthen national capacities in IP management, 
licensing and other mechanisms for the protection 
of knowledge. 
The government aims to promote good governance 
in terms of policy coherence and effectiveness with­
in the strategy document. The Ministry of Science, 
Technology and Telecommunications (MCTIC), as the 
coordinator and initiator of the strategy, established 
an Inter-ministerial Bioeconomy Commission (CIB), 
for exchange among the four participating ministries 
(MAG, MEIC, MCTIC and MINEA). In addition, by cre­
ating a high-level National Bioeconomy Council, as 
the highest decision-making and monitoring body, 
the strategy further pursues a multi-stakeholder ap­
proach to promoting bioeconomy development.
55 	 The Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (1998). Biodiversity 
Law. Available at https://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.51/whd.c06.
myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/es_laws/Costa-Rica-Biodiversity-
Law-of-Costa-Rica.pdf [English Version; Unofficial translation] [30.09.20] 
https://www.conagebio.go.cr/Conagebio/public/documentos/legislacion/
Decretos/Reglamento_a_la_Ley_Biodiversidad_DE_34433-MINAE.pdf 
[Spanish version] [30.09.20]
56  	 Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications. (2015). National 
Biodiversity Policies. Available at https://www.conagebio.go.cr/Conagebio/
public/documentos/POLITICA-NACIONAL-DE-BIODIVERSIDAD-2015.pdf 
[30.09.20]
57  	 Ministry of the Environment and Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and 
Livestock. (2008). National Biofuels Program. Available at https://sepse.
go.cr/documentos/Programa%20Nacional%20de%20Biocombustibles.pdf 
[30.09.20]
58  	 Navarro, M. C., Rivero, C. R., Guzmán J. S. & Picado D. J. (2015). Strategy for 
Low-Carbon Livestock. Available at http://www.mag.go.cr/bibliotecavirtual/
L01-11006.pdf [30.09.20]
59	 The Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (2007). Law on 
the Development, Promotion and Encouragement of Organic Agriculture. 
Available at http://www.mag.go.cr/legislacion/2006/ley-8542.pdf 
[30.09.20]
60  	 Ministry of Science, Technology and Telecommunications. (2017). National 
Policy on a Knowledge-Based Society and Economy. Available at https://
www.micit.go.cr/sites/default/files/politica_nacional_sociedad_y_ecnomia_
en_el_conocimiento-min.pdf [30.09.20]
61  	 The Government of Costa Rica. (2019). Decarbonization Plan. 
Available at https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/
NationalDecarbonizationPlan.pdf [30.09.20]
62  100% Renewable Energy in Costa Rica. (2019). World Future Council. 
Available at https://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/100-renewable-energy-
costa-rica/ [30.09.20]
63 	 Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Agriculture and 
Livestock, the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Commerce and the 
Ministry of Science, Technology and Telecommunications. (2020). National 
Bioeconomy Strategy – Costa Rica 2020 – 2030. Available at https://
gbs2020.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/PolicyBrief-Bioeconomy-
Strategy-Costa-Rica.pdf [30.09.20]
64  	 Costa Rica lanza Estrategia Nacional de Bioeconomía. (2020). Elpais. 
Available at https://www.elpais.cr/2020/08/07/costa-rica-lanza-estrategia-
nacional-de-bioeconomia/ [30.09.20]
65  	 Rodriguez. (n.d.). Estrategia Nacional de Bioeconomía.
66 https://www.elpais.cr/2020/08/07/costa-rica-lanza-estrategia-nacional-de-
bioeconomia/
67 https://www.elpais.cr/2020/08/07/costa-rica-lanza-estrategia-nacional-de-
bioeconomia/
68 https://www.elpais.cr/2020/08/07/costa-rica-lanza-estrategia-nacional-de-
bioeconomia/
69 https://www.elpais.cr/2020/08/07/costa-rica-lanza-estrategia-nacional-de-
bioeconomia/
REFERENCES

40
USA
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
In 2012, the White House published a dedicated U.S. 
bioeconomy strategy, the “National Bioeconomy 
Blueprint,”70 covering the entire bioeconomy portfo­
lio and emphasizing biotechnology and biomedicine. 
With the release of this Blueprint, the United States 
became the first country to describe biotechnology 
as a key driver of the bioeconomy.
The agricultural strategy or updated “Farm Bill,” de­
veloped by the Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
and covering the period from 2014 – 2018, did not 
specifically relate to the bioeconomy, but promoted 
key subsegments in the areas of agriculture, bioen­
ergy, and food, and expanded efforts to enable the 
procurement of biobased products (BioPreferred 
Program) and the BioRefinery Assistance Program 
(rebranded as the Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical, 
and Biobased Product Manufacturing Assistance Pro­
gram), and the Biomass Crop Assistance Program. 
The BioPreferred program,71 which works to increase 
the use of biobased products through a federal pro­
curement program and a voluntary certification and 
labeling program, has developed into one of the U.S. 
bioeconomy’s main support tools. Since the launch 
of the program’s voluntary certification initiative 
in 2011, more than 3,000 bioproducts have been 
certified and labeled.72 However, in May 2018, the 
Obama era Executive Order compelling federal agen­
cies to submit biobased procurement targets was 
revoked by the current Administration, potentially 
setting back efforts to measure the success of the 
program. While federal agencies are still required 
to procure biobased products, they no long are re­
quired to report targets.
In 2015, the U.S. government renewed the federal 
“Strategy for American Innovation,”73 highlighting 
the need for investment in new technologies to de­
velop future U.S. industries, such as the bioecono­
my. Public R&D investment was considered highly 
relevant for the National Nanotechnology Initiative, 
the Materials Genome Initiative, the National Robot­
ics Initiative, and the Big Data Research and Devel­
opment Initiative.
Without a central document to replace the 2012 
Bioeconomy Blueprint and its holistic view of bio- 
and high-tech innovation across all economic sec­
tors, the U.S. entered a period marked by the more 
agricultural and bioresources-based vision put forth 
by individual federal agencies. Building on a series 
of opportunity reports named “Billion-ton Report” 
(2005, 2011, 2016),74 an inter-agency vision to sus­
tainably produce one billion tons of biomass by 2030 
was adopted. The implementation of this billion-ton 
strategy is documented in the 2016 “Federal Activi­
ties Report on the Bioeconomy,”75 which provides 
an overview of publicly funded bioeconomy activi­
ties. Subsequently, in December 2016, the govern­
ment adopted the “Strategic Plan for a Thriving and 
Sustainable Bioeconomy,”76 a strategy providing a

41
framework for biomass-derived product development 
in the United States. After a series of meetings and 
stakeholder activities, the Department of Energy’s 
Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) would eventu­
ally receive congressional appropriations in 2017 to 
establish the first open, public biofoundry, the Agile 
BioFoundry (ABF), a distributed consortium of nine 
DOE National Laboratories, which work to advance 
biomanufacturing and address precompetitive re­
search challenges identified by industry.77 
The U.S. leads in many biotechnology arenas and 
in recent years has focused on modernizing the 
regulatory system. In 2017, the USDA released an 
interagency task force report78 outlining the need 
to increase public acceptance of biotechnology 
products, modernize and streamline the federal 
regulatory system for biotechnology products, and 
expedite commercialization of biotechnology prod­
ucts. The White House also released an “Update to 
the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of 
Biotechnology,”79 aimed at streamlining regulatory 
processes and accelerating the translation of bioin­
novations to market. In 2019, the administration 
signed an Executive Order80 aiming to modernize 
how agricultural biotechnology products are regu­
lated. The Order called for the development of an 
international trade strategy to remove unjustified 
trade barriers and expand markets, and the creation 
of a unified biotechnology web-based platform. It 
was aligned with the USDA 2020 SECURE Rule81 
which creates a new process to regulate plants de­
veloped using genetic engineering.
In June 2019, the Engineering Biology Research Con­
sortium (EBRC), a public-private partnership partially 
funded by the National Science Foundation, released 
its technical research roadmap, Engineering Biol­
ogy: A Research Roadmap for the Next-Generation 
Bioeconomy,82 which outlines technical themes and 
application sectors for engineering biology.
In 2019, the Biomass Research and Development 
Board (BR&D Board) co-chaired by USDA and the 
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued “The Bio­
economy Initiative: Implementation Framework,”83 
focused on innovative technologies to harness the 
nation’s biomass resources for affordable biofuels, 
bioproducts and biopower. In 2020, the USDA Sci­
ence Blueprint: A Roadmap for USDA Science from 
2020 to 2025,84 listed the bioeconomy as a key 
aspect of fostering value-added innovations and 
explicitly references the BioPreferred program as an 
important evidence tool.
In contrast to other countries, over the years the 
Department of Defense has invested significantly 
in the bioeconomy. In 2019, for example, it estab­
lished biotechnology as an enterprise modernization 
priority.85 
While in May of 2019 some coordinating activity oc­
curred within the White House, these events have 
not developed into a new strategy or Executive Order 
to replace the 2012 National Bioeconomy Blueprint. 
For the first time since 2009, in August 2019 the Ad­
ministration identified the bioeconomy as a key area 
for federal agencies to focus R&D efforts,86 in Sep­
tember it released a request for information (RFI)87 
to gather stakeholder input, and in October hosted 
the White House Summit on America’s Bioecono­
my.88 This Summit marked the first gathering at the 
White House of the country’s bioeconomy experts, 
federal officials, and industry leaders to discuss the 
U.S. bioeconomy and signaled an understanding of 
the bioeconomy as critical for “Industries of the Fu­
ture” and as a science and technology priority. 
In 2020 the National Academy of Sciences, Engineer­
ing and Medicine (NASEM) released a new report on 
“Safeguarding the Bioeconomy,”89 which for the 
first time provided a comprehensive measurement 
of the U.S. bioeconomy and made a number of key 
recommendations to government for the appropriate 
promotion and protection of the bioeconomy. The 
report strongly recommended the establishment of 
a government-wide strategic coordinating body with 
a mandate to develop, adopt and regularly update a 
living bioeconomy strategy. 
Other promising developments include bills in the 
House of Representatives90 and the Senate91 to 
strengthen America’s bioeconomy, including the es­
tablishment of a committee to coordinate research 
in engineering biology across the federal agencies.
Recently, in response to the Covid pandemic, a 
consortium of DOE National laboratories has come 
together to form the National Virtual Biotechnology 
Lab (NVBL).92

42
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The White House published the Bioeconomy Blue­
print in 2012 with Mary Maxon, the Assistant Direc­
tor for Biological Research at the Office of Science 
and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the 
President, as the principal author.
The National Bioeconomy Blueprint describes the 
bioeconomy as “one based on the use of research 
and innovation in the biological sciences to create 
economic activity and public benefit.” Notably, this 
definition considers GM crops as part of the bio­
economy as opposed to all crops, as do many EU 
countries.
This holistic definition of bio- and high-tech inno­
vation across all economic sectors would evolve 
over the decade. In 2016 the “Strategic Plan for a 
Thriving and Sustainable Bioeconomy” defined the 
bioeconomy as the “sustainable use of domestically 
produced renewable biomass for fuels, products, 
and power” reflecting a vision of a future clean en­
ergy economy. 
In 2019 the “White House in its Summit on Amer­
ica’s Bioeconomy” referenced the following defini­
tion: “the bioeconomy represents the infrastructure, 
innovation, products, technology, and data derived 
from biologically- related processes and science 
that drive economic growth, improve public health, 
agricultural, and security benefits.” This represents 
a more comprehensive view and shift away from 
the previous focus on agriculture and biomass to 
include more economic areas. In addition, we see an 
increasing value in the “security” benefits of the bio­
economy (e.g. protecting against biological threats 
and developing biotechnology for military use).
Given the significant advances that have occurred 
since the Blueprint first articulated the U.S. defini­
tion in 2012, the NASEM report on “Safeguarding 
the Bioeconomy” in 2020 recommended that the 
government adopt a more comprehensive defini­
tion that would enable a better assessment of the 
bioeconomy. The report recommended the follow­
ing definition: “The U.S. bioeconomy is economic 
activity that is driven by research and innovation 
in the life sciences and biotechnology, and that is 
enabled by technological advances in engineering 
and in computing and information sciences.” This 
definition identifies four drivers of the bioeconomy 
(life sciences, biotechnology, engineering, and com­
puting and information sciences), takes a broad un­
derstanding of the bioeconomy and places innova­
tion in the foreground. Notably, under this definition 
forestry would not be included in the bioeconomy 
given that the use of biotechnology or the use of 
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
While the dedicated strategy of the U.S., the Na­
tional Bioeconomy Blueprint, released in 2012 em­
phasized the benefits of coordinating federal efforts, 
especially with regard to R&D and regulation, no 
single agency has a clear lead in advancing U.S. bio­
economy goals. Each U.S. agency and department 
has its own defined mission and associated scien­
tific domain, with no central government agency 
mandated to holistically steer the bioeconomy.

43
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The Obama administration’s Bioeconomy Blueprint 
positions itself as a response to a world shifting 
to an innovative and technology-fueled economy. 
The bioeconomy should produce technical inno­
vations to secure the future competitiveness and 
sustainability of the U.S. economy. Emphasis is 
placed less on using biomass for energy and more 
on non-energy applications (see also adaptation 
of the Biorefinery Assistance Program to biobased 
materials in the Farm Bill). 
The Bioeconomy Blueprint lays out five strategic 
objectives: supporting R&D investments, improv­
ing commercialization of bio-inventions, reforming 
regulatory processes, updating workforce training 
programs for new bioeconomy careers, and build­
ing new bioeconomy public-private partnerships. It 
provides no quantitative targets, time limits or ac­
tion plan. No new dedicated bioeconomy strategy 
has since replaced the Bioeconomy Blueprint. 
produced biomass for fermentation in the industry 
is not thought to be significant at this point. Accord­
ing to this definition, the bioeconomy contributed 
nearly USD 960 billion in 2016 alone – more than 5 
percent of the country’s GDP.93
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The Obama administration’s Bioeconomy Blueprint 
covers the entire bioeconomy portfolio, explicitly in­
cluding the health sector. It specifically highlights the 
role of biomedical research and its impact on health. 
Particular weight is given to three “foundational tech­
nologies:” genetic engineering, DNA sequencing, and 
automated high-throughput manipulations of biomol­
ecules. Other areas that are mentioned are synthetic 
biology, proteomics and bioinformatics. In addition, 
applied research, cross-cutting technologies and tech­
nology transfer, including easier access to market, are 
particularly important. 
Lastly, federal agencies are encouraged to prioritize 
procurement of biobased and sustainable products 
where appropriate and cost-effective. Increased at­
tention is paid to biobased consumer goods for sports, 
leisure time, health care, ecosmetics, etc. 
The Bioeconomy Blueprint provides measures relat­
ing to the promotion of innovation, infrastructure, 
commercialization, demand-side instruments, and 
political framework conditions. It not only defines 
traditional R&D funding in life-sciences, but also pro­
vides for measures to ensure improved and acceler­
ated technology transfer. Some of the measures to 
facilitate this transfer include simplifying the proce­
dure for forming clusters and start-ups, adapting to 
regulatory mechanisms, and eliminating obstacles to 
innovation. Particularly in the health sector, approval 
processes should be accelerated and be more ef­
ficient. A further package of measures aims at the 
reform of education and training courses, as well as 
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7

44
enhanced involvement of industry in the qualifica­
tion of employees. 
While no new dedicated bioeconomy strategy has 
been released since the Bioeconomy Blueprint in 
2012, a number of key policies and actions over 
the past few years have helped steer the U.S. bio­
economy. Below are key measures from the latest 
initiatives, the Bioeconomy Initiative: Implementa­
tion Framework (2019) and the USDA Science Blue­
print (2020).
With regard to research and innovation, the Science 
Blueprint provides a vision for the USDA’s scientific 
research through 2025 and in the area of the bio­
economy looks to strengthen food, agricultural and 
forest production, processing, manufacturing, uti­
lization, and marketing through new technologies, 
innovation, and data analysis to create jobs and 
economic opportunities in rural areas. It specifically 
calls for the development of a bioeconomy research 
roadmap with near-, mid-, and long-term goals and 
annual progress reports.
At least 25 agencies and departments in the U.S. 
support research and development (R&D) in areas of 
the life sciences. The Bioeconomy Initiative Frame­
work builds upon previous federal investments in 
basic research and applied R&D and provides a guid­
ing document for federal agencies. The Framework 
specifically proposes building a national feedstock 
network including USDA, DOE, NSF, DOI, and indus­
try with improved public accessibility. 
Stimulating public-private partnerships is also a 
priority for the Bioeconomy Initiative Framework. 
It refers to the existing public-private partnership 
model, the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels 
Initiative (CAAFI), which develops alternative jet fu­
els for commercial aviation. Other prime examples 
include the Manufacturing USA program, a collection 
of 14 manufacturing institutes, each a public–pri­
vate partnership that works to develop and advance 
manufacturing-related technologies. Several of 
these institutes connect directly to the bioeconomy, 
including those working on biofabrication and regen­
erative medicine, biopharmaceuticals, robotics, and 
digital technologies (e.g. the Advanced Regenerative 
Manufacturing Institute (BioFabUSA), the National 
Institute for Innovation in Manufacturing Biophar­
maceuticals (NIIMBL), the Advanced Robotics for 
Manufacturing Institute (ARM), and Manufacturing 
Times Digital (MxD)).94 
Support for infrastructure is mostly focused on re­
search facilities. The Science Blueprint sets the ob­
jective of optimizing biorefining and processing sys­
tems that leverage economies of scale to promote 
biobased product competition and market access. 
With regard to commercialization, the Bioeconomy 
Initiative Framework places significant emphasis on 
technology transfer. Investment in this area is mostly 
through federal public funding of innovation, and 
programs such as the Small Business Innovation 
Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business 
Technology Transfer (STTR) program to bridge the 
gap between basic science and commercialization. 
Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative). In addition, both 
the Bioeconomy Initiative Framework and the Sci­
ence Blueprint aim to build on the successful USDA 
BioPreferred program. 
With regard to good governance measures, the Bio­
economy Initiative Framework ultimately aims to 
facilitate coordination among federal government 
agencies that affect the research and development 
(R&D) of biofuels, bioproducts, and biopower and 
includes a number of initiatives to ensure better 
coordination of programs. In addition, it provides for 
increased sustainability R&D, for example by iden­
tifying relevant metrics and indicators to facilitate 
evaluation of environmental, societal, and economic 
effects. The Science Blueprint also sets the objec­
tive of gathering data to quantify and inform the 
valuation of the bioeconomic ecosystem.
The Bioeconomy Initiative Framework also sees the 
expansion of the bioeconomy as limited by technol­
ogy uncertainty and investment risk for biorefineries. 
While federal agencies support industry in develop­
ing the U.S. bioeconomy through direct financial as­
sistance via grants, loans, cooperative agreements, 
technology transfer activities, and incentives (e.g. 
biofuels mandates and tax credits, as determined 
by Congress), the Framework also looks to increase 
private sector involvement.
The Bioeconomy Initiative Framework refers to the 
need for education and job-training initiatives. For

45
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The Bioeconomy Blueprint provides no action plan 
and does not put in place mechanisms to monitor 
or evaluate strategy implementation.
No state-level dedicated bioeconomy strategies ex­
ist in the USA. There are, however, innovative inter­
national cooperation projects. 
In October 2019, the State of Maine and Finland 
signed a five-year Memorandum of Understanding 
(MOU) to foster an exchange of information and co­
operation in developing a bioeconomy that is based 
on forests and the use of wood.96 
In May 2020, a new set of policy recommendations 
under the title “Built With Biology: California’s Bio­
strategy 2020: The Greenprint for Biomanufactur­
ing and Sustainable Supply Chains in a Post-COVID 
World,”97 was released for California Governor Gavin 
Newsom’s Business Recovery Task Force. “Built 
With Biology” is a five-point plan to rethink and re­
build the economy using biomanufacturing and lays 
out a 50-year strategy to create more prosperous, 
sustainable, and equitable economy in the state of 
California, the fifth largest economy in the world. 
The report was drafted in consultation with over 100 
leading entrepreneurs, investors, startups, large and 
small corporations, scientists and engineers, and 
input from the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, the 
Engineering Biology Research Consortium, and the 
advocacy organizations the Californian Life Science 
Association (CLSA) and the Biotechnology Innovation 
Organization (BIO). 
The five main recommendations include 1) almost 
USD 900k to create a Built With Biology initiative; 
example, through the Agricultural Biotechnology Ed­
ucation and Outreach Initiative, which calls upon the 
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to provide 
education and outreach to the public on agricultural 
biotechnology and food and animal feed ingredients 
derived from biotechnology.95 
With regard to demand side instruments, the Bio­
economy Initiative Framework seeks to make scien­
tific knowledge and data available to the biomass 
community and the public. Actions include improving 
existing federal online portals, hosting meetings and 
webinars, and publishing technology innovation suc­
cess stories. In addition, the Initiative should revamp 
the federal bioeconomy stakeholder engagement 
and communications strategy and develop addi­
tional public-private partnership models (e.g. the 
Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative). In 
addition, both the Bioeconomy Initiative Framework 
and the Science Blueprint aim to build on the suc­
cessful USDA BioPreferred program.
With regard to good governance measures, the Bio­
economy Initiative Framework ultimately aims to 
facilitate coordination among federal government 
agencies that affect the research and development 
(R&D) of biofuels, bioproducts, and biopower and 
includes a number of initiatives to ensure better 
coordination of programs. In addition, it provides for 
increased sustainability R&D, for example by iden­
tifying relevant metrics and indicators to facilitate 
evaluation of environmental, societal, and economic 
effects. The Science Blueprint also sets the objec­
tive of gathering data to quantify and inform the 
valuation of the bioeconomic ecosystem.

46
REFERENCES
70  White House. (2012). National Bioeconomy Blueprint. Available at https://
obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/
national_bioeconomy_blueprint_april_2012.pdf [24.08.20]
71  	 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). (n.d.). BioPreferred Program. 
Available at https://www.biopreferred.gov/BioPreferred/faces/pages/
AboutBioPreferred.xhtml [01.09.20]
72  	 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). 
(2020). Safeguarding the U.S. Bioeconomy. Available at https://www.nap.
edu/catalog/25525/safeguarding-the-bioeconomy [24.08.20]
73  	 The White House. (2015). A Strategy for American Innovation. Available at 
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/strategy_for_
american_innovation_october_2015.pdf [24.08.20]
74   U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2016). 2016 Billion-ton Report: 
Advancing Domestic Resources for a Thriving Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/12/f34/2016_billion_ton_
report_12.2.16_0.pdf [24.08.20]
75	 Biomass Research and Development Board (BRDB). (2016). Federal 
Activities Report on the Bioeconomy. Available at https://www.energy.gov/
sites/prod/files/2016/02/f30/farb_2_18_16.pdf [24.08.20]
76  	 DOE. (2016). Strategic Plan for a Thriving and Sustainable Bioeconomy. 
Available at https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/12/f34/beto_
strategic_plan_december_2016_0.pdf [24.08.20]
77  Final FY17 Appropriations: DOE Applied Energy. (2017). Available at 
https://www.aip.org/fyi/2017/final-fy17-appropriations-doe-applied-energy 
[24.08.20]
78 	 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2017). Report to the President of 
the United States from the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity. 
Available at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/rural-
prosperity-report.pdf [24.08.20]
79  	 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2017). Modernizing the regulatory 
system for biotechnology products: An update to the coordinated framework 
for the regulation of biotechnology. Available at https://www.epa.gov/
regulation-biotechnology-under-tsca-and-fifra/modernizing-regulatory-
system-biotechnology-products [24.08.20]
80  	 White House. (2019). Executive Order on Modernizing the Regulatory 
Framework for Agricultural Biotechnology Products. Available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-modernizing-
regulatory-framework-agricultural-biotechnology-products/ [24.08.20]
81  	 USDA. (2020). USDA SECURE Rule Paves Way for Agricultural Innovation. 
Available at https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2020/05/14/
usda-secure-rule-paves-way-agricultural-innovation [24.08.20] 
82  	 Engineering Biology Research Consortium (EBRC). (2019). Engineering 
biology: A research roadmap for the next- generation bioeconomy. Available 
at https://roadmap.ebrc.org [24.08.20]
83  BRDB. (2019). The bioeconomy initiative: Implementation framework. 
Available at https://biomassboard.gov/pdfs/Bioeconomy_Initiative_
Implementation_Framework_FINAL.pdf [24.08.20]
84  USDA. (2020). USDA Science Blueprint: A Roadmap for USDA Science from 
2020 to 2025. Available at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/usda-science-blueprint.pdf [24.08.20]
85  	 Department of Defense (DOD). (2019). Modernization Priorities. Available at 
https://www.cto.mil/modernization-priorities/ [24.08.20]
86  	 White House. (2019). Fiscal Year 2021 Administration Research and 
Development Budget Priorities. Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
wp-content/uploads/2019/08/FY-21-RD-Budget-Priorities.pdf [24.08.20]
87   Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). (2019). Request for 
Information on the Bioeconomy. Available at https://www.federalregister.
gov/documents/2019/09/10/2019-19470/request-for-information-on-the-
bioeconomy [24.08.20] 
88  	 White House. (2019). Summary on the White House Summit on America’s 
Bioeconomy. Available at  https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2019/10/Summary-of-White-House-Summit-on-Americas-
Bioeconomy-October-2019.pdf [24.08.20]
89   NASEM. (2020). Safeguarding the U.S. Bioeconomy. Available at https://
www.nap.edu/catalog/25525/safeguarding-the-bioeconomy [24.08.20]
90 	 H.R.4373 - Engineering Biology Research and Development Act of 2019. 
Available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-
bill/4373/all-info [24.08.20]
91 	 S.3734 - Bioeconomy Research and Development Act of 2020. Available at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3734/actions 
[24.08.20]
92 	 DOE. (2020). U.S. Department of Energy National Virtual Biotechnology 
Laboratory (NVBL). Available athttps://science.osti.gov/nvbl [24.08.20]
93   NASEM. (2020). Safeguarding the U.S. Bioeconomy. Available at https://
www.nap.edu/catalog/25525/safeguarding-the-bioeconomy [24.08.20]
94   National Institute of Standards Technology. (2018). Annual report 2018: 
Manufacturing USA program. Available here https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/
nistpubs/ams/NIST.AMS.600-5.pdf [01.10.20]
95  	 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (n.d.). Agricultural Biotechnology 
Education and Outreach Initiative. Available here https://www.fda.gov/
food/agricultural-biotechnology/agricultural-biotechnology-education-and-
outreach-initiative [01.10.20]
96  	 Finland and the State of Maine agree on cooperation in forest bioeconomy. 
(2019). Available at https://www.bioeconomy.fi/suomi-ja-maine-sopivat-
yhteistyosta-metsabiotalouden-kehittamisessa/ [24.08.20]
97   Synbiobeta. (2020). California’s Biostrategy 2020:The Greenprint for 
Biomanufacturing and Sustainable Supply Chains in a Post-COVID World. 
Available at https://synbiobeta.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Built-
With-Biology-v3.0-May-20-2020.pdf [24.08.20]
2) over USD 8.5 million to better equip schools and 
universities with courses and lab facilities to prepare 
for future biomanufacturing jobs; 3) USD 100 million 
per site to build five biomanufacturing opportunity 
zones that could rapidly make a variety of biobased 
products 4) introduce a California BioPreferred 
Stimulus Program inspired by the USDA BioPreferred 
Program; and 5) create a USD 100 million Bio-Bridge 
Matching Investment Fund for synthetic biology and 
biomanufacturing startups.

47

Asia/Pacific
48
Three countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Malaysia, 
Thailand and Japan, have adopted dedicated bio­
economy strategies. Some of the emerging econo­
mies in Asia are rated among the most innovative 
countries in the world. It is therefore not surprising 
to find that bioeconomy development in Asia is gen­
erally strongly oriented towards high-tech and indus­
trial innovations. Innovations in the bioeconomy are 
seen as particularly important for improving human 
health in the medical sector, working closely with 
bioindustry to develop innovative biobased products 
(e.g. marine biodegradable plastics) and creating 
centers of excellence for bioeconomy research and 
experimentation. 
While not analyzed in the following section, a num­
ber of bioeconomy-related strategies also reflect the 
high-tech vision and focus on biotechnology in the 
region (e.g. China, India, Russia, South Korea, Sri 
Lanka).98 Large industrial economies such as China 
and India see biotechnology as a nascent field of in­
novation in which they can quickly compete. South 
Korea is a leader in marine biotechnology policy. 
Bioenergy is an important focus in Indonesia, India, 
and New Zealand. In Australia, the federal state of 
Queensland has a dedicated roadmap for bioindus­
try development, whereas New Zealand continues 
to concentrate on further growth and value-creation 
in the primary industries.

Click on strategy name to access the online document
Country
Perspective
Document Name
Australia
Research & Innovation
Bioeconomy (regional)
Blue Economy
Research & Innovation
Bioenergy
Research & Innovation
Bioeconomy (regional)
National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (2018)
Queensland Biofutures 10-Year-Roadmap and Action Plan (2016)
National Marine Science Plan 2015 – 2025 (2015) 
National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (2013) 
Opportunities for Primary Industries in the Bioenergy Sector: National 
Research, Development and Extension Strategy (2011) + Workplan 
(2014)
Strategic Roadmap for Australian Research Infrastructure (2011)
Building a Bioeconomy in South Australia (2004)
China
Research & Innovation
High-Tech
High-Tech
High-Tech
Research & Innovation
High-Tech
13th FYP for Science, Technology and Innovation (2016)
13th FYP for Strategic Emerging Industries (2016)
13th FYP on Bioindustry Development (2016)
12th FYP on Bioindustry Development (2012)
12th FYP (2011-2015) on Agricultural Science and 
Technology Development (2012)
12th FYP for National Strategic Emerging Industries (2012)
49
See further policy strategies on the next page →

50
Country
Perspective
Document Name
India
Bioenergy
High-Tech
High-Tech (regional)
High-Tech (regional)
National Biofuel Policy 2018 (2018)
National Biotechnology Development Strategy (2007, 2014, 2015)
Biotech Policy 2015 – 2020 – Goverment of Andhrapradesh (2015)
Tamil Nadu Biotechnology policy (2014)
Indonesia
Bioenergy
Bioenergy
Strategic Plan of the Indonesian Ministry of Agriculture 2015 – 2019 
(2015)
National Energy Policy (2014)
Japan
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bio-Strategy Japan (2020)
Bio-Strategy Japan (2019)
Malaysia
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy Transformation Programme (BTP) (2012)
New Zealand
Research & Innovation
Research & Innovation
Research & Innovation
Bioenergy
Agritech Industry Transformation Plan (2020)
Primary Sector Science Roadmap – Te Ao Turoa (2017)
Biological Industries Research Fund (2013)
Bioenergy Strategy (2010)
Russia
High-Tech
High-Tech
Russian Government Roadmap for Development of Biotechnology 
(2013)
Comprehensive Program for the Development of Biotechnology in 
Russia by 2020 (BIO2020) (2012)
South Korea
Research & Innovation
High-Tech
Blue Economy
Biobased Economy
High-Tech
3rd Basic Plan for Science and Technology (2013)
Strategy for Promotion of Industrial Biotechology (2012)
Blue-Bio 2016 Plan (2008)
2020 Vision and Strategy of Bio-industry (2007)
2nd Framework Plan for Promotion of Biotechnology, Bio-Vision 2016 
(2006)
Sri Lanka
High-Tech
National Biotechnology Policy (2010)
Thailand
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Biobased Economy
Bio-Circular-Green Economy (BCG) in Action: The new Sustainable 
Growth Engine (2019)
Measures for the Development of Bio-Industry in Thailand 
2018 – 2027 (2018)
98	 For the purposes of this report, Russia has been included in this continental 
grouping.
REFERENCES
Click on strategy name to access the online document

51

52
Japan
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
While initially the term “bioeconomy” was rarely used 
in Japan, the country has a long history of promoting 
the production and industrial use of biomass. As an 
example, the first biomass strategy, Biomass Nippon 
Strategy,99 was developed in 2002 with the aim of 
generating a sustainable economy by efficient use of 
biological resources. The strategy was then revised in 
2006 to also focus on bioenergy, as well as to accel­
erate the promotion of “Biomass Towns” (biobased, 
environmentally friendly and disaster-resistant com­
munities which utilize biomass comprehensively). 
From 2005 to 2011, the central government encour­
aged the development of “Biomass Town” plans and 
a total of 318 municipalities participated. 
Many of these advancements or “zero-waste” Japa­
nese municipalities can be attributed to other laws 
such as the Fundamental Plan for Establishing a 
Sound Material-Cycle Society,100 first enacted in 
2000, that helped establish “regional circular and 
ecological spheres’ and advanced household and 
municipal waste approaches. 
In the case of biotechnology promotion, in 2002 Ja­
pan launched the Biotechnology Strategy Council 
(BTSC), presided over by the Prime Minister, and a 
comprehensive set of Biotechnology Strategy Guide­
lines, containing 200 detailed action plans to foster 
Japan’s biotechnology sector.101 The Japanese gov­
ernment then established the Government-Industry 
Council for Biotechnology Strategy Promotion in 2008 
and published a new strategy, “Dream BT Japan”,102 
to promote and realize the “Biotechnology Strategy 
Guidelines” issued in 2002. Given its importance for 
medicine and pharmaceuticals, chemistry, agricul­
ture, and environmental protection, biotechnology is 
considered a key sector in the Japanese government’s 
strategies to stimulate the economy. In Japan, it has 
been permitted to import genetically modified (GM) 
plants under certain conditions for a long time. With 
respect to biotech-related regulation, an expert panel 
released rules in 2019 governing genome-edited agri­
cultural and marine products, in which Japan decided 
to exempt SND-1 type modifications from GMO regu­
lation under the Japanese Cartagena Act.103 
In 2009, the “Basic Act for the Promotion of Biomass 
Utilization”104 was passed. It outlined the principles of 
biomass utilization and specified government respon­
sibilities, political stakeholders, and funding mea­
sures as well as appointing the National Biomass 
Policy Council. The National Plan for the Promotion 
of Biomass Utilization105 followed in 2010, setting 
quantitative utilization targets for 2020 at nation­
al, prefectural, and district level (e.g. fixed quotas 
for biofuels). The plan took into account the entire 
value-added chain from the recycling of residues to 
biorefining.
Difficulties regarding the commercial success of busi­
nesses involved in the “Biomass Town” plans would 
ultimately lead to the formulation of a new policy in

53
2012, the Biomass Commercialization/Industrializa­
tion Strategy,106 and in 2013, the “Biomass Industrial 
City/Region” scheme, an expansion of the biomass 
town concept to promote biomass industrialization. 
As of 2020, 90 municipalities were recognized as 
Biomass Industrial Cities. Following the great eastern 
earthquake and the Fukushima nuclear power plant 
disaster in 2011, the new 2012 biomass strategy 
also sought to support green industry (e.g. through 
biobased materials and conversion technologies) and 
achieve autonomous and decentralized energy pro­
duction. Topics included biorefineries, research on 
microalgae, and biofuels. 
Following a change in government, the Abe Cabinet 
passed a revitalization strategy for Japan in 2013 
with the aim of research and technology moving Ja­
pan towards new growth. On this basis, the Cabinet 
adopted the Comprehensive Strategy on Science, 
Technology and Innovation in June 2013 which 
focuses, among other things, on a clean energy 
system and revitalization of the regional economy. 
The 4th and 5th Science and Technology Basic Plan 
(2011 – 2015) and (2016 – 2021) also promote 
green innovation in the field of energy and environ­
mental technologies.107
Over the years, the Japanese government has also 
actively promoted the market entry of environmen­
tally friendly products through legislation, tax breaks, 
reduced-interest loans or consumer-oriented labeling 
of such products (e.g. the biodiversity label, Eco Mark, 
or GreenPla and BiomassPla for bioplastics). The first 
edition of the “Act on Promoting Green Purchasing” 
appeared in 2001 and requires that government 
agencies apply green purchasing criteria when pro­
curing products in a wide array of categories.108
The national strategy and action plan for biodiver­
sity (2012 – 2020)109 also promotes aspects of the 
bioeconomy by living in harmony with nature and em­
phasizing traditionally managed regions or so-called 
Satoyama, farmed agricultural and forestry areas that 
maintain and restore the resilience and efficiency of 
the ecosystem. The strategy also strives to revitalize 
rural regions which are suffering from the migration 
of younger people to urban areas.
Private stakeholders are also increasingly active in 
bioeconomy policy development in Japan. In 2016, 
the Japan Bioindustry Association (JPA) developed a 
Vision Document110 for Japanese biobased industry, 
in which key innovations were expected from advanc­
es in genome editing and synthetic biology. 
Japan has also been active in efforts to solve marine 
plastic waste issues. In advance of the G20 Summit 
in 2019, the Minister of Economy, Trade, and Industry 
(METI) published a Roadmap for Popularizing Devel­
opment and Introduction of Marine Biodegradable 
Plastics111 and, during the summit, Japan launched 
an international framework on marine waste, the 
“MARINE Initiative.”112
In June 2019, Japan adopted its first dedicated Bio­
economy Strategy,113 based on a report of the Work­
ing Group for Bio-Strategy and in June 2020 it was 
updated.114 With a strong bioindustry and research 
setting, the strategy strongly focuses on high-tech 
aspects of the bioeconomy. It is one of the most com­
prehensive representations in a national strategy 
worldwide of the bioeconomy in relation to digitiza­
tion, AI, and robotics. Nonetheless, the strategy seeks 
to holistically span a range of topics from the circular 
economy to sociopolitical considerations. 
In 2018, the Integrated Innovation Strategy doc­
umented the growing interest in the bioeconomy 
around the world and called for the formulation of a 
new bioeconomy strategy by the summer of 2019. It 
further launched the Integrated Innovation Strategy 
Promotion Council, which consists of the secretari­
ats of each innovation-related headquarters and rel­
evant ministries and agencies, and approves AI, bio, 
quantum, and environmental strategies.115
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?

54
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The strategy was developed under the Council of 
Science, Technology and Innovation (CSTI)116 of the 
Cabinet Office which established a Working Group 
for Bio-Strategy. The Working Group met multiple 
times, starting in 2017, to review previous strate­
gies for the advancement of biotechnology and to 
discuss and formulate a new bioeconomy strategy. 
An interim report of the Working Group’s discus­
sions and analysis was issued in June 2018.117 The 
Ministries of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), 
Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry (MAFF), and Minis­
try of Health and Welfare (MHLW) also contributed 
to the strategy. 
The strategy refers to the bioeconomy as a “concept 
that expands a sustainable and renewable circular 
economy and society by using biotechnology and 
renewable biological resources.” Throughout the 
document, the strategy refers to a bioeconomy that 
covers all sectors including agriculture, industry, 
health, and medicine. The definition is strongly influ­
enced by the 2009 OECD report which defined the 
bioeconomy as involving the integration of biotech­
nology across all sectors, including health.
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The Bioeconomy Strategy positions itself in re­
sponse to global changes in international power 
structures, social issues, such as the rapid pop­
ulation and economic growth in Asia and Africa, 
worsening environmental problems, as well as the 
increasing demand for goods. The strategy seeks 
to overcome social issues, such as climate change, 
conservation of the environment, and an aging pop­
ulation in Japan. It sees biotechnology, including 
renewable bio-resources and utilization of waste, 
as essential tools of the bioeconomy that can ad­
dress these issues while also maintaining economic 
growth. Rapid technological innovation and the fu­
sion of biotechnology with digital technologies such 
as big data and AI, provide a major impetus for the 
strategy. At the same time, it admits to the need 
to strengthen the relationship between science 
and society. It seeks to shift from a conventional 
strategy of utilizing biotechnology to one in which 
the bioeconomy is an indispensable element of a 
new sustainable socioeconomic system. 
The strategy seeks to align itself with the SDGs 
and global trends of conservation and restoration 
of the environment (CO2 reduction, improvement 
of soil and water quality, etc.), the creation of a 
recycling-oriented society, food security as well 
as environmental, social, and governance (ESG) 
investment. 
The overall objective is for Japan to achieve the 
world’s most advanced bioeconomy society by 
2030. Such a society is defined by one in which 
three elements are realized: 1) bio-first concept 
which looks to conceive business that can be ac­
complished with biotechnology or biomass use as 
first choice; 2) biocommunities which looks to build 
a strong bioeconomy society that resonates both 
domestically and internationally; 3) biodata-driven, 
to realize the goal of becoming a leading country 
in the world in terms of integrating biological and 
digital technologies.
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

55
Five basic principles help guide the strategy and 
reflect the lessons learned from previous strate­
gies: 1) establishment of targeted market domains, 
back-casting roadmaps, and continuous commit­
ment. This is a response to past overemphasis on 
seed-oriented thinking, incapability of identifying 
applied fields for new technology, and a lack of 
commitment to the strategy; 2) integration of biol­
ogy and digital technology in response to inade­
quate data management in the past; 3) encourage­
ment of international hubs, local networking, and 
investment in response to insufficient resources 
for startups and the lack of an international strat­
egy; 4) enhancement of international strategies in 
response to the low priority on harmonization of 
standards and regulations; 5) response to ethical, 
legal, and social issues due to a lack of actions on 
ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI).
The strategy rests on four so-called societal vi­
sions: 1) greater circularity in society and industry; 
2) satisfying diversified need by sustainable pri­
mary production; 3) biobased feed stock and sus­
tainable production; 4) healthy longevity and social 
participation through health and medical care.
The heart of the strategy calls for the formulation of 
target-driven roadmaps for the nine market domains 
which at the time of publication were still in the pro­
cess of being written. A number of first general actions 
are proposed. However, no overall timeline with targets 
or a budget is provided ahead of the roadmaps. 
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The strategy targets nine market areas that are ex­
pected to attract significant investment from inside 
and outside the country.
As a leader in the accumulation of biological resources 
(microbes, plants, etc.), Japan focuses on high-perfor­
mance biomaterials (lightweight, durable, safe). The 
need for light and strong biomaterials, especially in the 
fields of health and medicine, and mobility, is expected 
to expand significantly and the strategy seeks to take 
advantage of Japan’s strengths in material technology 
and application (e.g. automotive industry). The strategy 
supports bioplastics as a substitute for commodity 
plastics. Given the rise in global marine plastic pollu­
tion, the strategy focuses on using Japan’s know-how 
in plastic handling and 3R (Reduce, Reuse and Re­
cycle) management. 
A sustainable primary production system (e.g. smart 
farming technology, optimal use of fertilizer, water, 
waste, and labor) is furthered to address climate 
change and improve agricultural productivity to meet 
the rising demand for food (better tasting and healthi­
er) in Asia and Africa. 
Organic waste and organic wastewater treatment are 
prioritized. This builds on Japan’s advanced biobased 
resource recycling system that converts waste into 
high-value substances.
The strategy focuses heavily on healthcare, functional 
foods, and digital health in order to realize the creation 
of a food-based healthcare industry. With the rise in 
life-style-related diseases and expansion of digital 
health, the strategy looks to develop healthy, “tailor-
made” food to improve health as well as to advance 
concepts like the AI Hospital System and modern di­
agnostics. Priority is also given to biopharmaceuticals, 
regenerative medicine, cell and gene therapy. 
Biofoundries or “bio-production” and the associated 
areas of engineered biology, microbes, and fermen­
tation for food production and biobased products are 
supported. Japan has a strong history of fermentation 
research and a well-funded biofoundry to push ideas 
to commercialization. Biofoundry support is also tied to 
systematic SME support. Biological analysis, measure­
ment, and experimental systems, including robotics, 
are prioritized.
And lastly, the strategy promotes large wooden archi­
tecture and smart forestry in order to capture CO2 and 
expand Japan’s international market share of wooden 
houses.

56
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
With regard to research and innovation, overall fund­
ing for basic scientific research is advanced, as is the 
funding of inter-agency cooperation for subject-driven 
research and innovation (e.g. competitive projects in 
the field of biotechnology). The strategy looks to es­
tablish rules to promote open innovation through data 
collaboration among national research institutes, uni­
versities, and companies. Collaborative research be­
tween industry, academia, research, and development 
that contributes to the development of market areas is 
also promoted. The strategy looks to have the world’s 
most advanced development base for bio-production 
systems (i.e. biofoundry) and bio-related analysis, mea­
surement, and experiment systems. 
More specifically, the strategy sets out to create two in­
ternational biocommunities or clusters (e.g. potentially 
one near Tokyo and the other near Osaka) to attract 
scientists and investors through the establishment 
of an advanced research incubation center and the 
promotion of biofoundries. The research center will not 
only support advanced research through a global incu­
bation system and increased university-industry col­
laboration, it will also include startup support with the 
help of global investments, IP management, regulation 
support, human resources, wet lab support, and hospi­
tal collaboration. A feasibility study is set for 2020.
Furthermore, the strategy looks to promote interna­
tional and regional collaboration through demonstra­
tion projects. With regard to regional activities, the 
strategy emphasizes the sharing of best practices such 
as the regional recycling Biomass Town initiative. The 
promotion of international research and demonstra­
tion includes standardization, international regulatory 
harmonization, and stabilizing biomass supply.
Infrastructure promotion centers on the provision of 
research facilities. 
Capacity building and education is supported through 
a comprehensive package of support for young re­
searchers to strengthen research capabilities, as well 
as staff training and securing biodata scientists who 
are in charge of integrating biotechnology and digital 
technology. It remains unclear which measures the 
package includes.
Commercialization is mostly advanced by strength­
ening the business and investment environment by 
establishing a global incubation system (e.g. the pres­
ence of hospitals, clinical sites, and expensive wet 
facilities for R&D) to support biotech startups. 
Japan was one of the first countries in the world to in­
troduce a system for labeling the functionality of foods. 
Demand-side measures point to providing solutions for 
marine plastic waste by introducing bioplastic research 
roadmap and market introduction roadmap. New func­
tional food labeling based on scientific findings (e.g. 
immune system enhancement) is also promoted. 
The strategy calls for the protection of intellectual prop­
erty and genetic resources by identifying the market 
segments that require database, IP, and genomic ma­
terial protection (both human related and plant and 
animal data) and providing framework conditions for 
the bioeconomy. 
A range of good governance actions are advanced. 
One of the very first steps in the strategy includes de­
veloping a data platform that can gather information 
involving data from all bio-related fields (e.g. a health/
medical, biomaterial, and breeding and fermentation 
data platform). A user-friendly and internationally-com­
patible system design should be formulated by 2020. 
The strategy further addresses Ethical, Legal and So­
cial Issues (ELSI) by creating international regulatory 
harmonization of basic research and clinical tests on 
fertilized human embryo genome editing, as well as 
increasing the social acceptance of genome editing by 
scientists/sociologists.
Another key component of the strategy is to strengthen 
the so-called “strategic command post function,” in 
other words the transition from a decentralized to a 
more centralized and connected approach where re­
sources are brought together to produce a synergistic 
effect. Examples include the promotion of health and 
medical and biostrategies in tandem. 
Lastly, the Japanese government looks to strengthen 
the international strategy by reviewing key countries 
and regions and accumulating market, policy and regu­
lations trends from investors and funding agencies.

57
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The Bio-Strategy Taskforce is responsible for pro­
moting and following up the strategy. This ongoing 
discussion mechanism will allow for continuous sup­
port, including the introduction of new measures 
each year. Implementation will be supported by ana­
lyzing policy, market, and regulatory trends in Japan 
and abroad, and with the participation of industry, 
universities and other stakeholders, including Japan 
Science and Technology Agency (JST), New Energy 
and Industrial Technology Development Organization 
(NEDO), National Institute of Technology and Evalu­
ation (NITE), Japan Agency for Medical Research 
and Development (AMED), National Agriculture and 
Food Research Organization (NARO), Japan External 
Trade Organization (JETRO), and Japan International 
Cooperation Agency (JICA). 
By the end of 2019 (as of publication in 2020, this 
had not yet been completed), a roadmap will be de­
veloped for each market segment with Key Perfor­
mance Indicators (KPIs). The strategy also calls for 
the development of systems that enable evaluation 
and verification of the biotechnology field. The strat­
egy notes that there will be a wide range of support 
from multiple ministries and agencies and the pri­
vate sector. 
No
REFERENCES
99  	 Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. (n.d.). Biomass Policies and 
Assistance Measures in Japan. Available at https://www.maff.go.jp/e/pdf/
reference6-8.pdf [18.09.20]
100 	Ministry of the Environment. (2018). Fundamental Plan for Establishing 
a Sound Material-Cycle Society. Available at www.env.go.jp/en/recycle/
smcs/4th-f_Plan.pdf [18.09.20]
101 Biotechnology Strategy Council. Available at https://japan.kantei.go.jp/
policy/bt/index_e.html [24.09.20]
102	 Japanese Government. (2008). Drastic Reform with Effective and Agile 
Movements for BT innovation in Japan. Available at https://www8.cao.go.jp/
cstp/project/bt2/bt_01-08.pdf [24.09.20]
103	 Tsuda, M., Watanabe, K. N., & Ohsawa, R. (2019). Regulatory Status of 
Genome-Edited Organisms Under the Japanese Cartagena Act. Frontiers in 
bioengineering and biotechnology. Available at https://doi.org/10.3389/
fbioe.2019.00387 [18.09.20]
104	 Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. (n.d.). Biomass Policies and 
Assistance Measures in Japan. Available at https://www.maff.go.jp/e/pdf/
reference6-8.pdf [18.09.20]
105	 Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. (n.d.). Biomass Policies and 
Assistance Measures in Japan. Available at https://www.maff.go.jp/e/pdf/
reference6-8.pdf [18.09.20]
106	 Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. (n.d.). Biomass Policies and 
Assistance Measures in Japan. Available at https://www.maff.go.jp/e/pdf/
reference6-8.pdf [18.09.20]
107	 Council for Science, Technology and Innovation. (2015). Report on The 5th 
Science and Technology Basic Plan. Available at https://onuglobal.files.
wordpress.com/2018/05/japon_5basicplan_en.pdf [18.09.20]
108  Hasanbeigi, A., Becque, R., Springer, C. (2019). Curbing Carbon from 
Consumption: The role of Green Public Procurement. Available at https://
www.climateworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Green-Public-
Procurement-Final-28Aug2019.pdf [18.09.20]
109 	Government of Japan. (2012). The National Biodiversity Strategy of Japan 
2012-2020. Available at https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/jp/jp-nbsap-v5-en.
pdf [18.09.20]
110	 Japan Association of Bioindustries. (2016). Bioeconomy Vision of Japan for 
2030: Bioindustry’s Social Contribution to Enhance Adaptation to Changing 
World. Available at https://www.jba.or.jp/jabex/pdf/2016/JABEX_vision_ 
digest(english160420).pdf [28.02.18]
111 Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. (2019). Available at https://www.
meti.go.jp/english/press/2019/0507_002.html [18.09.20]
112 Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan. (2019). Available at https://www.mofa.
go.jp/ic/ge/page25e_000317.html [18.09.20]
113	Council for Integrated Innovation Strategy. (2019). Bio-Strategy 2019. 
Available at https://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/tougou-innovation/pdf/
biosenryaku2019.pdf [18.09.20]
114	 Government of Japan. (2018). Integrated Innovation Strategy. Available at 
https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/english/doc/integrated_main.pdf [18.09.20]
115 Cabinet Office. (2018). Members of the Council for Science, Technology 
and Innovation. Available at https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/english/policy/
members.html [18.09.20]
116 Cabinet Office. (2018). Working Group for Bio-Strategy and the Interim 
Report. Available at https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/tyousakai/bio/bio_
chukan.pdf [18.09.20]
117 Cabinet Office. (2018). Working Group for Bio-Strategy and the Interim 
Report. Available at https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/tyousakai/bio/bio_
chukan.pdf [18.09.20]

58
Malaysia
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Malaysia is the first country in Asia to develop a ho­
listic policy program fostering the development of 
the bioeconomy. Historically, the term bioeconomy 
has been strongly related to industrial upgrading 
and the application of biotechnology. 
Malaysia’s path to developing its bioeconomy began 
with the launch of a comprehensive National Bio­
technology Policy (NBP) in 2005.118 The Malaysian 
Government recognized biotechnology as one of the 
key strategic drivers to propel the country’s social 
and economic development, in pursuit of the status 
of a developed nation. The policy is a 15-year plan 
aimed at making biotechnology a key contributor to 
economic growth in three consecutive stages, focus­
ing on capacity building in phase 1 (2005 – 2010), 
commercialization of R&D in phase 2 (2011 – 2015), 
and internationalization in phase 3 (2016 – 2020). 
It is focused on the development of three major bio­
technology sectors, namely agriculture, healthcare, 
and industrial manufacturing. In ensuring the proper 
execution of the NBP, the Malaysian Biotechnology 
Corporation (now renamed as the Bioeconomy De­
velopment Corporation) was set up in 2005 as an 
agency under the Ministry of Science, Technology 
and Innovation (MOSTI).
Launched by the Malaysian Prime Minister in Oc­
tober 2012, the Bioeconomy Transformation Pro­
gramme (BTP)119 made Malaysia the first country 
in Asia to initiate a comprehensive plan to develop 
the bioeconomy. At the BioMalaysia & Asia Pacific 
Bioeconomy 2016,120 a biotech event first estab­
lished in 2003, the Biotechnology Corporation was 
rebranded to Bioeconomy Corporation and its roles 
and functions expanded to uplift the strategies and 
programs of Malaysia’s bioeconomy agenda and 
help develop a competitive and diverse end-to-end 
value chain of the bioeconomy ecosystem.
The National Biomass Strategy 2020121 was up­
dated in 2013. While the first edition of the National 
Biomass Strategy (2011) focused on agricultural 
biomass valorization (mainly palm oil), the second 
edition explored the development of higher value-
added downstream opportunities from the country’s 
biological resources in general, with special consid­
eration of residues.

59
The Malaysian government through the Bioeconomy 
Transformation Programme (BTP) and the Bioeconomy 
Corporation has set national goals and developed multi­
ple programs, in line with the national agenda, to create 
a coherent supportive bioeconomy policy framework 
and implementation programs. The BTP is at times 
referred to as a complement to the National Biotechnol­
ogy Policy and the shift in focus onto the bioeconomy 
as a necessary move, as the country enters the third 
phase of the National Biotechnology Policy.122 
It is also seen as one of the implementation strate­
gies under the Economic Transformation Programme 
(ETP) through the various relevant national key eco­
nomic areas (NKEAs).123 Furthermore, it is in line 
with the 11th Malaysia Plan 2016 – 2020 and its 
six strategic thrusts,124 which has been developed 
to propel the country into a high-income economy.125 
The six thrusts include enhancing inclusiveness to­
wards an equitable society, improving well-being for 
all, accelerating human capital development for an 
advanced nation, pursuing green growth for sustain­
ability and resilience, strengthening infrastructure 
to support economic expansion, and re-engineering 
economic growth for greater prosperity.
The BTP was developed under the guidance of the 
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation 
(MOSTI) and endorsed by the government. 
The Bioeconomy Corporation is owned by the Minis­
try of Finance, governed by the National Bioeconomy 
Council (NBC) and advised by the Bioeconomy In­
ternational Advisory Panel (Bio-IAP), chaired by the 
Prime Minister. The Bio-IAP assists the government 
in formulating strategies to drive the growth and de­
velopment of the biotechnology industry in Malaysia, 
including the NBP.126 It is not clear, however, what 
the concrete output of the panel is.
The Bioeconomy Corporation is tasked with achiev­
ing all the objectives set out in the national bioecon­
omy policy and with identifying the needs of industry 
and research, providing financial and commercial 
support. Furthermore, it has developed many of the 
programs jointly with the private sector. It is also 
responsible for achieving the objectives of the Na­
tional Biotechnology Policy.127 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
According to the Bioeconomy Corporation, the bio­
economy refers to “all economic activity that is de­
rived from the continued commercial application of 
biotechnology” and encompasses “the production 
of renewable biological resources and their conver­
sion into food, feed, chemicals, energy, and health­
care wellness products via innovative and efficient 
technologies.” This includes agriculture, forestry, 
fisheries, food production, healthcare, chemicals, 
and renewable energy.128

60
The BTP has three focus areas: agriculture, health­
care and industry. Within the agriculture sector, 
there are four EPPs: 1) biobased farm inputs (e.g. 
animal vaccines, livestock, aquaculture biofeed, and 
biofertilizers and biopesticides), 2) high-value bioin­
gredients (e.g. biobased fragrances, bioflavors, nat­
ural products, functional foods), 3) high value food 
varieties (e.g. high-tech livestock breeding, high-
tech aquaculture, genetically modified crops and 
organisms, novel plant breeding techniques), and 4) 
high-value horticulture inputs ( e.g. micropropaga­
tion of forestry species and ornamental plants). The 
largest number of projects were in high-value food 
varieties. 131
Within bioindustry, the first EPP, biobased raw ma­
terial for industrial input (e.g. biogas, feedstock 
plantation for industrial application), is strongly sup­
ported. For example, the production of palm oil is 
vital for the Malaysian economy and the country is 
the second-largest producer in the world, after Indo­
nesia. The National Biomass Strategy of 2011 was 
strongly focused on palm oil biomass and higher-
value uses such as wood products, energy pellets, 
bioenergy, biofuels, and organic-based bioproducts. 
Interestingly, no reference is made in the BTP to 
the issues of sustainable forest management and 
biodiversity protection/conservation.
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The BTP acts as a platform provided by the govern­
ment for the private sector to channel and maxi­
mize commercial opportunities in bio-based indus­
tries. It is designed as a transformation program 
based on biotechnology’s potential to cut across 
various different industries and transform Malay­
sia into a high income, inclusive and sustainable 
economy. It seeks to promote a knowledge-based 
bioeconomy through the establishment of a sus­
tainable ecosystem of R&D and commercialization 
in the areas of agriculture, healthcare, and indus­
trial biotechnology. It therefore focuses not only on 
bio-based industry but also on other industries and 
economic sectors that produce manage and utilize 
biological resources, including agriculture, forestry, 
fisheries, food production, healthcare, chemicals, 
and renewables.
BTP aims to increase Malaysia’s GNI up to RM 
3.6 billion with a total investment of RM 10 billion 
by 2020. It looks to do this by further enhancing 
domestic biotechnology and biobased industries, 
while also creating new job opportunities and en­
abling Malaysia to become a high-income nation 
by year 2020. In addition, it promotes the “Green 
Economy” by contributing towards Malaysia’s tar­
get of a 40 percent reduction in its carbon foot­
print and emissions, and improving the health and 
well-being of the people through reduced health­
care treatment costs, early disease detection and 
cheaper, accessible medicines. It also seeks to help 
enhance productivity, yield, and quality of outputs 
throughout the entire supply chain. No reference is 
made to the circular economy or the SDGs.129 
BTP targets to secure RM 48 billion (USD10.9) of 
GNI, create 170,000 new job opportunities, and 
capture an investment of RM 50 billion (USD11.4) 
by the year 2020.
Malaysia does not have an action plan and rather 
implements bioeconomy with “Entry Point Projects 
(EPPs) and Trigger Projects.” During the launch of 
the program, 10 Entry Point Projects (EPPs) were 
identified to develop the national biobased industry 
and private sector-driven Trigger Projects chosen. 
As of 2017, it had been expanded to 13 EPPs in 
the areas of BioIndustrial, Agbiotech, and Health­
care Bio, and 77 Trigger Projects (e.g. 35 Trigger 
Projects in BioIndustrial, 34 in Agbiotech and 8 in 
Healthcare Bio).130

61
Other industrial EPPs are biobased chemicals (e.g. 
petrochemical substitutes and production of indus­
trial sugar), biomaterials (e.g. bioplastics, biodegrad­
able packaging, and biodegradable compostable 
materials), and bioremediation (e.g. waste treat­
ment and environmental management).
Although a significantly smaller field, innovative bio­
healthcare products and services are prioritized, includ­
ing EPPs in biopharmaceuticals, biobased materials 
(e.g. tissue engineering, drug delivery systems), medi­
cal devices (e.g. biocompatible implantable devices), 
molecular screening (e.g. personalized medicine), drug 
discovery, and stem cell and regenerative therapy. 
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The BTP as well as the National Biotechnology Policy 
advance a number of measures to support the bio­
economy. 
With regard to research and innovation, BTP looks 
to establish a sustainable ecosystem of R&D. It does 
so through the development of regional clusters in 
the country’s five economic corridors, namely the 
Northern Corridor Economic Region (NCIA), the East 
Coast Economic Region (ECERDC), Iskandar Malay­
sia (IRDA), Sarawak Corridor of Renewable Energy 
(SKOR) and Sabah Development Corridor (SEDIA). 
The Bioeconomy Corporation also established a 
partnership with the California Institute for Quan­
titative Bioscience (Qb3), based in San Francisco, 
with projects running until 2020.132,133
In addition to BTP, the National Biomass Strategy 
(NBS) through the national innovation agency, Agensi 
Inovasi Malaysia (AIM), laid out a BioHub concept. 
It encompasses the complete and holistic planning 
and development of various complementary clusters 
that serve as platforms for various waste streams to 
enhance the economics of various projects.134 
Infrastructure support mostly comes in the form of 
cluster development/bioparks/biohubs, a strategical­
ly located office with centralized utilities and shared 
laboratory space. This “plug-and-play” model also 
supports biorefineries and biochemical plants, such 
as the first commercial biorefinery in Segamat, in Jo­
hor State, which utilizes empty fruit bunch fiber (EFB), 
a waste product from palm oil production.135,136
Education and capacity measures referring to the 
development of talent and entrepreneurship to help 
the sector prosper are a key element of the program. 
For example, the BioAcademy focuses on develop­
ing a skilled workforce in the biotech industry. The 
SCIENSATIONBIO program seeks to promote un­
derstanding of biotechnology and life sciences in 
public schools.137 The Bioeconomy Community De­
velopment Programme (see below) also is designed 
to support rural farmers by increasing their skill as 
bio-agropreneurs.
Commercialization measures play a large role in the 
BTP. Incentive programs such as ‘BioNexus’ award a 
special status to qualified international and Malay­
sian biotechnology companies undertaking value-
added biotechnology and/or life sciences activities. 
These companies are granted fiscal incentives, tax 
incentives (up to ten years of exemptions), legal ad­
visory services, and other privileges.138 One privilege 
is access to shared facilities and laboratories to help 
companies with R&D and commercialization of their 
biobased products and services. As of 2018, a total 
of 283 companies have been awarded the special 
status.139
The Bioeconomy Community Development Pro­
gramme (BCDP) focuses on supporting the up­
stream portion of the industry value chain through 
the creation of secure, local, high-quality sources 
of raw materials for capacity expansion. It involves 
enlisting farmers to cultivate raw materials on idle 
lands to produce inputs for biotechnology compa­
nies and projects that are part of BTP. Farmers and 
producer associations obtain additional sources of 
income through the contract farming mechanism 
with guaranteed buyback and the bioindustries re­
ceive a constant supply of raw materials to produce

62
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The public agency responsible for implementation 
of the bioeconomy strategy (Bioeconomy Corpora­
tion) publishes progress reports on the country’s 
Bioeconomy Transformation Program.144 However, it 
is not clearly stated to what extent implementation 
of the program will be monitored and evaluated.
Although there are no dedicated regional bioecono­
my policy strategies, as part of the National Biomass 
Strategy Plan, the state governments of Sabah and 
Sarawak developed a Biomass Industry Develop­
ment Plan in 2016.145 Both states account for more 
than 50 percent of biomass resources in Malaysia. 
Ongoing efforts with the Sabah and Sarawak state 
governments and Agensi Inovasi Malaysia (AIM) ex­
ist to establish a local task force and implement a 
biomass action plan.146
bioproducts. The Bioeconomy Corporation acts as 
the facilitator and provides advisory services. The 
projects are targeted to local conditions and needs. 
They seek to increase economic opportunities in the 
areas in which they operate and are focused on stra­
tegic subsectors, such as high-value herbs, seeds, 
mushroom farming, dairy, bee keeping, and aqua­
culture. Examples of related technologies include 
tissue culture, DNA fingerprinting, the extraction of 
active compounds, and selective breeding.140 
In addition, BioShoppe, a market access platform, 
aims to enhance market access and commercializa­
tion of natural-based products produced by compa­
nies with BioNexus status, particularly in the area of 
biocosmeceutical and pharma nutrition.141 
Lastly, the private sector can access the Biotechnol­
ogy Commercialisation Fund (BCF 2.0) with a total 
approved fund of RM 100 million. It is administered 
in collaboration with Malaysian Industrial Develop­
ment Finance Berhad (MIDF) and helps finance the 
commercialization of biobased products and servic­
es, providing assistance to expanding biobased busi­
nesses. Two funding schemes exist: one for working 
capital (up to RM 600,000) with a tenure of up to 2 
years, and one for business expansion capital (up 
to RM 3 million including ‘zero entry financing cost’) 
with a tenure of up to 7 years.142 
Demand-side measures include raising awareness 
of the bioeconomy through Bioeconomy Day in con­
junction with BioMalaysia & ASEAN Bioeconomy 
Conference.
Good governance measures have focused on moni­
toring and measuring the bioeconomy in Malaysia. 
The Bioeconomy Contribution Index (BCI) methodol­
ogy is one such tool. The BCl specifies five indica­
tors: Value-added, Productivity, Investment, Exports, 
and Employment as identifiers of bioeconomy per­
formance.143

63
REFERENCES
118	Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. (2005). Biotechnology for 
Wealth Creation and Social Well-Being. Available at https://www.mestecc.
gov.my/web/profil/bahagian-unit/bahagian-bioteknologi-kebangsaan-
biotek/ [21.09.20]
119	Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Bioeconomy Transformation Programme. 
Available at http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/bioeconomy-malaysia/
bioeconomy-transformation-project/ [21.09.20]
120	Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). About BioMalaysia 2018. Available at 
http://biomalaysia.bioeconomycorporation.my  [30.09.20]
121 Agensi Inovasi Malaysia (AIM). (2013). National Biomass Strategy 2020: 
New wealth creation for Malaysia’s biomass industry Version 2.0. Available 
at  https://www.cmtevents.com/MediaLibrary/BStgy2013RptAIM.pdf 
[21.09.20]
122	Arujanan M, Singaram M. (2018). The biotechnology and bioeconomy 
landscape in Malaysia. Available at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
gov/28668584/ [30.09.20]
123	Malaysia’s Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU). 
(2010). Economic Transformation Programme. Available at https://policy.
asiapacificenergy.org/sites/default/files/ETP.pdf [30.09.20]
124	 The Government of Malaysia. (2015). Eleventh Malaysia Plan. Available 
at https://policy.asiapacificenergy.org/sites/default/files/11th%20
Malaysia%20plan.pdf [30.09.20]
125	Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysian Biotechnology 
Corporation SDN BHD. (2015). Bioeconomy Transformation Programme 
Annual Report 2015. Available at http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/
wp-content/uploads/2011/11/publications/BTP_AR_2015.pdf [30.09.20]
126	Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Bioeconomy International Advisory Panel 
(BIO-IAP). Available at http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/national-
biotech-policy/bioeconomy-international-advisory-panel/ [30.09.20]
127	 Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). About Bioeconomy Corporation. Available 
at http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/corporate-profile/about-
bioeconomycorporation/ [30.09.20]
128 Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). What is Bioeconomy? Available at http://
www.bioeconomycorporation.my/bioeconomy-malaysia/investing-in-
bioeconomy/investment-overview/ [30.09.20]
129	Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysian Biotechnology 
Corporation SDN BHD. (n.d.). Enriching the Nation, Securing the Future. 
Available at http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/wp-content/
uploads/2011/11/publications/Bioeconomy_Transformation_Programme_
Booklet_Brochure.pdf [30.09.20]
130	Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysian Bioeconomy 
Development Corporation SDN BHD. (n.d.). What is Bioeconomy? http://
www.bioeconomycorporation.my/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/
publications/BTP%20Brochure_ENG%20(2017).pdf [30.09.20]
131	 Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysian Bioeconomy 
Development Corporation SDN BHD. (n.d.). What is Bioeconomy? http://
www.bioeconomycorporation.my/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/
publications/BTP%20Brochure_ENG%20(2017).pdf [30.09.20]
132 Bonaccorso, M. (2019). Malaysia Dossier: Palm Oil Bioeconomy. Renewable 
Matter, 32-37. Available at https://www.renewablematter.eu/assets/
Uploads/RM29-30-eng.pdf [30.09.20]
133	University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). (n.d.). Institute for 
Quantitative Biosciences (QB3). Available at https://globalprojects.ucsf.
edu/program/institute-quantitative-biosciences-qb3 [04.10.20]
134	National Innovation Agency Malaysia. (2018). New Wealth Creation – AIM’s 
BioHub Concept. Available at https://innovation.my/aim_reporter/new-
wealth-creation-aims-biohub-concept/ [30.09.20]
135 Leaf Resources. (n.d.). Malaysia. Available at http://leafresources.com.au/
projects/ [30.09.20]
136 Bonaccorso, M. (2019) Malaysia Dossier: Palm Oil Bioeconomy. Renewable 
Matter, 32-37. Available at https://www.renewablematter.eu/assets/
Uploads/RM29-30-eng.pdf [30.09.20]
137 Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Overview Bioacademy. Available at http://
www.bioeconomycorporation.my/bioeconomy-academy/bioacademy-
overview/ [30.09.20]
138	Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Overview BioNexus Development. Available 
at http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/bionexus-development/bionexus-
status/overview/ [30.09.20]
139	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2018). Assessing 
the contribution of Bioeconomy to Countries’ Economy. Available at http://
www.fao.org/3/I9580EN/i9580en.pdf [30.09.20]
140	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2019). Towards 
Sustainable Bioeconomy. Available at http://www.fao.org/3/ca4352en/
ca4352en.pdf [30.09.20]
141  Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). BioShoppe. Available at http://www.
bioeconomycorporation.my/bionexus-development/bionexus-sme-
development/bioshoppe-overview/ [30.09.20]
142	Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Overview – Biotechnology 
Commercialisation Fund (BCF 2.0). Available at http://www.
bioeconomycorporation.my/services-and-technologies/funding-facilitation/
overview-biotechnology-commercialisation-fund-bcf-2-0/ [30.09.20]
143 	Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Bioeconomy Contribution Index. Available at 
http://www.bioeconomycorporation.my/bioeconomy-malaysia/investing-in-
bioeconomy/bioeconomy-contribution-index/ [30.09.20]
144 Bioeconomy Corporation. (n.d.). Resources. Available at http://www.
bioeconomycorporation.my/corporate-profile/resources/ [30.09.20]
145	Agensi Inovasi Malaysia (AIM) National Biomass Strategy Delivery 
Unit. (2017). International Workshop: Future Perspective of Bioenergy 
Development in Asia. Available at https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/09/1.3-Timothy-Ong.pdf [30.09.20]
146	Agensi Inovasi Malaysia (AIM). (n.d.). On Going Initiatives. Available at 
https://www.nbs2020.gov.my/on-going-initiatives-crdo [30.09.20]

64
Thailand
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Bioeconomy development in Thailand was initially driv­
en by the “National Biotechnology Policy Framework” 
(2004, 2012).147,148 The policy framework provided a 
holistic view of biotechnology as a knowledge-based 
industry with diverse applications across the medical, 
agricultural, aquatic, and industrial fields. 
Bioplastics were specifically fostered as a new 
biobased industry via the “National Roadmap for 
the Development of Bioplastics Industry” (2008)149 
and renewable energies have been promoted with­
in the “Alternative Energy and Development Plan” 
(2012, 2015),150,151 which supports bioenergy and 
biofuels based on the country’s vast agricultural 
feedstock, specifically by-products and residues.
The Thai government actively promotes the country’s 
transition to a value-based, innovative, and technol­
ogy-driven economy. The bioeconomy plays a key 
role in this transition process which is reflected, for 
example, in the announcement of the Thailand 4.0 
program (2015).6 This innovation strategy identifies 
10 future industries that will drive economic devel­
opment (five existing industries that will most likely 
be subject to substantial innovation, e.g. agriculture 
and food, and five new industries). The bioeconomy 
is considered as one of these new S-curve industries 
and includes biofuels & biochemicals.153 
To accelerate bioeconomy development in Thailand, 
the National Reform Assembly Steering Committee 
published a reform proposal in March 2016, which 
suggests placing the bioeconomy on the national 
agenda and developing a dedicated national policy 
strategy. These recommendations were considered 
by 23 key industrial and policy stakeholders who 
signed a memorandum of understanding, the so-
called “Pracharath” Bioeconomy Roadmap, to drive 
bioeconomy development in Thailand. The roadmap 
included a dedicated 10-year action plan which fore­
saw an overall investment of THB 365 billion (about 
USD 12 billion), which should be co-financed by 
private and public stakeholders over three project 
periods.154 
In 2017, the Ministry of Industry drafted “Measures 
for the Development of Bio-Industry in Thailand 
2018 – 2027” to promote Thailand as a biohub in the 
ASEAN region with a focus on the bioplastics, bio­
chemicals, and biopharmaceuticals industry. These 
measures were approved by the Thai cabinet in July 
2018 and included 1) measures to eliminate invest­
ment barriers; 2) measures to accelerate domestic 
investment in the three key industries; 3) measures 
to stimulate demand in domestic markets by creat­
ing awareness and promoting capacity building and 
training in manufacturing, and 4) measures to foster 
networks in the form of a Center of Bio-Excellence 
(CoBE).155 
As a result of the Global Bioeconomy Summit 2018, 
attended by the Thai Minister of Science and Tech­

65
nology, a workshop on the Thai bioeconomy to which 
more than 100 bioeconomy experts were invited 
was organized under his initiative. The workshop 
resulted in a White Paper on the Bio-Circular-Green 
(BCG) Economy Model, a new economic model for 
promoting inclusiveness, sustainable growth, and 
competitiveness in Thailand. The white paper pre­
sented an advancement of the previous bioeconomy 
policy documents by also integrating the Sustainable 
Development Goals, ecosystem, and biodiversity pro­
tection. Furthermore, the industry focus had evolved 
to include the following economic sectors and their 
related ministries: 1) food and agriculture; 2) medi­
cine and wellness; 3) bioenergy, biomaterials, and 
biochemicals; 4) tourism and creative economy.156 
In November 2019, around 500 experts from the pri­
vate and public sector met with the Prime Minister to 
discuss the Bio-Circular-Green Economy Model. As a 
result, the Roadmap “Bio-Circular-Green Economy 
(BCG) in Action: The new Sustainable Growth En­
gine” was adopted and a national BCG committee, 
chaired by the Prime Minister, was established. In 
June 2020, the Minister of Higher Education, Sci­
ence, Research and Innovation brought together rep­
resentatives from government agencies, academia, 
industry, and business to further promote the BCG 
Model and to drive forward the national agenda on 
food security, public health security, energy security, 
job security, environmental sustainability, and social 
inclusiveness.157 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
The BCG in Action policy is aligned with the Thai Suf­
ficiency Economy Philosophy158 which is also a key 
principle of Thailand’s social and economic develop­
ment. It further builds on the future industries’ strat­
egy by envisioning the transformation from Thailand 
3.0 to Thailand 4.0 by focusing on four out of ten 
targeted S-curve industries.
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The BCG in Action Policy is a result of an expert con­
sultation process led by the Thai Minister of Science 
and Technology. The BCG Policy Board of Directors, 
which is chaired by the Prime Minister, coordinates 
the strategy and a dedicated BCG Economic Pro­
motion Agency oversees its implementation. The 
Agency is divided into different sub-units, including 
agriculture, food, medical and wellness, energy, ma­
terial and biochemical, tourism and creative econo­
my, circular economy, and digital platform.
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
The BCG model is an integration of the bioeconomy, 
circular economy and green economy, with the bio­
economy defined as involving “(…) the production of 
renewable biological resources and the conversion 
of these resources into value added products.159 
While no clear definition of the bioeconomy is pro­
vided in the BCG in Action policy, the bioeconomy 
is roughly defined as an economic model that pro­
motes four major sectors, namely food and agricul­
ture, medical and wellness, bioenergy biomaterial 
and biochemicals, and tourism and creative econo­

66
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The BCG in Action strategy aims to distribute eco­
nomic prosperity and highlights biodiversity and 
biotechnology as drivers for the BCG economy. The 
strategy further pursues a transformation of the 
country into a value-based and innovation-driven 
economy and aims to increase the countries com­
petitiveness.
It addresses particular challenges the country is fac­
ing in the agriculture sector (e.g. volatile crop prices 
and low incomes of farmers, deteriorating natural 
resources), the medical and pharmaceutical sector 
(e.g. aging society, dependence on import of medi­
cal equipment and pharmaceutical products), the 
energy sector (e.g. energy security, dependence of 
energy imports), and the tourism sector (e.g. over­
tourism, deteriorating natural resources). 
The goal of the BCG model is to address the UN’s 
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and pro­
mote inclusive and sustainable growth. The circular 
economy is integrated into the BCG model itself.
Furthermore, the BCG in Action policy intents to re­
brand Thailand after the Covid-19 crisis160 and to 
create 300,000 new jobs for graduates and unem­
ployed workers affected by covid-19 with the help of 
a community development campaign.161
While it provides no clear action plan with timelines 
and targets, the BCG in Action policy provides for 
both public and private investments. It is envisaged 
that the public-private investment ratio will be set at 
30:70 in the first three years of 2021 and that this 
ratio will gradually decrease in subsequent years 
(to 15:85 in 2030). In this respect, the strategy 
will be supported by an overall investment of THB 
3.75 billion (about USD 120 million), increasing to 
THB 7.5 billion (about USD 240 million) in 2025, and 
THB 10 billion (about USD 320 million) in 2030.162 
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
Priority areas of the BCG Model include food and ag­
riculture, medical and wellness, bioenergy and high-
value biochemical materials, and tourism and creative 
economy. These four S-curve industries already com­
bine an economic value of THB 3.4 trillion (about USD 
109 billion) (pre-Covid-19) and account for 21 percent 
of the Thai GDP. It is expected that the BCG in Action 
policy will raise this number to THB 4.4. trillion (about 
USD 141 billion) in the next five years.163 
Within the food and agriculture sector, the fo­
cus lies on developing high value and novel food 
products and functional ingredients, but also on 
biorefinery development, waste reduction, improve­
ments in resources and land-use efficiency, and on 
smart and precision farming (e.g. new plant breed­
ing techniques for coping with drought, flood and 
insect resistance). 
In the medical and wellness sector, the emphasis 
is on precision medicine, omics, the development 
of vaccines and biopharmaceuticals, the promotion 
of biosimilars and medical devices, herbal extrac­
tion for medicine and cosmetics, fostering bioactive 
my. The bioeconomy is said to transform agricultural 
products and diversity to high-value products for 
competitiveness by using innovation and technology, 
and to utilize bioresources and diversity as ecosys­
tem services. This is a more holistic approach than 
Thailand’s previous bioeconomy policies which fo­
cused on the industrial bioeconomy.

67
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
With regard to policy instruments promoting the 
BCG in Action policy, the strategy highlights four so-
called enablers, namely research and innovation, 
infrastructure development, education and capacity 
building, and bioeconomy-friendly framework condi­
tions.
In order to promote research and innovation, the 
focus is on promoting research on complex microbi­
ota, omics technologies, bioprocessing engineering, 
gene editing and synthetic biology, AI and high-per­
formance computing, and advanced digital technolo­
gies. International research collaboration should be 
strengthened through the establishment of a BCG 
global Forum. Furthermore, the shift from traditional 
industries to S-curve industries should be enabled 
through actions such as promoting BCG start-ups 
and innovation-driven enterprises. In addition, a 
bioeconomy-friendly innovation ecosystem should 
be fostered by boosting the private investment ratio 
and by promoting funding for integrated research 
projects (instead of individual projects) that will ad­
vance the transfer of research to the market.
The promotion of infrastructure development is en­
visaged through the establishment of a National 
Biobank to support the collection, preservation, and 
utilization of bioresources. Furthermore, a Genomics 
Thailand network should be established to support 
human genome research and to enable advance­
ments in precision medicine. Other infrastructure 
projects include the establishment of regional sci­
ence parks to foster local economy development 
and the promotion of pilot plants (particularly bio­
mass power plants, biorefinery pilot plants, and hy­
drogen power plants).
Thailand is currently establishing the Eastern Eco­
nomic Corridor of Innovation (EECi), a hub linking in­
novation and investment across the country for Thai­
land’s target industries. The National Science and 
Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) invested 
THB 3.4 billion (about USD 109 million) in a pilot 
biorefinery in the EECi to further promote Thailand 
as a hub for biotechnology in Southeast Asia. The 
biorefinery will be certified with Good Manufacturing 
Standards for the production of consumer goods, 
such as nutrients and medical foods, and biochemi­
compounds, and platforms to facilitate the utiliza­
tion of genetic data.
In order to promote bioenergy and high-value 
biochemical materials, the policy promotes en­
ergy produced from renewable resources, such as 
refuse-derived fuel (RDF) and biogas, the estab­
lishment of community-based power plants with 
distributed renewable energy resource systems 
(including biomass and biogas) and their connec­
tion through blockchain-enabled smart microgrids. 
Furthermore, the strategy highlights research on 
energy storage systems and the development of 
cutting-edge technologies to convert biomass and 
agricultural by-products to high value commodities, 
such as bioplastics, fibers, and pharmaceuticals.
In the tourism and creative economy sector, the 
strategy particularly fosters the development of the 
digital infrastructure and supports the further pro­
motion of culinary tourism and sustainable tourism 
(e.g. through national guidelines for tourism).
The BCG in Action strategy further highlights area-
based developments in 1) the Northern Economic 
Corridor (promotion of food safety and agricultural 
health standards, the agro-industry, and food pro­
cessing); 2) the North-Eastern Economic Corridor 
(resolving major health issues, and promoting in­
sect farming as an alternative protein source); 3) 
the Eastern Economic Corridor (focus on fruit pro­
duction and the development of future industries); 
4) the Southern Economic Corridor (focus on preci­
sion aquaculture and innovative halal foods), and 
5) the Central Thai region (reducing waste, promot­
ing an active aging society, and enhancing new and 
innovative cultural tourism).164

68
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
It is not stated to what extent the implementation of 
the strategy will be monitored and evaluated.
No
cals and bioplastics.165 As part of the project, the 
German company Glatt Ingenieurtechnik has been 
commissioned to plan a biorefinery pilot plant. The 
aim of the so-called Biopolis complex is to provide 
technology that is freely available under patent law 
and can therefore be widely used by companies and 
organizations as well as by local and international 
universities. The facility should enable users to vali­
date and scale prototypes and to conduct technical 
and economic feasibility studies before investing in 
their own production line.166
Another so-called enabler of the BCG in Action policy 
is in education and capacity building. The strategy 
highlights the need to develop labor in the various 
fields of the four S-curve industries, particularly in 
system biology, bioinformatics, life sciences, com­
puter engineering, and data science. Furthermore, 
BCG career paths should be developed with their 
respective curriculums and non-degree programs 
should be fostered.
With regard to demand-side measures, it is envis­
aged to adapt and improve quality and safety stan­
dards for food and functional food, and to introduce 
carbon pricing and green tax measures to boost 
eco-friendly products.
To provide appropriate political framework condi­
tions for advancing the BCG Model in Thailand, the 
strategy focuses on long-term investments, particu­
larly shifting from annual project funding to multi-
year funding. Financial and tax measures should be 
promoted to incentivize the private sector to engage 
in capacity-building projects, e.g. for small farmers. 
The Thailand Board of Investment, for example, is 
also offering a corporate tax holiday of up to 13 
years to investors in bioeconomy ventures.167

69
REFERENCES
147	 National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (BIOTEC). (n.d.). 
Overview. Available at http://www.biotec.or.th/en/index.php/about-us/
overview [28.09.20]
148	 Thailand’s Ministry of Science and Technology. (2012). Thailand’s National 
Policy Framework (2012-2021). Available at http://www.biotec.or.th/en/
images/document/1.pdf [28.09.20]
149	 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). 
Policies for Bioplastics in the Context of a Bioeconomy. Available at https://
doi.org/10.1787/5k3xpf9rrw6d-en [28.09.20]
150 Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency. (n.d.). The 
10-Year Alternative Energy Development Plan. Available at http://weben.
dede.go.th/webmax/content/10-year-alternative-energy-development-plan 
[28.09.20]
151	 Achawangkul, Y. (2017). Thailand’s Alternative Energy Development Plan. 
Available at https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/MoE%20_%20
AE%20policies.pdf [28.09.20]
152	Royal Thai Embassy, Washington D.C. (n.d.). Thailand 4.0 program. Available 
at https://thaiembdc.org/thailand-4-0-2/ [28.09.20]
153 Vongkusolkit, I. (2016). Public-Private Collaboration: A New Sustainable 
Growth Path. Available at https://www.set.or.th/th/news/thailand_focus/
files/2016/Isara.pdf [18.09.20]
154	PTT Global Chemical Public Company. (2017). “Pracharath” collaboration 
advances “Bioeconomy”, a driving force to revitalize investment and 
innovation while strengthening the national economy. Available at https://
www.pttgcgroup.com/en/updates/press-release/200/pracharath-
collaboration-advances-bioeconomy-a-driving-force-to-revitalize-investment-
and-innovation-while-strengthening-the-national-economy [28.09.20]
155	Thailand’s Ministry of Industry. (2018). Measures for the Development of 
Bio-Industry in Thailand 2018 – 2027. Available at http://www.oie.go.th/
assets/portals/1/fileups/2/files/action%20plan/bio_plan.pdf [28.09.20]
156 Office of National Higher Education Science Research and Innovation Policy 
Council. (n.d.). BCG in Action. Available at https://www.nxpo.or.th/th/en/
bcg-in-action/ [28.09.20]
157 Visessanguan, W. (2020). Thailand: Overview of the Biotechnology Sector 
and Strategy to Develop Thailand’s Bio-Economy. Presented at Covid-19 
Opportunities and Investment Support Measures for Bio-Circular-Green 
Economy in Thailand.
158 Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2002). Sufficient Economy Philosophy. Available 
at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=99&
nr=157&menu=1449 [28.09.20]
159	National Science and Technology Development Agency. (n.d.). BCG Concept. 
Available at https://www.nstda.or.th/thaibioeconomy/bcg-concept.html 
[28.09.20]
160	 National Science and Technology Development Agency. (2020). MHESI 
Minister and 8 leaders from all sectors propose BCG model for post-COVID 
economic recovery plan aiming to achieve THB 4.4 trillion GDP in 5 
years. Available at https://www.nstda.or.th/thaibioeconomy/117-mhesi-
minister-and-8-leaders-from-all-sectors-propose-bcg-model-for-post-covid-
economic-recovery-plan-aiming-to-achieve-4-4-trillion-thb-gdp-in-5-years.html 
[28.09.20]
161	 National Science and Technology Development Agency. (2020). BCG 
assembly launches a THB 10 billion public-private partnership to drive 
BCG agenda. Available at https://www.nstda.or.th/en/news/news-years-
2020/1066-bcg-assembly-launches-a-10-billion-thb-public-private-
partnership-to-drive-bcg-agenda.html [28.09.20]
162 Maesincee, S. (2020). BCG Model: Sustainable Economic Model. Presented 
at Covid-19 Opportunities and Investment Support Measures for Bio-
Circular-Green Economy in Thailand.
163 Maesincee, S. (2020). BCG Model: Sustainable Economic Model. Presented 
at Covid-19 Opportunities and Investment Support Measures for Bio-
Circular-Green Economy in Thailand.
164 Office of National Higher Education Science Research and Innovation Policy 
Council. (n.d.). BCG in Action. Available at https://www.nxpo.or.th/th/en/
bcg-in-action/ [28.09.20]
165 The Nation Thailand. (2019). Planned biorefinery first step to ‘Biopolis’. 
Available at https://www.nationthailand.com/business/30375158 
[28.09.20]
166 Glatt mit Planung einer GMP-Bioraffinerie in Thailand beauftragt. (2020). 
Chemietechnik.de. Available at https://www.chemietechnik.de/glatt-mit-
planung-einer-gmp-bioraffinerie-in-thailand-beauftragt/ [28.09.20]
167	 The Economist. (n.d.). Across Thailand, researchers, government and top 
firms are working together to turn plants into prosperity. Available at https://
innovatingthailand.economist.com/bioeconomy-boom/ [28.09.20]

Europe
70
In Europe, the European Union can be seen as the key 
driver of national bioeconomy policy strategies. Sup­
port for bioeconomy development dates back to 2007 
when Janez Potocnik, the former EU Commissioner 
for Research, Science and Innovation, presented the 
concept of a knowledge-based bioeconomy.168 During 
the Presidency of the EU Council in 2007, Germany en­
hanced the concept and highlighted the importance of 
biological resources as primary feedstock and biore­
fineries as important production facilities. Germany 
was the first country to publish a dedicated national 
bioeconomy research strategy in 2010, followed by a 
policy strategy in 2013. In 2012, the European Com­
mission presented the first dedicated macro-regional 
bioeconomy strategy, sparking the development of 
dedicated bioeconomy strategies across individual 
EU Member States. The Horizon 2020 program 
(2014 – 2020) would provide the basis for further de­
velopment of national research and innovation strate­
gies across Europe. In 2014, Finland published a dedi­
cated policy strategy on the bioeconomy, propelling it 
to become a leading bioeconomy nation in Europe. 
The international political landscape changed signifi­
cantly in 2015 with the adoption of the UN’s Agenda 
2030 and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals 
leading to important discussions on the bioeconomy’s 
contribution to sustainable economies. Since 2015, 
9 dedicated bioeconomy policy strategies have been 
adopted in Austria, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Nor­
way, the Nordic Countries (including Denmark, Finland, 
Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Faroe Islands, Greenland), 
Spain and the UK. 
In addition, a number of strategies have been updated, 
including the EU, Italy, and Germany, with Finland due 
to update its strategy in 2021. In the updated strate­
gies, the concepts of sustainability, circular economy, 
and the need to understand the ecological limits of 
the bioeconomy became more integral parts of the 
bioeconomy concept. With this increasing complexity, 
bioeconomy strategies in Europe recognize a broad set 
of goals and increasingly seek to maximize impact by 
better aligning with other policy priorities.

71
Many other European countries have adopted bioecon­
omy-related strategies such as research and inno­
vation strategies (e.g. the Netherlands and Sweden 
have adopted holistic bioeconomy/biobased economy 
research and innovation strategies). In Belgium, a 
regional bioeconomy strategy for Flanders was de­
veloped. Furthermore, the bioeconomy in European 
countries is often treated within the wider context of 
green or blue growth strategies, and most recently 
within strategies focusing on the circular economy. 
Interestingly, in its most recent roadmap, Portugal 
is fostering the blue bioeconomy as a new economic 
model, focused on the knowledge-based production 
and use of blue bioresources to provide products, pro­
cesses, and services. 
At the regional level, the funding framework of the 
European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF), 
including regional (ERDF) and agriculture and rural 
development funds (EAFRD) as well as Smart Special­
ization Strategies (RIS3), an ex-ante conditionality for 
the use of ESIF funds, have significantly contributed 
to supporting the development of rural bioeconomies 
in Europe. Several regions in the European Union have 
coupled bioeconomy development with their research 
and innovation RIS3 strategies and many have now 
developed regional bioeconomy strategies, such as 
in Spain (Extremadura, Andalucía, Basque and Cas­
tilla León), Norway (Innladet, Rogaland, Trondelag, 
Ostfold), France (Haute-de-France, Grand Est) and 
Germany (Baden-Wuerttemberg).

72
Country
Perspective
Document Name
Austria
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy – A Strategy for Austria (2019)
Belgium
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy in Flanders (2014)
Croatia
Bioeconomy
Rural Development Programme 2014-2020 (2016)
Czech Republic
Bioeconomy
Bioenergy
Bioeconomy concept in the Czech Republic
from the perspective of the Ministry of Agriculture 2019 – 2024 (2019)
Action Plan for Biomass in the Czech Republic 2012 – 2020 (2012)
Denmark
Research & Innovation
Circular Bioeconomy
Green Economy
Green Economy
Research 2025 – promising future research areas (2018)
Strategy for Circular Economy (2018)
Growth Plan for Water, Bio and Environmental Solutions (2013)
Growth Plan for Food (2013)
European 
Union
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
A sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection 
between economy, society and the environment (2018)
Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe (2012)
Finland
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (holistic) 
Roadmap Towards Oil-Free and Low-Carbon North Karelia by 2040 
(2017)
The Finnish Bioeconomy Strategy (2014)
France
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Grand Est Regional Plan for the Bioeconomy (2019)
Master Plan de la Bioéconomie en Hauts-de-France (2018)
A bioeconomy strategy for France: 2018 – 2020 Action plan (2018)
A Bioeconomy Strategy for France (2017)
Germany
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
National Bioeconomy Strategy (2020)
The Baden-Württembergs Government’s Sustainable Bioeconomy 
Strategy (2019)
National Policy Strategy on Bioeconomy (2013)
National Research Strategy BioEconomy 2030 (2010)
Ireland
Bioeconomy (holistic)
National Policy Statement on the Bioeconomy (2018)
Italy
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (regional)
Implementation Action Plan (2020 – 2025) for the Italian Bioeconomy 
Strategy BIT II (2020)
National Strategy for Bioeconomy – BIT II (2019)
Bioeconomy in Italy: A unique opportunity to reconnect economy, 
society and environment (2017)
The smart specialisation Strategy and the Bioeconomy Cluster in the 
Basilicata Region (2016)
Latvia
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Latvian Bioeconomy Strategy 2030 (LI-BRA) (2017)
Lithuania
High-Tech
National Industrial Biotechnology Development Programme (2007 – 2010)
Netherlands
Bioeconomy
Green Economy
Biobased Economy
The position of the bioeconomy in the Netherlands (2018)
Groene Groei: voor een sterke, duurzame economie (2013)
Groene Groei – Van Biomassa naar Business (2012)

73
Country
Perspective
Document Name
Nordic 
Countries
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Nordic Bioeconomy Programme: 15 Action Points for Sustainable 
Change (2018)
Norway
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Bioeconomy (regional)
Strategy for Bioeconomy in Rogaland 2018 – 2030 (2018)
Bioeconomy Strategy for Innlandet 2017 – 2024 (2017)
The Government’s Bioeconomy Strategy: Familiar resources – 
undreamt of possibilities (2016)
Strategy for Bioeconomy in Østfold (2016)
Portugal
Blue Economy
Bioenergy
Circular Bioeconomy
Blue Economy
Blue Bioeconomy Strategy (2019)
National Plan for the Promotion of Biorefineries (2017)
Circular Economy Action Plan (2017)
Estrategía Nacional para o Mar (2013)
Slovenia
Green Economy
Framework Programme for the Transition to a Green Economy (2015)
Spain
Bioeconomy (regional)
Circular Bioeconomy 
(regional)
Bioeconomy (hollistic)
Bioeconomy (regional)
Bioeconomy (hollistic)
Castilla y León Agrifood Bioeconomy Strategy (2019)
Andalusian Circular Bioeconomy Strategy (2018)
Spanish Bioeconomic Strategy: “Horizon 2030 – Action plan 2018”
Marco Regional de Impulso a la Economía Verde y Circular en 
Extremadura (2017)
Spanish Bioeconomic Strategy: “Horizon 2030” (2016)
 + The 2016 Action Plan (2016)
Sweden
Forest Bioeconomy
Research & Innovation
Sweden’s National Forest Programme (2018)
Swedish Research and Innovation Strategy for a Bio-based Economy 
(2012) 
United 
Kingdom
Bioeconomy (holistic)
Circular Bioeconomy 
(regional)
Bioeconomy (regional)
High-Tech (regional)
Growing the bioeconomy: a national bioeconomy strategy to 2030 
(2018)
Making Things Last: a circular economy strategy for Scotland (2016)
Biorefinery Roadmap for Scotland: Building a Sustainable Future (2015)
National Plan for Industrial Biotechnology: Driving Progress to 2025 
(2013)
168 	En Route to the Knowledge-Based Bio-Economy in Europe, German 
presidency to the European Union. (2007). Available at https://dechema.
de/dechema_media/Downloads/Positionspapiere/Cologne_Paper.pdf  
[14.10.20].
REFERENCES
Click on strategy name to access the online document

74
Austria
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
In the last decade, the Austrian government has 
taken several steps to develop bioeconomy-related 
policies which have been predominantly research-
oriented. Political commitment to supporting a bio­
economy research initiative was first laid out in the 
coalition agreement of 2013 and largely based on 
the comprehensive policy paper on bioeconomy 
published by BIOS Science Austria and the Austrian 
Union for Agricultural Research (ÖVAF)169 in 2013,
One year later, the government published the Re­
search, Technology and Innovation Strategy (RTI 
Strategy) for Biobased Industries (2014)170. An inter-
ministerial working group then reviewed the current 
bioeconomy-related RTI activities in Austria in the 
RTI Status Quo Report.171 The report defined relevant 
research areas and was used to elaborate a compre­
hensive National RTI Strategy on Bioeconomy,172 
which was published in 2018. 
In November 2018, three ministries published a Mis­
sion Statement173 which provided a SWOT analysis 
of the bioeconomy in Austria and laid the founda­
tions for the development of a national bioeconomy 
policy strategy.
In 2019, the Austrian Government adopted the dedi­
cated national bioeconomy strategy “Bioökono­
mie: Eine Strategie für Österreich”174 to address 
key questions as to how society can use natural re­
sources in a sustainable and responsible way while 
also running a thriving economy.
At the beginning of January 2020, the new Austrian 
government alliance of the Austrian People’s Party 
(ÖVP) and the Greens published its government pro­
gram175 which names the bioeconomy as a central 
pillar for climate protection. The new government 
confirmed its commitment to implementing the na­
tional bioeconomy strategy and an associated ac­
tion plan (not yet published), and to establishing a 
bioeconomy cluster and an associated office within 
the existing resources in the administration.

75
The Austrian Bioeconomy Strategy was adopted 
by the Council of Ministers on 13 March 2019. It 
has been developed as an essential cornerstone 
of the Austrian Climate and Energy Strategy “#mis­
sion2030” and is aligned with the EU Bioeconomy 
Strategy of 2012, its revision of 2018, as well as 
with the United Nations Agenda 2030 and the Paris 
Climate Agreement. The strategy is also integrated 
into the policy framework of the Austrian Forest 
Strategy 2020+ and the Resource Efficiency Action 
Plan (REAP).
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The national bioeconomy strategy is the result of 
inter-ministerial collaboration. Three ministries were 
involved in its development and publication, includ­
ing the Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tour­
ism; the Federal Ministry of Education, Science and 
Research; and the Federal Ministry for Transport, 
Innovation and Technology.
The strategy was developed with the help of a public 
consultation process which has been overseen by 
the University of Natural Resources and Life Sci­
ences in Vienna since 2014. The process included, 
for example, two online consultations, a conference 
to inform the public about the status of the develop­
ment process, and a public web survey to confirm 
and partially quantify the operational objectives.
The European Forum Alpbach also played a decisive 
role in the strategy process. Since 2015, it has invit­
ed representatives from countries that already have 
dedicated bioeconomy strategies, such as Finland, 
South Africa, Italy, Germany, and the United States. 
The aim was to learn from the different strategy pro­
cesses, the different priorities, and the countries’ 
general experience of developing a dedicated bio­
economy strategy.176 
In Austria, the bioeconomy stands for an “(…) eco­
nomic concept that aims to replace fossil resources 
(raw materials and energy sources) with renewable 
raw materials in as many areas and applications as 
possible.” It highlights that the bioeconomy covers 
all industrial and economic sectors that produce, 
process, handle or use biological resources. The 
focus is on raw material sources from agriculture 
and forestry, water management, and waste, as well 
as the use of these biobased raw materials for food 
and feed, chemicals, materials, and energy.
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

76
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The national bioeconomy strategy envisions an 
economy that reconciles technology and ecology. 
By providing a dedicated national bioeconomy 
strategy, the Austrian government’s main aim is to 
meet global societal challenges, such as climate 
change, food and water shortages, and increas­
ing environmental pollution. At the same time, the 
strategy is intended to contribute to achieving the 
goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and to pro­
mote the decarbonization of Austrian society and 
the economy. The bioeconomy is expected to sig­
nificantly contribute to reducing greenhouse gas 
emission by 2030. In comparison to other (Euro­
pean) bioeconomy strategies, the Austrian strategy 
is thus very climate- and environment-oriented in 
its objectives.
The strategy introduces a series of goals and quali­
tative targets. For example, the country’s depen­
dence on fossil fuels and energy sources should be 
reduced, i.e. by significantly increasing the share of 
renewable resources in total raw material by 2030.
Furthermore, the strategy pursues regional value 
creation and looks to secure jobs for the future, i.e. 
by accelerating the existing growth of “green jobs” 
and creating additional jobs in the bioeconomy by 
2030.
The Austrian Government aims to enter new mar­
kets, domestically and abroad, and to strengthen 
the country’s economic development and competi­
tiveness. With the dedicated bioeconomy strategy, 
Austria should be positioned globally as a bioecon­
omy RTI competence location and as an exporter 
of high-value, innovative biobased products and 
services.
The Government further aims to mobilize pri­
vate capital for bioeconomy development and to 
strengthen the position of Austria as a financial 
location. Private investment in bioeconomy enter­
prises of all sizes should be significantly increased 
by 2030.
By 2030, a national accounting system should be 
established that includes not only monetary vari­
ables but also other measures. This should help 
to better reflect value creation in the bioeconomy 
in several dimensions, including economic perfor­
mance but also social and natural capital.
Moreover, the government is striving for sustain­
able social transformation. To do this, it aims to 
disseminate knowledge about the bioeconomy 
among the general public by 2030 so that people 
will be able to form a qualified judgement about 
bioeconomy-related topics and issues. Bioeconomy 
topics should also be comprehensively anchored in 
education and research by 2030.
The Austrian bioeconomy strategy is based on 
guidelines aligned with the UN SDGs. These guide­
lines form the framework for designing implementa­
tion measures to cope with potential goal conflicts 
and to optimize synergies with other Agenda 2030 
objectives.
The circular economy is highlighted as essential for 
the utilization of biobased resources. While circular 
concepts are a central pillar of the strategy, refer­
ence is also made to the EU’s circular economy 
package and the EU bioeconomy strategy.
The strategy document notes that an action plan is 
currently being developed with the participation of 
all stakeholders. To this end, numerous workshops 
with enterprises, regions, and other stakeholders 
were held in autumn 2019. However, the action 
plan has not yet been published. Its publication 
is expected at the beginning of 2021. In addition, 
there is no refence to budgetary resources.

77
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The national bioeconomy strategy addresses four 
thematic areas. In the first, “sustainable consump­
tion” is pursued by combining the goals of “suffi­
ciency” (changing use and consumption behavior), 
“efficiency” (using raw materials as fully as possible) 
and “consistency” (recycling management and circu­
lar economy). The strategy emphasizes the urgent 
need for changes in behavior and values, both for 
producers and consumers. Interestingly, the Austri­
an government is committed to reducing per capita 
consumption and fostering sustainable services in 
the interest of sustainable resource management.
The second thematic area, “resources of the bio­
economy,” focuses on the sustainable production 
and utilization of biological resources in agriculture 
and forestry, i.e. through precision farming, the de­
velopment of new value-added and production con­
cepts, and the use of digitalization and data man­
agement. Interestingly, water management is also 
addressed, i.e. through the development of new raw 
material sources in closed production systems, such 
as algae production (energy and material use), pro­
tein production by insects (for animal feed), vertical 
and urban farming, and the sensible use of unused 
nutrients in sludge from biogas or sewage plants.
The third thematic area, “technologies of the bio­
economy,” focuses, for example, on sustainable and 
improved agricultural cultivation, processing and 
harvesting technologies, improved transport and 
logistic concepts, and new conversion processes 
and technologies, including the evaluation and opti­
mization of existing biorefinery concepts.
The thematic area, “products of the bioeconomy,” 
points to further promoting the existing strengths 
of the Austrian forest-based bioeconomy in the pa­
per and pulp industry, the construction, insulation 
and wood sector, the basic chemical industry, and 
the bioenergy sector. Focus is on developing new 
and advanced materials based on cellulose, lignin, 
wood fiber, wood wool, and fiber plants but also on 
new and sustainable products based on biobased 
platform chemicals and biobased plastics or second 
generation (or higher) biofuels. Furthermore, the 
strategy highlights the food and animal feed sector 
and the need to ensure more conscious, climate-
compatible and healthy diets and a high quality of 
food. Promoting organic agriculture and reducing 
food losses and waste are also emphasized as key 
areas of action.
In addition to these priority areas, the strategy 
highlights digitalization and new communication 
technologies as a cross-cutting theme which, in 
conjunction with technological developments such 
as artificial intelligence, will bring about significant 
changes in production processes towards so-called 
“biodigitization.” Initiated by the Austrian govern­
ment’s digitization strategy, this should contribute to 
the long-term success of the domestic economy.
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
To promote innovation beyond the boundaries of 
disciplines, sectors and institutions, the strategy 
specifically addresses cooperation between busi­
ness, science, administration, and society by foster­
ing technological and social innovations as well as 
open innovations. 
Policy measures proposed to foster bioeconomy 
research and innovation include instruments that 
support basic research at university research insti­
tutions, promote cooperation centers and platforms 
for science and industry, and funding programs for 
applied/industrial research. New and existing clus­
ters should be promoted for the development of 
economic partnerships across production chains. 
In addition, international networking and coopera­
tion between research institutions and innovation-
oriented companies should be strengthened, i.e. by 
further supporting international networks such as 
the European Bioeconomy University, Austrian mem­

78
bership in the Biobased Industries Joint Undertaking 
(BBI JU), the IEA Technology Collaboration Program 
(TCP) and the international “Mission Innovation“ al­
liance. Furthermore, targeted measures should be 
developed to support the establishment of compa­
nies in biobased industry. 
With regard to infrastructure investments, the strat­
egy document focuses primarily on the development 
of research infrastructure and support for logistics 
infrastructure for the biobased economy.
To support commercialization, the strategy pro­
vides for the development of targeted measures to 
strengthen the biobased market. For example, the 
Environmental Technology Export Initiative should be 
further promoted to improve the global positioning 
of Austrian combustion technologies. Bioeconomic 
products should also be given priority in terms of 
market access through appropriate funding instru­
ments. However, the strategy document does not yet 
specify any measures.
Measures proposed to address the demand side fo­
cus mainly on supporting the consumers’ conscious 
decision to buy biobased products and replacing 
fossil products, for example, by introducing national 
and European certificates and labels. In addition, 
targeted information campaigns, such as the “Buy 
consciously” initiative, should be promoted. Besides 
the promotion of new consumption concepts (e.g. 
sharing economy, cradle-to-cradle), innovative and 
sustainable public procurement policies for biobased 
products should also be developed.
In addition to research and innovation, the strat­
egy recognizes education as one of the key growth 
drivers for modern economies. In view of the com­
plexity of the bioeconomy, the strategy highlights 
the need for comprehensive educational programs. 
Educational institutions that strive to improve and 
develop educational structures and processes re­
lated to bioeconomy will be supported by the Innova­
tion Foundation for Education. Education. Capacity 
building should be further promoted by integrating 
the bioeconomy into school and academic education 
as well as into vocational training programs.
Interestingly, Austria strongly promotes bioeconomy 
education and capacity building within and across 
European borders. For example, the University of 
Natural Resources and Life Sciences in Vienna was 
one of the founding members of the European Bio­
economy University, a new alliance of the six lead­
ing European universities in bioeconomy research, 
which will act not only as a think tank for knowledge 
generation, but also as a creative hub for knowledge 
transfer.177 
Some policy measures mentioned in the policy strat­
egy are intended to create political framework con­
ditions that are favorable to the bioeconomy. These 
include promoting compliance with internationally 
recognized sustainability standards in agriculture, 
forestry and water management; compensating 
companies for additional costs of biobased produc­
tion; and regulatory measures such as bans (e.g. 
for new installations of fuel oil boilers, or the use of 
plastic). Furthermore, benchmarks and standards 
for the use of secondary raw materials should be 
strengthened and additional measures should 
be developed to achieve the recycling quotas for 
2025. Environmental and social standards should 
ensure fair competition for biobased products and 
feed quotas should be reduced. In addition, laws 
and standards in the construction sector should 
be harmonized and the rate at which buildings are 
renovated should be increased to promote the trend 
of living with natural materials. To accelerate the de­
velopment and utilization of bioenergy, there should 
be further strengthening of the Renewable Energies 
Expansion Act of 2018 and promotion of incentives 
for early withdrawal from fossil fuels. At the same 
time, there should be an increase in the admixture 
of liquid biofuels.
With regard to good governance measures, the strat­
egy often emphasizes that cooperation between the 
Austrian Government and the provinces should be 
expanded in the future, by promoting networking ac­
tivities of regional clusters for example. An Austria-
wide initiative for a joint cooperation approach was 
planned for in 2019.

79
REFERENCES
169	 BIOS Science Austria and the Austrian Union for Agricultural Research 
(ÖVAF). (2013). Bioeconomy Policy Paper. Available at https://oevaf.at/wp-
content/uploads/2013/11/biokonomie-positionspapier.pdf [07.09.2020]
170	 E. Ganglberger, T. Sturm. (2014). Research, Technology and Innovation 
Strategy (RTI Strategy) for Biobased Industries. Available at https://
nachhaltigwirtschaften.at/resources/fdz_pdf/1438_fti_strategie_
biobasierte_industrie.pdf [07.09.2020]
171 FTI-AG2 Klimawandel und Ressourcenknappheit. (2015). Report: 
Bioeconomy and RTI activities in Austria, a contribution to the bioeconomy 
development of the federal government. Available at https://www.discuto.
io/sites/default/files/2015mai_fti-ag2_biooekonomie_bericht.pdf 
[07.09.2020]
172	 FTI-AG2 Klimawandel und Ressourcenknappheit. (2018). Working Paper of 
FTI AG2 Climate Change and Scarcity of Resources: Supporting the Change 
to a CO2 Neutral Future - Bioeconomy FTI Strategy for Austria. Available at 
https://nachhaltigwirtschaften.at/resources/nw_pdf/biooekonomie-fti-
strategie-ag2-2018.pdf [07.09.2020].
173	 Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism, The Federal Ministry of 
Education, Science and Research, Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation 
and Technology. (2018). Mission Statement Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://www.bmlrt.gv.at/dam/jcr:dd5ca9f6-d201471e98510ae71e7d814b/
Mission%20Statement%20Bio%C3%B6konomie_online%20Version.pdf. 
[07.09.2020]
174	 Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism, Federal Ministry of 
Education, Science and Research & Federal Ministry for Transport, 
Innovation and Technology. (2019). Bioeconomy: A Strategy for Austria. 
Available at https://www.bmnt.gv.at/umwelt/klimaschutz/biooekonomie/
Bioökonomie-Strategie-für-Österreich.html [07.09.2020].
175	 The Austrian Government. (2020). Government program 2020-
2024. Available at https://www.dieneuevolkspartei.at/Download/
Regierungsprogramm_2020.pdf [07.09.2020]
176 “Forum Alpbach: Experten suchen Bioökonomie-Strategie“. (2015). 
science.apa.at. Available at https://science.apa.at/rubrik/politik_und_
wirtschaft/Forum_Alpbach_Experten_suchen_Biooekonomie-Strategie/
SCI_20150828_SCI63653414225065890 [07.09.2020]
177	 AgroParisTech, University of Bologna, University of Natural Resources and 
Life Sciences (BOKU), University of Hohenheim, Wageningen University 
and Research, University of Eastern Finland. (2019). Available at https://
european-bioeconomy-university.eu/ [07.09.20]
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
No
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
The three ministries involved in development of the 
strategy are also responsible for its implementa­
tion. With the new government in January 2020, 
the responsibility for implementation moved to the 
Austrian Federal Ministry for Climate Action, Envi­
ronment, Energy, Mobility, Innovation and Technol­
ogy. The strategy’s implementation should involve 
relevant stakeholders from science, business, and 
civil society.

80
EU
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
The European Union can be seen as the key driver of 
national bioeconomy policy strategies. In 2012, the Eu­
ropean Union presented its first dedicated Bioeconomy 
Strategy and Action Plan, “Innovating for Sustainable 
Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe,”178 with a focus on 
three pillars: (1) investments in skills, research and 
innovation; (2) coordination of policy and engagement 
with stakeholders, and (3) market development and 
competitiveness. Implementation was funded mainly 
via EU Research and Innovation funding under Horizon 
2020 (2014 – 2020). Funding dedicated to the bio­
economy would nearly double from EUR 1.9 billion in 
the 7th Framework Programme (2007 – 2013) to EUR 
3.85 billion in Horizon 2020.
One of the largest investments was dedicated to an 
innovative public-private partnership (ppp), the “Bio-
Based Industries Joint Undertaking (BBI JU),” between 
the EU and the Bio-based Industries Consortium (BIC). 
The BBI JU aimed to invest EUR 3.7 billion in biobased 
innovation between 2014 and 2020: EUR 975 million 
was committed by the European Commission and EUR 
2.7 billion by the private sector. As of June 2020, BBI 
JU had invested over EUR 700 million in 123 projects 
creating over 100 new biobased value chains and ma­
terials in 37 countries.179 
Several other Horizon 2020 programs supported 
bioeconomic innovations, specifically under Societal 
Challenge 2 (food security, sustainable agriculture and 
forestry, marine, maritime and inland water research 
and the bioeconomy), such as the 2014 call for propos­
als “Innovative, sustainable and inclusive Bioeconomy” 
(ISIB) with a budget of EUR 44.5 million, “Sustainable 
Food Security” (EUR 138 million) and “Blue Growth” 
(EUR 100 million). Other important initiatives under 
Horizon 2020 included a ppp with the chemical indus­
try, Sustainable Process Industry (SPIRE), and a clean 
energy initiative, the “European Industrial Bioenergy 
Initiative” (EIBI).180 
Policy coherence was furthered in the Strategy via 
the Bioeconomy (Stakeholders) Panel (established in 
2013 and renewed in 2016), an expert committee of 
29 members tasked with providing cross-sectoral and 
interdisciplinary policy advice. EU-wide coordination of 
bioeconomy-related public research funding was also 
advanced with the help of ongoing ERA-Net activities 
(e. g. see the report on “Bioeconomy ERA-NET Actions” 
2014) and Joint Programming Initiatives of member 
states. In addition, the Bioeconomy Observatory, led 
by the Joint Research Center (JRC), was established in 
February 2013 to inform policy-making by scientifically 
guiding the development of the EU bioeconomy with 
the help of statistical monitoring and modeling stud­
ies. In July 2017, the European Commission launched 
the Knowledge Center for Bioeconomy (KCB), also 
hosted by the Joint Research Centre, to provide data 
and relevant publications on the bioeconomy in the 
member states to ensure better knowledge-sharing. To 
ensure cooperation at international level, in November 
2017the EU Commission launched the “International

81
Bioeconomy Forum,” a platform for multilateral R&D 
collaboration in areas of common interest.  
Under the third pillar of the Strategy, activities were 
implemented that related mainly to research on stan­
dardization and coordinating the respective imple­
mentation activities, including the development of 
measurement methods, and standards and labels for 
different biobased products in the European Commit­
tee for Standardization (CEN). 
Beyond the Strategy, the EU Commission also set up 
the European Innovation Partnership for Agriculture 
(EIP-AGRI)181 in 2012 to promote sustainable intensi­
fication in agriculture and forestry and contribute to 
providing the right quality and amount of biomass for 
food, feed, and the production of new biomaterials. The 
EIP was also backed by Horizon 2020 and Regional 
Development funds to foster the work of “operational 
groups” which facilitate hands-on communication and 
interactive knowledge transfer in agriculture and for­
estry. It also supported pilot projects and cooperation 
initiatives targeting improved supply chains, food secu­
rity, climate or environmental protection.
In December 2015, the EU Commission adopted a 
circular economy strategy, “Closing the loop – An EU 
action plan for the Circular Economy,”182 to promote 
resource efficiency across industries and member 
states. Biomass and biobased products were among 
the five priority areas of intervention and the biobased 
sector was seen as an integral part of the circular 
economy. Consequently, bioeconomy and the use of 
biological resources was increasingly linked to the cir­
cular economy concept. 
In November 2017, the Commission presented an 
expert review of the 2012 Bioeconomy Strategy and 
determined that the policy context in which the bio­
economy operates had changed significantly and 
a Strategy update was necessary. An updated Bio­
economy Strategy and Action Plan, “A sustainable Bio­
economy for Europe: strengthening the connection 
between economy, society and the environment,”183 
was released in October 2018 and set new priorities 
for the bioeconomy’s contribution to climate protection 
and sustainable development in Europe.
In addition to the updated Bioeconomy Strategy, two 
other important EC communications that year helped 
define the bioeconomy as an important element in 
overarching policy debates: the EU Communication on 
“A Clean Planet for all – A European strategic long-
term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive 
and climate neutral economy,”184 which highlights how 
the bioeconomy can contribute to achieving the Paris 
Climate Agreement goals, and the reflection paper 
“Towards a Sustainable Europe by 2030,”185 which 
emphasizes the function of the bioeconomy as a posi­
tive driver for several SDGs. It specifically identified 
the transition to sustainable food systems as a key 
contribution of bioeconomy to reaching the SDGs. 
In December 2019, the new president of the EU Com­
mission, Ursula von der Leyen, published a first com­
munication on the European Green Deal.186 It pre­
sented a comprehensive approach to tackling urgent 
environmental challenges, including those the conti­
nent is facing in the area of agriculture and forestry, 
and renewed political relevance for the bioeconomy. 
It highlighted the essential and increasing role that 
the bioeconomy must play in reducing GHG emissions 
and created many synergies with and links to the bio­
economy and many policies of the Green Deal (e.g. 
Circular Economy Action Plan, Farm to Fork Strategy, 
EU Biodiversity Strategy). 
In March 2020, the Commission published the “Cir­
cular Economy Action Plan (CEAP)”187 with the hope 
of accelerating the change required by the European 
Green Deal, while also building on the 54 circular econ­
omy actions implemented since 2015. Important refer­
ences are made to the biobased sector, especially with 
regard to circularity in production processes, plastics, 
and food, water and nutrients, however, bioeconomy 
development is lacking in important areas such as ur­
ban development, packaging, textiles, and construction 
and building. The EU Industrial Strategy (2020)188 also 
envisions the physical, digital, and biological worlds 
coming together. 
The Green Deal also focuses on the Farm to Fork 
Strategy189 which looks to address the challenges of 
sustainable food systems and sees the deployment 
of a circular and sustainable bioeconomy as providing 
business opportunities, for instance, in making use of 
food waste and in advanced biorefineries that produce 
biofertilizers, protein feed, bioenergy, and biochemi­
cals. As referenced in the European Green Deal, an 
EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030190 was released in

82
The 2018 Strategy explicitly aims to maximize im­
pact by aligning with other European priorities, espe­
cially those laid out in the renewed Industrial Policy, 
the Circular Economy Action Plan, and the Clean 
Energy for All European Package.  
With regard to the overarching goals of the European 
Green Deal, the areas of action most relevant to 
the bioeconomy include the “Farm to Fork” Strategy 
(2020) for a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly 
food system, with legislative measures to reduce the 
use of chemical pesticides, fertilizers, and antibiot­
ics; the EU Biodiversity Strategy (2020); the not yet 
published EU Forest Strategy to help preserve and 
restore ecosystems and biodiversity; and the mobili­
zation of research and fostering of innovation.
In general, the 2018 Bioeconomy Strategy uses a 
systemic approach that embraces multiple sectors 
and policies related to the bioeconomy and seeks 
to interlink them and facilitate coherence. Whereas 
the Circular Economy Action Plan sees the imple­
mentation of the Bioeconomy Strategy as an integral 
part of its strategy, the Green Deal and Biodiversity 
Strategy do not explicitly reference the Bioeconomy 
Strategy.  
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The 2018 Bioeconomy Strategy was published by the Eu­
ropean Commission, Directorate-General for Research 
and Innovation. In February 2018, the Commission pub­
lished a roadmap for the Communication, updating the 
2012 Strategy, and received public consultation (92 in 
total) from the public and private sectors. The Communi­
cation was developed jointly across different DGs (RTD, 
AGRI, ENV, MARE, GROW, JRC, CLIMA).
The 2018 Strategy and its corresponding Action Plan 
reflect conclusions drawn from the Review of the 2012 
European Bioeconomy Strategy (2017).194 The Review 
report built on input from an external expert group, com­
posed of 14 experts from the public and private sector, 
as well as the Bioeconomy Stakeholders Panel, with 
representatives from large and small companies, NGOs, 
biomass producers, regions and academia from across 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
May 2020 which outlines a 10-year vision to restore 
and protect the union’s ecosystems with a budget of 
at least EUR 20 billion a year. It lays out measures to 
transform the agriculture sector by promoting agro­
ecology practices (e.g. supporting organic farming and 
crop genetic diversity, reducing chemical pesticides, 
soil erosion, and water depletion). In addition, “nature-
based solutions”191 play a major role and should be 
systematically integrated into urban planning.
The European Forest Strategy (2013),192 which pro­
motes the multifunctional role of forests, the principles 
of Sustainable Forest Management, and cascade use 
of wood products, is set to be updated in 2020. It is 
unclear, however, how it will relate to the biodiversity 
strategy. The European Commission’s Green Recovery 
Plan in response to the Covid crisis and the EU’s new 
seven-year budget, including the next research and 
innovation program, Horizon Europe 2021 – 2027, and 
its funding for the bioeconomy, have not been finalized 
at the time of publication, leaving a string of unknown 
consequences for future investments in the bioecono­
my. While the financing is not yet clear, Horizon Europe 
will begin in 2021 with a largely approved preliminary 
structure, with the bioeconomy falling under pillar 2 
in the Food, Bioeconomy, Natural Resources, Agricul­
ture and Environment Cluster and a redesigned BBI 
JU program.193

83
The 2012 Bioeconomy Strategy defines the bioecon­
omy as encompassing “the production of renewable 
biological resources and their conversion into food, 
feed, biobased products and bioenergy. It includes ag­
riculture, forestry, fisheries, food, and pulp and paper 
production, as well as parts of the chemical, biotech­
nological, and energy industries. Its sectors have a 
strong innovation potential due to their use of a wide 
range of sciences (life sciences, agronomy, ecology, 
food science, and social sciences), enabling industrial 
technologies (biotechnology, nanotechnology, infor­
mation and communication technologies [ICT], and 
engineering), and local and tacit knowledge.”
The updated 2018 Strategy makes an explicit effort 
to more clearly define the bioeconomy and uses a 
more comprehensive definition: “The bioeconomy 
covers all sectors and systems that rely on biologi­
cal resources (animals, plants, micro-organisms 
and derived biomass, including organic waste), their 
functions and principles. It includes and interlinks: 
land and marine ecosystems and the services they 
provide; all primary production sectors that use and 
produce biological resources (agriculture, forestry, 
fisheries and aquaculture); and all economic and 
industrial sectors that use biological resources and 
processes to produce food, feed, biobased prod­
ucts, energy and services. To be successful, the 
European bioeconomy needs to have sustainability 
and circularity at its heart.”
According to the new 2018 definition, the bioecon­
omy now includes all systems based on biological 
resources in addition to economic sectors. While 
the 2012 Strategy emphasized the cascading use 
of biomass, the new Strategy goes further and de­
scribes the bioeconomy as a sub-sector of the cir­
cular economy. Similar to 2012, biotechnology plays 
a key role in the bioeconomy, but health biotechnol­
ogy and biological medicines are not included in the 
definition. 
According to a study conducted by nova-Institute on 
behalf of the Bio-based Industries Consortium (BIC) 
in 2020, the entire EU bioeconomy, including the 
primary sectors of agriculture, forestry, fishery, food 
products, beverages, and tobacco products, totaled 
EUR 2.4 trillion and employed 18.5 million people 
in 2017. Excluding the above-mentioned sectors, 
the biobased economy had a turnover of EUR 750 
billion with the largest sectors being forest-based 
industry (26 percent), paper products (26 percent), 
and pharmaceuticals (19 percent), and employed 
EUR 3.6 million, 43 percent of whom were from the 
forest-based industry.196 
It is important to note that the broader definition 
in 2018 also includes bioeconomy services (e.g. 
restoration, waste treatment, food retail trade, and 
research into and repair of biobased products) which 
poses new methodological challenges for measuring 
jobs and wealth creation. While estimation of the 
biobased content of biobased products is appropri­
ate for determining the biobased share of manufac­
turing sectors, it is less relevant for certain service 
sectors.197 
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
Europe, and related stakeholders’ conferences. A key 
document published in November of 2017 by the Stake­
holder Panel was a Manifesto195 providing guidelines 
for developing a sustainable bioeconomy in Europe. 
In addition, a coordinators’ survey and an open public 
consultation were conducted for the BBI JU projects.

84
The 2018 Bioeconomy Strategy and its Action Plan 
make clear that the bioeconomy needs to have sus­
tainability and circularity at its heart. In turn this will 
help achieve the new EU priority goals: the renewal of 
industries, the modernization of primary production 
systems, job creation (estimated as up to 1 million 
new jobs by 2030), protection of the environment, and 
biodiversity.
The five objectives referenced in the 2012 Strategy 
remain valid: 1) food and nutrition security; 2) sustain­
able resource management; 3) reduced dependence 
on fossil fuels; 4) climate change mitigation; 5) job cre­
ation and competitiveness. While the revised Strategy 
includes these same objectives, it also goes beyond 
them. One of the central aims of the updated Strategy 
is to adapt objectives so that they align better with 
overall European priorities, especially with regard to the 
EU Circular Economy, the Paris Climate Agreement, and 
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Con­
sequently, the Strategy places increased emphasis on 
the concept of a sustainable and circular bioeconomy. 
The focus is on green transformation, an economically 
sensible and ecologically sustainable reorientation of 
the economy and society, and a systemic change in the 
production and consumption of resources. 
The 2018 Strategy is based on three key objectives: 
1) strengthening and scaling-up the biobased sectors; 
2) rapidly deploying local bioeconomies across Europe; 
3) protecting the ecosystem and understanding the 
ecological boundaries of the bioeconomy. 
In the 2012 Strategy, there is no clear direct link be­
tween objectives (referred to as societal challenges) 
and the measures listed in the Action Plan. An over­
arching goal of the revised 2018 Strategy is to make 
measurable contributions, and thus 14 concrete policy 
measures are defined in the Action Plan which are to 
be implemented starting in 2019. Unlike many other 
bioeconomy strategies, the Action Plan sets milestones 
for some individual actions.
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The updated 2018 Strategy strives to move beyond 
research and innovation with a systematic approach 
to the deployment of biobased innovations in the 
bioeconomy. There is an identified need for further 
mobilization of investments and increased predict­
ability of the regulatory environment. 
Attention is placed not only on conventional 
biobased products from biomass, such as wood, 
cork, paper, textiles, etc., but also new products 
such as biobased chemicals, plastics etc., which 
can either replace fossil-based products or have 
completely new functionalities and potential for new 
markets (e.g. cellulose-based products, biobased 
plastics that are fit for industrial composting and 
biodegradable in the natural environment or “green” 
chemicals). The Strategy specifically mentions using 
advances in the life sciences and biotechnology 
to modernize and strengthen Europe’s traditional 
industries. At the same time, innovations resulting 
from the convergence of physical, digital and bio­
technologies should create entirely new sources of 
future economic growth.
There is a strong focus on sustainability and circular­
ity, where cities should become major circular bio­
economy hubs. Job creation, particularly in coastal 
and rural areas, is of central importance. The Strat­
egy notes that the potential for the use of biological 
resources and residues has not yet been exhausted 
in European regions and municipalities (especially 
in Eastern Europe). It further supports the modern­
ization of the EU industrial base by capitalizing on 
advances in life science and biotechnology.

85
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The revised Strategy is funded through the bioeconomy 
cluster of the new research framework program “Hori­
zon Europe” 2021 – 2027 which identifies seven inter­
vention areas: environmental observation; biodiversity 
and natural resources; agriculture, forestry, and rural 
areas; seas, oceans, and inland waters; food systems; 
biobased innovation systems in the EU bioeconomy; 
and circular systems. For the new research framework 
program “Horizon Europe” 2021 – 2027, the Commis­
sion has planned a significant increase in the budget 
from EUR 3.85 billion to EUR 10 billion (“Food and 
Natural Resources” cluster), it remains open, however, 
whether these funds will be changed. 
The revised Strategy provides for 14 concrete policy 
measures which this analysis has categorized under 
the promotion of research and innovation, commer­
cialization, infrastructure, demand-side instruments, 
and good governance. 
With regard to research and innovation investments, 
the Strategy in Action 1.6 focuses on plastic-free 
oceans and calls for research on the development 
of substitutes for fossil-based materials that are 
biobased, recyclable and marine-biodegradable and 
on bioremediation methods. Action 3.4 promotes re­
search and innovation in the areas of agroecology, mi­
crobiome-based solutions, pollinators, etc. to enhance 
the benefits of biodiversity in primary production.
Pilot actions are supported through Action 2.2 which 
plans to implement five pilot projects in the first round 
in the following thematic areas: marine bioeconomy, 
urban bioeconomy, “carbon farming”, and “living labs” 
to support local bioeconomy development. July 2019 
saw the publication of the urban bioeconomy call, “Pi­
lot circular biobased cities,” which provides funding for 
at least five EU cities (and/or clusters of cities) to draft 
urban circular bioeconomy strategies fostering the sus­
tainable production of biobased products from urban 
biowaste and wastewater. In the longer term, financial 
support will be extended to up to 30 bioeconomy cities 
across Europe.
With regard to strengthening and scaling-up the 
biobased sector through commercialization, the Ac­
tion Plan singles out BBI JU as a successful tool to 
kick-start demonstration and deployment of biorefiner­
ies and new value-chains. However, it determines that 
funding of high-risk investments is still not well support­
ed. The 2017 Review identified the need to: 1) make 
investment opportunities more appealing, transparent, 
secure and visible, and 2) help EU regions evaluate 
their investment readiness level for the production 
of more sustainable chemicals. Action 1.1 therefore 
calls for the development of a toolbox of solutions, 
including financial advisory and strategic deployment 
support for biobased solutions, with special attention 
paid to new technologies, such as artificial intelligence 
and blockchain. Action 1.3 seeks to study and identify 
obstacles and factors promoting market development 
for biobased products by 2021. 
Action 1.2 launched a EUR 100 million Circular Bioecon­
omy Thematic Investment Platform, called the European 
Circular Bioeconomy Fund (ECBF), to help de-risk private 
investments for both bioeconomy projects scaling-up 
from the pilot to demonstration phase as well as from 
the demonstration to industrial scale phase. The new 
fund will provide access to finance, in the form of equity, 
debt or quasi-equity, to innovative circular bioeconomy 
companies and projects of various sizes. Focus is placed 
on projects in the biobased industries, the marine bio­
economy, and closely related sectors such as agriculture 
and forestry. ECBF is a joint initiative of the European 
Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) 
and has a target fund volume of EUR 250 million.198
Infrastructure is strongly supported in the Strategy. By 
2024, Action 1.5 calls for the development of a road­
map for deploying an estimated 300 new biorefineries 
that must be built by 2030 to meet growing demand. A 
strong focus is placed on small-scale and decentralized 
biorefineries (especially sustainable chemicals). 
With regard to demand-side measures, by 2025 Action 
1.4 will promote and further develop existing standards 
and labels and the development of public procurement 
guidelines for biobased products. For example, to in­
crease consumer acceptance of new products, reliable 
and comparable information on the environmental per­
formance of products should be available to consumers 
(e.g. using the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) 
method).

86
Education and capacity building are furthered through 
Action 2.4, the adaptation of education and training to 
the needs of the bioeconomy (e.g. by piloting vocational 
and higher education curricula and entrepreneurship 
programs). Vocational training is strongly emphasized, 
as is stimulating entrepreneurship, e.g. through a 
potential “Bioeconomy Innovation Bootcamp” for re­
searchers to help develop, new business approaches; 
examples of positive synergies with local communities; 
and bioeconomy and ecosystem-based principles. Fur­
thermore, the Strategy looks to support projects under 
the Blueprint for Sectoral Cooperation on Skills that 
address digital, green and maritime skills 
A number of good governance measures are prominent 
in the Strategy. An essential finding of the 2017 Review 
and a pillar of the revised Strategy is to encourage the 
adoption, updating and coherence of national and re­
gional bioeconomy strategies throughout Europe. To 
this end, Action 2.1 calls for the development of an 
implementation concept by 2021, the Strategic Deploy­
ment Agenda (SDA), to strengthen local bioeconomies. 
The focus is primarily on the use of by-products from 
agriculture, aquaculture and biobased materials. The 
Strategy notes that the utilization potential of biomass 
and biological residues has not yet been exhausted, 
especially in Eastern European regions and municipali­
ties. Policy coherence and support is further provided 
through Action 2.3 which sets up an EU Bioeconomy 
Policy Support Facility (with a focus on Central and 
Eastern Europe) and a European Bioeconomy Forum 
for Member States. 
Under the theme of understanding the ecological 
boundaries of the bioeconomy, a number of actions 
contribute to good governance measures. Action 
3.1 seeks to enhance the knowledge based on the 
bioeconomy, including biodiversity and ecosystems, 
and make it accessible through the Knowledge Cen­
tre for Bioeconomy (KCB) which boasts a library of 
over 3,016 resources (publications, datasets, news, 
events, etc.).199 
Another key finding of the 2017 Review was the need 
for better monitoring of the bioeconomy as a whole and 
of the Strategy itself, including indicators. Action 3.2 
thus introduces an EU-wide monitoring system to track 
progress towards a sustainable bioeconomy and docu­
ment its impact on biodiversity, ecosystems, climate 
change, etc. The BioMonitor project, a consortium of 
universities, statistical and standardization institutes, 
consultancies, and data modelling experts, has already 
begun setting up a monitoring and assessment frame­
work for the European bioeconomy.200
Knowledge gained from these actions will then be used 
in Action 3.3 to provide voluntary guidance for operating 
the bioeconomy within safe ecological limits. 
Lastly, in order to enhance the benefits of biodiversity 
in primary production, Action 3.4 proposes the devel­
opment of microbiome-based solutions, a roadmap for 
action to support agroecology, and tools for the integra­
tion of pollinators into value chains. 
The Strategy also emphasizes that all measures should 
be implemented in close connection with global devel­
opments. Specifically, the “International Bioeconomy 
Forum” and the “Global Bioeconomy Summit” should be 
used to identify synergies with like-minded partners.
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
By introducing an EU-wide monitoring system with in­
dicators, the updated 2018 Strategy seeks to better 
track economic, environmental, and societal prog­
ress, and highlight trade-offs and synergies. 
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The deployment of the bioeconomy at regional level in 
the EU is quite advanced. The existence of a national 
or regional Smart Specialisation Strategy (RIS3) was 
one of the ex-ante conditionalities of the funding pe­

87
riod 2014 – 2020 for the approval of a Regional/Na­
tional Operational Program. As a result, all regions in 
the EU have a strategic RIS3 document and the vast 
majority of these strategies foresee support for bio­
economy R&I. Most of them are under the heading of 
agrifood or energy R&I. However, with regard to specif­
ic measures and funding modalities, RIS3 strategies 
propose a wide array of measures.201 The European 
Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) are an impor­
tant funding source for bioeconomy related activities 
for many RIS3 strategies. In particular, the European 
Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European 
Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), and 
the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) are 
used by the regions and countries. Overall, the ESIF 
Funds made more than EUR 450 billion available for 
the period 2014 – 2020.202 Mapping in 2017 revealed 
a number of subregions in the EU that had coupled 
bioeconomy development with their RIS3 strategies, 
including the Central Hungarian region, the Island of 
Crete (Greece), the Spanish regions of Extremadura, 
Galicia and the Basque country, the Haute de France 
region (France), Lapland (Finland), the Lodzkie region 
(Poland), North Denmark, the Norte region (Portugal), 
Olomouc and South Bohemia (Czech Republic), Up­
per Austria, Värmland and Skåne regions (Sweden), 
Weser-Ems region (Germany), West Romania, and the 
Emilia Romagna (Italy).203 
In addition, a number of collaboration initiatives sur­
rounding the bioeconomy seek to exploit synergies 
from different regions, i.e. the Smart Specialisation 
Platform S3, European Regions Research and Innova­
tion Network (ERRIN), European Regions for Innova­
tion in Agriculture, Food and Forestry (ERIAFF), and 
The Vanguard Initiative.204 Furthermore, a number of 
regional “bioeconomy ecosystems or clusters” have 
blossomed over the years.205
REFERENCES
178 European Commission. (2012). Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A 
Bioeconomy for Europe. Available at  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-
detail/-/publication/1f0d8515-8dc0-4435-ba53-9570e47dbd51 [10.09.20]
179	 Bio-Based Industries Joint Undertaking. (2020). A high-impact initiative for 
green recovery of Europe. Available at https://www.bbi-europe.eu/sites/default/
files/documents/bbiju-impact-green-recovery.pdf [11.09.20]
180 Bioeconomy. (n.d.). ec.europa.eu. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/
programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/bioeconomy [20.10.20]
181	 European Innovation Partnership “Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability”. 
(2020). Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/european-
innovation-partnership-agricultural [10.09.20]
182	 European Commission. (2015). Closing the loop - An EU action plan for the 
Circular Economy. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0614 [11.09.20]
183 European Commission. (2018). A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: 
strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment: 
Updated Bioeconomy Strategy. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/research/
bioeconomy/pdf/ec_bioeconomy_strategy_2018.pdf [11.09.20]
184 European Commission. (2018). A Clean Planet for all: A European strategic 
long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate 
neutral economy. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52018DC0773 [11.09.20]
185 European Commission. (2019). Reflection Paper: Towards a Sustainable Europe 
by 2030. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/
files/rp_sustainable_europe_30-01_en_web.pdf [11.09.20]
186 European Commission. (2019). The European Green Deal. Available at https://
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1588580774040&uri=CELEX%3
A52019DC0640 [11.09.20]
187 European Commission. (2020). A new Circular Economy Action Plan: For a 
cleaner and more competitive Europe. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.
eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN 
[11.09.20]
188	 European Commission. (2020). A New Industrial Strategy for Europe. Available 
at https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/communication-eu-industrial-
strategy-march-2020_en.pdf [11.09.20]
189	 European Commission. (2020). A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and 
environmentally-friendly food system. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/
legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0381 [11.09.20]
190 European Commission. (2020). EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing 
nature back into our lives. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/
EN/TXT/?qid=1590574123338&uri=CELEX:52020DC0380 [11.09.20]
191 The EU defines nature-based solutions as “(…) solutions that are inspired 
and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide 
environmental, social and economic benefits and help build resilience” 
European Commission. (2016).Topics: Nature-based solutions. Available at 
https://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/index.cfm?pg=nbs [13.09.20]
192 European Commission. (2013). A new EU Forest Strategy: for forests and the 
forest-based sector. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
ALL/?uri=celex%3A52013DC0659 [11.09.20]
193 European Commission. (2019). Presentation: Horizon Europe. Available at 
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/research_and_innovation/ec_rtd_he-
presentation_062019_en.pdf [21.09.20]
194	 European Commission. (2017). Review of the 2012 European Bioeconomy 
Strategy. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/pdf/review_
of_2012_eu_bes.pdf [11.09.20]
195	 European Bioeconomy Stakeholders. (2017). European Bioeconomy Stake-
holders Manifesto. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/
pdf/european_bioeconomy_stakeholders_manifesto.pdf [11.09.20]
196	 Nova Institute. (2020). European Bioeconomy in Figures 2008–2017. Available 
at http://bio-based.eu/markets/ [21.09.20]
197	 Ronzon, T., Piotrowski, S., Tamosiunas, S., Dammer, L., Carus, M., M’barek, R. 
(2020). Developments of Economic Growth and Employment in Bioeconomy 
Sectors across the EU. Available at https://www.mdpi.com/2071-
1050/12/11/4507 [11.09.20]
198 European Circular Bioeconomy Fund. Available at https://www.ecbf.vc 
[21.09.20]
199 Knowledge Centre for Bioeconomy. Available here https://ec.europa.eu/
knowledge4policy/bioeconomy [29.09.20]
200 BioMonitor: Monitoring the Bioeconomy. Available at http://biomonitor.eu 
[13.09.20]
201 European Commission. (2017). Bioeconomy development in EU regions: 
Mapping of EU Member States’ / regions’ Research and Innovation plans 
& Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) on Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/pdf/publications/bioeconomy_
development_in_eu_regions.pdf [01.10.20]
202	 European Commission. (2015). European Structural Investment Funds 2014-
2020: Official texts and commentaries. Available at http://ec.europa. eu/
regional_policy/sources/docgener/guides/blue_book/blueguide_en.pdf 17 
[13.11.17]
203 European Commission. (2017). Bioeconomy development in EU regions: 
Mapping of EU Member States’ / regions’ Research and Innovation plans 
& Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) on Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/pdf/publications/bioeconomy_
development_in_eu_regions.pdf [01.10.20]
204	 Biobased Industries Consortium. (2017). Access to EU Financial Instruments 
suitable for the implementation of large Bio-based Industry investments. 
Available at https://biconsortium.eu/sites/biconsortium.eu/files/downloads/
BIC_Financial_Instruments_web.pdf [01.10.20]
205 European Commission. (2017). Bioeconomy development in EU regions: 
Mapping of EU Member States’ / regions’ Research and Innovation plans 
& Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) on Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/pdf/publications/bioeconomy_
development_in_eu_regions.pdf [01.10.20]

88
Finland
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Beginning in 2009, Finnish Innovation Fund Sitra 
published three documents which can be seen as 
milestones on the path toward the development of a 
Finnish bioeconomy strategy. The Natural Resource 
Strategy of 2009206 was developed to promote the 
sustainable and innovative use of natural resources by 
addressing six key areas, one of which covers the bio­
economy. Alongside economic and ecological aims, the 
document “Distributed Bio-Based Economy – Driving 
Sustainable Growth” of 2011207 also pursues social 
aims, with the intention of helping to face the chal­
lenges of climate change and the scarcity of natural 
resources. The paper further presents a vision of an 
almost self-sufficient Finnish society in respect of nutri­
ents, food, and energy. Within the report, “Sustainable 
Bio-economy: Potential, Challenges and Opportunities 
for Finland” (2011),208 Sitra highlighted the importance 
of bioeconomy in relation to sustainable food produc­
tion and the replacement of fossil natural resources. 
In 2014, Finland published its first comprehensive 
policy strategy on the bioeconomy, “The Finnish Bio­
economy Strategy – Sustainable growth from bio­
economy.”209 The importance of the 2014 Finnish 
Strategy is undisputed. As one of the first national 
bioeconomy strategies in Europe, it presented an am­
bitious list of measures, propelling it to become the 
leading bioeconomy nation in Europe. 
In 2016, Finland was one of the first countries world­
wide to present a Road Map to a Circular Economy 
2016 – 2025.210 Two of the five topics prioritized are 
closely linked to the bioeconomy, namely sustain­
able food systems and forestry cycles. In 2019, Sitra 
launched an updated road map, “Critical Move – Fin­
land’s Road Map to a Circular Economy 2.0,” with the 
goal of plotting Finland’s development to 2025, rais­
ing the level of ambition, and connecting it to climate 
change mitigation.211
The Energy and Climate Strategy in 2016212 set out to 
increase the share of biofuels in road transport to 30% 
by 2030 and to increase the proportion of electricity 
generated from biomass.213 In addition, the National 
Forestry Strategy 2025 (originally drafted in 2015 
and then updated in 2019), the National Biodiversity 
Strategy (2012 – 2020),214 and a National Strategy for 
Aquaculture 2022215 also interlock strongly with the 
country’s bioeconomy strategy. 
In 2018, the Ministry of the Environment published 
the Plastics Roadmap for Finland,216 which proposes, 
among other things, the establishment of a national 
program to develop new value networks for solutions, 
materials and technologies to replace plastics, and a 
New Plastics Finland knowledge network of expertise 
to promote biomaterials. 
Under the government program of Prime Minister Rinne 
(June to December 2019) and the current Prime Minister 
Marin, Finland has ambitiously pledged to become carbon 
neutral by 2035.217 In July 2019, Finland took over the EU

89
The Finnish strategy, published in 2014, appeared to 
hold a strategic position in the government and was giv­
en priority in the program of the subsequent regime. In 
the program of Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s Government 
(2015-2019), a total of EUR 323 million was allocated 
to the priority area Bioeconomy and clean solutions 
between 2016 and 2018.222 This strategic priority area 
set four objectives (energy and climate, deregulation, 
job creation, and economic viability of food production), 
chose five key projects (these projects were partially 
based on the 2014 Finnish Bioeconomy Strategy), and 
appointed a ministerial working group to oversee its 
work. More recent policy developments in the country 
have prioritized circular economy proposals.
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The Finnish bioeconomy strategy of 2014 was de­
veloped under the responsibility of the Ministry of 
Employment and the Economy, and in cooperation 
with the Prime Minister’s Office and other ministries, 
including the Ministries of Agriculture and Forestry; 
Environment; Education and Culture; Social Affairs 
and Health, and Finance. The public VTT Technical 
Research Centre and the Finnish Innovation Fund 
SITRA were also involved in this project. The strategy 
development was preceded by stakeholder consulta­
tions (including five workshops, three regional bio­
economy forums and eight sectoral hearings) with 
regional representatives and economic operators. 
In 2018, the National Audit Office (NAOF) published 
an audit of the 2014 Strategy and determined that 
“the preparatory process provided, as a whole, a 
good basis for achieving the objectives laid out for 
the strategy.” It found the drafting process was prop­
erly organized and involved a large number of stake­
holders. However, documents were not properly ar­
chived, leading to a lack of transparency.223 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
Presidency and presented a program with a strong em­
phasis on sustainability and circularity, and on implement­
ing the European Commission’s updated bioeconomy 
strategy. A major event under Finland’s Presidency includ­
ed the European Bioeconomy Scene 2019 conference in 
Helsinki. Other major bioeconomy related events hosted 
by Finland include the Koli Forum, the World Bioeconomy 
Forum (2018, 2019, 2020), the World Circular Economy 
Forum, and Food Economy 4.0 (2017).
In addition to Sitra, the state owned VTT Technical 
Research Centre of Finland has been supporting the 
bioeconomy transition with a number of important 
publications.218 In 2017, VTT expanded operation 
of the Bioruukki pilot centre, one of VTT’s biggest 
investments, from thermochemistry to novel ways 
of biomass utilization, recycling of textile fibers, and 
green chemistry technologies.219
Finland has entered into international partnerships 
with the U.S. State of Maine and Michigan to further 
develop the bioeconomy. In October of 2019, the 
State of Maine and Finland (coordinated through 
the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland) 
signed a five-year Memorandum of Understanding 
(MoU) to foster an exchange of information and co­
operation to develop a bioeconomy that is based on 
forests and the use of wood.220 In March of 2020, 
the Finnish Minister of Economic Affairs and the 
Governor of Michigan signed an MoU on clean tech­
nology development, particularly in the areas of in­
telligent transport, including the car industry and 
maritime, battery technology, and bioeconomy. The 
focus of the MoU is initially on the R&D side, but the 
goal is to build valuable long-term partnerships in 
support of market access and bilateral investment 
opportunities.221

90
The Finnish bioeconomy definition refers to “an 
economy that relies on renewable natural resources 
to produce food, energy, products, and services.” 
The definition is expansive and cuts across tradi­
tional sectoral boundaries linking wood processing, 
chemistry, energy, construction, technology, food, 
and wellbeing solutions.
According to the latest statistics from 2018, the 
bioeconomy accounted for 12 percent of Finland’s 
gross added value or EUR 25.2 billion, with the larg­
est sector, forestry (EUR 9.1 billion), followed by con­
struction (EUR 4.4 billion), food (EUR 3.9 billion), and 
other industries (EUR 3.5 billion). It has an output of 
almost EUR 73 billion (almost 17% of total output) 
and employs more than 300,000 people, a slight 
decrease from a peak in 2011.224 
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The Finnish bioeconomy strategy was designed as 
a growth strategy and therefore envisions sustain­
able bioeconomy solutions as drivers for Finnish 
well-being and competitiveness. According to the 
vision, sustainable bioeconomy solutions should be 
the foundation of wellbeing and competitiveness in 
Finland in 2025. The vision contains both quantita­
tive and time-related goals. The document contains 
four strategic goals listed in its “action plan”. 
The strategy sets out a detailed list of actions and 
measures and identifies the bodies responsible for 
implementing each of these, with most predicted 
to start by the end of 2014. The first goal is to cre­
ate a competitive operating environment for the 
bioeconomy by promoting a climate favorable to 
investment and entrepreneurship. In order to coor­
dinate the various stakeholders in the bioeconomy 
sector, it establishes a national bioeconomy pan­
el. Secondly, the strategy targets the generation 
of new bioeconomy businesses which should be 
promoted, for example, by means of new funding 
solutions and exemplary pilot and demonstration 
projects. Thirdly, expanded research and the train­
ing of experts should foster the creation of a strong 
bioeconomy competence base. Fourthly, the strat­
egy aims to ensure the accessibility and sustain­
ability of biomass. 
These key goals are specified by numerous mea­
sures which do not mention concrete quantitative 
targets but should collectively contribute to an in­
creased bioeconomy output of up to EUR 100 bil­
lion by 2025 (up from EUR 60 billion in 2011).225 It 
should also create about 100,000 new jobs.
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
As Finland is home to a vast number of forests (al­
most 80% of Finland’s total area is forestry land), the 
core element of the country’s bioeconomy is the for­
estry industry. According to the strategy, the forestry 
industry has great potential to contribute to economic 
growth in Finland, for example by strengthening the 
timber market or due to the diversification of wood 
products. Wood is also of particular importance for 
energy purposes. Wood-based transport fuel, for ex­
ample, is increasingly used in Finland. 
The strategy considers the greatest opportunities for 
growth to be found in new products and materials, 
particularly in forestry, chemical and energy indus­
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6

91
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
For each of its measures, the strategy identifies which 
ministries and other public bodies (e.g. TEKES, SITRA, 
the Academy of Finland, and Team Finland) are respon­
sible for leading on implementation. The Strategy is 
largely policy-led and some measures are implemented 
solely by national public bodies (e.g. mapping policy 
steering instruments, developing criteria for sustain­
able public procurement). The most important state 
funding agencies include Finland’s state-owned devel­
opment bank Finnvera, the Research and Development 
Fund SITRA, the ELY centers, and Business Finland, 
created in 2018 by merging two organizations: the 
trade promotion organization, Finpro, and the technol­
ogy and Innovation Promotion Agency, Tekes. 
Measures call for allocating public research and in­
novation funding to the bioeconomy by encouraging 
Finnish actors to take part in international research 
networks, launching a collection of information on 
biomass resources and ecosystem services, as part 
of a national system for natural resource accounting 
and developing statistics systems on the bioeconomy, 
and developing and funding cooperation platforms 
(e.g. Strategic Centres for Science, Technology and 
Innovation or SHOKs, Finland’s Innovative Cities Pro­
gramme or INKA) to bring together actors in various 
sectors. The Academy of Finland and Tekes provide 
opportunities for research to work with companies 
within these SHOKs. One of these Centres or SHOKs, 
CLIC innovation Ltd, is an open innovation cluster with 
the mission of creating solutions in the bioeconomy, 
circular economy, and energy systems. 
Experimental, smart, green, urban regions, aimed at 
developing, testing and demonstrating new ideas, are 
also supported and partly delivered through existing 
cooperation models such as SHOK Centres and INKA 
programme projects (which focused on 12 cities and 
five themes, including the bioeconomy and sustain­
able energy). Measures also call for funding for pilot 
and demonstration projects of new bioeconomy solu­
tions. 
With regard to infrastructure development, while not 
highlighted in the 2014 strategy, Finland has made 
great progress in implementing the bioeconomy with 
an impressive number of biorefineries operating com­
mercially (e.g. Metsä Group in Äänekoski) and very ac­
tive, world-renowned industry players (e.g. Stora Enso, 
Matsä, Neste, UPM). 
Commercialization is fostered in a number of ways. 
Measures call for increasing equity financing in the 
bioeconomy by ensuring the availability of risk financ­
ing for companies. An open international biorefinery 
competition, launched in 2014, also sought to accel­
tries. Strong Finnish competence areas also include 
biochemical methods, pulping technologies, and en­
zyme production for refining biomass.
The strategy highlights the possibilities that arise 
from Finnish expertise in biotechnology, in the health 
sector, for example, by developing health technolo­
gies and pharmaceutical research. Interestingly, the 
Finnish bioeconomy strategy underlines the impor­
tance of water as the prerequisite for a successful 
bioeconomy. Clean water is mentioned as a critical 
resource which is commonly used within the bioecon­
omy. There is therefore a need for improved tech­
nologies for water efficiency and water recycling. The 
Finnish forestry industry is already leading by example 
in this area by developing and using processes with 
low water consumption. 
In addition to products, the Finnish bioeconomy strat­
egy focuses on services and their importance for the 
value chain. By reflecting emerging trends related to 
increasing service intensity, services (such as nature 
tourism) are seen as new business opportunities. 
Based on the assumption that the Finnish bioecon­
omy will increase in the future and therefore more 
biomass resources will be needed, the strategy also 
focuses on evaluation methods. This represents a 
first attempt to measure bioeconomy activities re­
lated to sustainability.

92
erate commercialization and boost new biorefinery 
investments in Finland.226 
New developments, not cited in the strategy, include the 
Bio and Circular Finland program run by Business Finland, 
which provides a number of services/funding to support 
the development of competitive bio and circular economy 
solutions and ecosystems. A central aim is to increase 
exports of bio and circular economy solutions.227 In ad­
dition, the BioNets program (2016-2018) funded and 
supported an array of bioeconomy projects, creating 
new networks and ecosystems and pilot solutions.228
Demand-side instruments include promoting the 
standardization and certification of bioeconomy so­
lutions, and developing criteria for sustainable public 
procurement. Further communication and the pro­
motion of public discussion is also encouraged. For 
example, an exclusive website on the bioeconomy 
was launched in 2012 to provide information about 
recent developments.229 
Beyond increasing awareness of the bioeconomy 
among young people, measures to support education 
and capacity building seek to update qualifications and 
retraining, and deepen cooperation between universi­
ties and research institutes.
Framework conditions include the promotion of intan­
gible value creation (e.g. brand management, intellec­
tual property rights, and design). In addition, measures 
call for mapping of the opportunities for nature tourism 
and other service activities which rely on natural val­
ues. Lastly, they encourage the promotion of exports 
of biobased products and technologies. 
With regard to good governance measures, the strat­
egy employs a number of tactics. In 2015, a national 
Bioeconomy Panel was established to facilitate a con­
tinuous dialogue between public authorities, research 
institutions, business and civil society. The Panel’s 
term of office lasted until April 2019 and should be 
set up again in 2020 with a new mandate to review 
the strategy. In addition to the panel, the Technical 
Research Centre of Finland (VTT) set up a Bioeconomy 
Forum. It acts as the operational arm of the Panel and 
prepares presentations on R&D and innovation, and 
implements the Panel’s proposals. The forum com­
prises representatives from associations, clusters, 
research institutes, and ministries.
Other measures are aimed at evaluating and updated 
the sustainability of biomass use by generally accepted 
methods (e.g. the European RES Directive, Timber Reg­
ulation, Pan-European criteria and indicators for sus­
tainable forest management, and domestic certifica­
tion systems). Among the range of indicators proposed 
to monitor implementation of the bioeconomy strategy, 
the aim was to measure its environmental benefits 
as well as its sustainability. In addition, the strategy 
aimed to develop a range of sustainability indicators 
for ecosystem services, environmental and resource-
efficiency, as well as environmental assets.230 
Other measures included a regulatory survey on “Bio­
economy bottlenecks and boosters,” the results of 
which were published in 2017231 and open access 
to biomass data with the Biomass Atlas launched in 
2017.232 
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Implementation is led by national public bodies (co­
ordination is led by the Ministry of Employment and 
the Economy), but other stakeholders (especially 
from the fields of business and research) implement 
specific projects. The Bioeconomy Panel is also con­
sulted on the strategy’s implementation. The new 
national Bioeconomy Panel will be charged with 
overseeing an update of the strategy in 2021.
According to a 2018 audit, the starting point of the 
bioeconomy-operating environment was extensively 
and systematically analyzed in the preparation of 
the strategy. The audit criticized the lack of foresight 
methods, and the fact that the indicators could not 
be used to monitor implementation of the measures 
or achievement of the strategic goals.233

93
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The region of North Karelia has been actively draft­
ing a bioeconomy strategy.234 In 2017, it released a 
“Roadmap Towards Oil-Free and Low-Carbon North 
Karelia by 2040” with one of the main sections fo­
cusing on natural resources and bioeconomy.235
REFERENCES
206	Sitra. (2009). Natural Resources - An Opportunity for Change. Available at 
https://www.sitra.fi/en/publications/natural-resources-opportunity-change/ 
[21.08.20]
207	 Sitra. (2011). Distributed Bio- Based Economy – Driving Sustainable Growth. 
Available at https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/23070426/Distributed_
BioBased_Economy-7.pdf [21.08.20]
208 Sitra. (2011). Sustainable Bio-economy: Potential, Challenges and 
Opportunities for Finland.
209	Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. (2014). The Finnish Bioeconomy 
Strategy – Sustainable growth from bioeconomy. Available at  http://
biotalous.fi/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/The_Finnish_Bioeconomy_
Strategy_110620141.pdf [21.08.20]
210	 Sitra. (2016). Leading the cycle - Finnish road map to a circular economy 
2016–2025. Available at https://media.sitra.fi/2017/02/24032659/
Selvityksia121.pdf [21.08.20]
211	 Sitra. (2019). Critical Move — Finland’s Road Map to a Circular Economy 2.0. 
Available at  https://www.sitra.fi/en/projects/critical-move-finnish-road-map-
circular-economy-2-0/ [21.08.20]
212	 Ministry of economic Affairs and Employment. (2017). Government Report 
on the National Energy and Climate Strategy for 2030. Available at http://
julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/handle/10024/79247 [21.08.20]
213	 Ministry of economic Affairs and Employment. (2018). Finland’s Integrated 
National Energy and Climate Plan. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/
energy/sites/ener/files/documents/finland_draftnecp.pdf [20.10.20]
214	 Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland. (2019). National 
Forestry Strategy of Finland 2025. Available at https://mmm.
fi/documents/1410837/2000444/Brochure_National_Forest_
Strategy_2025_updated_version.pdf/9e32e0b9-ee2a-b906-8222-
8c3a7df5f7d0/Brochure_National_Forest_Strategy_2025_updated_
version.pdf [21.08.20]
215	 Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland. (n.d.). National Strategy for 
Aquaculture 2022. Available at https://mmm.fi/en/fisheries/strategies-and-
programmes/aquaculture-strategy [21.08.20]
216	 Ministry of the Environment. (2018). Reduce and refuse, recycle 
and replace. A Plastics Roadmap for Finland. Available at https://
www.ym.fi/download/noname/%7BE2742BCE-A979-4C04-8512-
02BE7EBB2392%7D/151738  [21.08.20]
217 Ministry of the Environment (2019). Government’s climate policy: carbon-
neutral Finland by 2035. Available at https://www.ym.fi/en-US/The_
environment/Climate_and_air/CarbonNeutral_Finland_2035 [21.08.20]
218	 Examples include the Bio-Based Carbon Materials Road-Map (2016), 
the Food Economy 4.0 (2017), Bits and biomass: A roadmap to the 
digitalisation-empowered bioeconomy (2017), the Carbon Reuse 
Economy (2019), and the Synthetic biology as an enabler of a sustainable 
bioeconomy – A roadmap for Finland (2017). Available at https://cris.vtt.fi/
en/publications/ [30.09.20]
219	 VTT expands its bio and circular economy pilot centre. (2017). Available at  
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-06/vtrc-vei060117.php 
[20.10.20]
220 	Finland and the State of Maine agree on cooperation in forest bioeconomy. 
(2019). Available at https://www.bioeconomy.fi/suomi-ja-maine-sopivat-
yhteistyosta-metsabiotalouden-kehittamisessa/ [20.10.20]
221	 Finland and Michigan lead the way in the transition towards a cleaner 
economy. (2020). Available at https://finlandabroad.fi/web/usa/current-
affairs/-/asset_publisher/h5w4iTUJhNne/content/finland-and-michigan-
lead-the-way-in-the-transition-towards-a-cleaner-economy/384951 
[20.10.20]
222 National Audit Office Finland (NAOF). (2019). Conclusions and 
recommendations of the National Audit Office. Available at https://www.vtv.
fi/app/uploads/2019/10/NAOF-recommendations-13-2019-Bioeconomy-
as-a-key-Government-project.pdf [21.08.20]
223 National Audit Office Finland (NAOF). (2019). Conclusions and 
recommendations of the National Audit Office. Available at https://www.vtv.
fi/app/uploads/2018/09/21091342/NAOF-recommendations-17-2018-
Preparation-of-the-Finnish-Bioeconomy-Strategy.pdf [21.08.20] 
224	 Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke). (2018). Finnish bioeconomy in 
numbers. Available at https://www.luke.fi/en/natural-resources/finnish-
bioeconomy-in-numbers/ [21.08.20]
225	In 2018 the bioeconomy had an output of almost EUR 73 billion.
226	Ministry of Employment and the Economy. (2014). International 
Biorefinery Competition. Available at https://finlandabroad.
fi/documents/384951/405231/international_biorefinery_
competition_handout.pdf/cb57b6d3-4dd4-662d-a27c-
e8b5b9b9d84a?t=1556567463276 [01.10.20]
227 Business Finland. (n.d.). Bio and Circular Finland. Available at https://www.
businessfinland.fi/en/for-finnish-customers/services/programs/bio-and-
circular-finland/ [01.10.20]
228 Business Finland. (n.d.). BIONETS (2016-2018). Available at https://www.
businessfinland.fi/en/for-finnish-customers/services/programs/ended-
programs/bionets/ [01.10.20]
229 Bioeconomy.fi. (n.d.). Available at https://www.bioeconomy.fi/ [01.10.20]
230	OECD. (2019). Bio-Economy and the Sustainability of the Agriculture and 
Food System: Opportunities and Policy Challenges. Available at http://www.
oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=COM/TAD/
CA/ENV/EPOC(2018)15/FINAL&docLanguage=En [01.10.20]
231	 Finnish Government. (2017). Bioeconomy promotion needs regulations and 
research but also people. Available at https://valtioneuvosto.fi/-/10616/
biotalouden-edistaminen-kaipaa-tuekseen-saantelyn-ja-tutkimuksen-lisaksi-
myos-kansalaisia?languageId=en_US  [01.10.20]
232 Biomass Atlas. (n.d.). Available at https://www.luke.fi/biomassa-atlas/en/ 
[01.10.20]
233 National Audit Office Finland (NAOF). (2019). Conclusions and 
recommendations of the National Audit Office. Available at https://www.vtv.
fi/app/uploads/2018/09/21091342/NAOF-recommendations-17-2018-
Preparation-of-the-Finnish-Bioeconomy-Strategy.pdf [21.08.20] 
234 Regional Council of North Karelia. (2019). Available at https://www.regione.
toscana.it/documents/10180/16281413/1.3_Firenze+28032019+Risto+P
outiainen.pdf/00f7f74e-793f-44ab-9fee-a18b0c4bf502 [20.10.20]
235	Regional Council of North Karelia. (2017). Roadmap Towards Oil-Free and 
Low-Carbon North Karelia by 2040. Available at https://www.pohjois-karjala.
fi/documents/78304/361071/Summary+of+the+Roadmap+Towards+Oil-
Free+and+Low-Carbon+North+Karelia+(long+version).pdf/e0b46404-da12-
42d6-5f01-824fcb2cb0bc [20.10.20]

94
France
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
As one of Europe’s largest agricultural producers 
and host to one of Europe’s biggest biorefineries (La 
Mède) and leading Bioeconomy Clusters (IAR), France 
has a long tradition in bioeconomy development and 
policy support. The term “bioeconomy”, however, was 
not widely used in France prior to the publication of 
a national bioeconomy strategy in 2017, rather the 
biobased economy was discussed within the context 
of the green economy or industrial ecology. 
Prior to the national strategy, important areas of bio­
economy policy were addressed in autonomous strate­
gies such as the National Plan for Climate Change Ad­
aptation (2011),236 the National Biodiversity Strategy 
(2011 – 2020),237 The new face of industry in France 
(2013),238 the 2013 Strategic Agenda for Research, 
Technology Transfer and Innovation (France Europe 
2020),239 and later the 2015 National Research Strat­
egy (SNR)240 During this period, two distinct approach­
es to bioeconomy prevailed: promoting cutting-edge 
technologies and motivating ecological transformation. 
In addition, this period was marked by a bottom-up 
approach in which industry acted as the driving force 
of the bioeconomy. However, the public sector was 
active in backing regional “Poles de competitivité” or 
competitiveness clusters with an ecological focus, es­
pecially those concerned with “Chimie du végétal” or 
biobased chemistry. 
In the interests of policy coherence, a proposal for 
a comprehensive national strategy on the country’s 
ecological transition was published in 2014, the “The 
National Strategy of Ecological Transition Towards 
Sustainable Development (SNTEDD),”241 with the aim 
of ensuring sustainable development. The driving idea 
was to achieve ecological transition by means of an 
industrial transition based on scientific and techno­
logical innovations, accompanied by a comprehensive 
societal transition and commonly practiced sustain­
able patterns of consumption. The majority of the 
proposed measures were legislative initiatives, includ­
ing measures for making agriculture more ecological 
(Grenelle law), plant management (law on biodiversity 
or EcoPhyto Plan), a ban on plastic bags (law on the 
future of agriculture, food and forestry) and raising of 
green taxes to the average EU level.
First launched in 2012 by the Minister of Agricul­
ture, Agri-Food and Forestry, Stéphane Le Foll, and 
enshrined into French law in 2014, the Agroecology 
Project for France aims to shift agriculture towards the 
objective of combining economic, environmental and 
social performance and expand biomass production 
using more diversified methods with less environmen­
tal impact. New actions were launched as part of a re­
vised action plan and taking stock initiative in 2016.242 
Part of the project includes the thematic areas of plant-
based proteins and agroforestry (e.g. Vegetable Pro­
tein Plan for France 2014 – 2020 and National Forest 
and Wood Program 2016 – 2026). In this same spirit, 
France launched the initiative “4 per 1000: Soils for 
Food Security and Climate” at COP21 to help increase

95
organic matter content and carbon sequestration in 
soils using appropriate agricultural practices. 
With the second largest maritime area in the world, 
France has also invested in its maritime economy and 
in 2017 released a National Strategy for the Sea and 
the Coast. In 2019, the government launched a public 
consultation on its strategies for the four coastlines 
and maritime areas of mainland France (North and 
Normandy, Brittany and Loire, Aquitaine, and Mediter­
ranean) and between 2019 – 2021 will develop action 
plans and a monitoring system.243 
In March 2017, the Economic, Social and Environ­
mental Council (CESE), a constitutional consultative 
assembly, presented its proposals for a sustainable 
bioeconomy in the document “Vers une bioéconomie 
durable.”244 It highlighted environmental and societal 
challenges of the bioeconomy which, among other 
measures, would require the adoption of new ways of 
sustainable production and consumption. 
On publishing the dedicated national bioeconomy strat­
egy “A Bioeconomy Strategy for France” in 2017 and 
a corresponding action plan in February of 2018, the 
government laid the foundations for a policy for long-
term bioeconomy development.245 
In recent years the government has continued to 
publish bioeconomy-related strategies, including a 
Roadmap for the circular economy with 50 proposed 
measures and the objectives of 30 percent reduction 
of resource consumption in relation to GDP, halving 
the amount of non-hazardous waste sent to landfills, 
and reaching 100% recycled plastic.246 The circular 
economy is regarded as the third step of the ecological 
transition, with the first step being a low carbon econ­
omy and the second step a biobased economy. The 
Roadmap promotes “industrial and territorial ecology” 
in a decentralized manner through regional schemes. 
As committed in the dedicated bioeconomy strategy, 
France adopted The National Biomass Mobilization 
Strategy (SNMB)247 in 2018, which provides a national 
framework for assessing the current and potential sup­
ply and demand for various biomass types (agricultural, 
forest-based and marine sources). A national biomass 
resources observatory has also been developed and 
has become a major source of data for regional au­
thorities that make use of bioresources.
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
The French bioeconomy strategy is consistent with 
the other national strategies relating to the produc­
tion of bioresources, their mobilization, their use, 
and environmental goals and issues: the plant 
protein plan, the agroecology project for France, 
the national low-carbon strategy, the national bio­
mass mobilization strategy and regional biomass 
schemes, the roadmap for a circular economy, the 
national biodiversity strategy, the multiyear energy 
program, the “4 per 1000” program, the national for­
est and wood program, the convention on biological 
diversity, and the national strategy for the sea and 
coastal areas. The action plan does not cover topics 
already addressed in those documents (e.g. actions 
relating to the circular economy such as biowaste 
recycling).
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The development of the bioeconomy strategy dates 
back to an inter-ministerial initiative in 2015. Four 
ministries were involved in the strategy process, in­
cluding the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Develop­
ment and Energy; the Ministry of National Education 
and Research; the Ministry of the Economy, Industry

96
In the French context, the bioeconomy encompasses 
“(…) the whole range of activities linked to the produc­
tion, use, and processing of bioresources.” The strate­
gy further highlights the circular economy component 
of the bioeconomy. In this respect, the focus is on 
closing the loop, i.e. by reusing and recycling biobased 
resources. Acceptance of the circular economy con­
cept predates the bioeconomy strategy. Years before, 
cooperation between industrial symbiosis and the 
bioeconomy was important (e.g. in the construction of 
the Bazancourt-Pomacle biorefinery complex). 
The Action Plan deliberately focuses on the nonfood 
component of the bioeconomy. It does not address 
food-related exploitation of biomass, since this is 
covered by specific policies. 
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
By developing a dedicated national bioeconomy strat­
egy, the French government primarily seeks to pro­
mote sustainable economic growth in France. More 
specifically, it strives for increased employment, an 
improved balance of trade, and international competi­
tiveness. The strategy also promotes a self-sufficiency 
argument by fostering regional and rural development, 
food sovereignty, and independence from fossil fuel 
imports. While the strategy defines issues and goals, 
it does not define targets. The strategy also highlights 
the French commitment to the Paris climate agree­
ment by stressing the bioeconomy’s potential contri­
bution to mitigating climate change.
The dedicated action plan was published in Febru­
ary 2018 and provides actions for the period from 
2018 to 2020.The plan addresses five areas of 
action, including the improvement of knowledge, 
raising of public awareness on bioeconomy and 
biobased products, promotion of the demand and 
supply side, sustainable production and utiliza­
tion of biobased resources, as well as new financ­
ing mechanisms. The strategy does not set out a 
concrete budget for implementing the measures 
proposed. 
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The French bioeconomy strategy focuses on innova­
tions in primary industries which are intended to 
contribute to the sustainable and efficient produc­
tion and utilization of bioresources. This includes, for 
example, promoting sustainable resource manage­
ment practices (including precision farming) and 
adopting innovative crop production systems (e.g. 
organic farming, agroecology and agroforestry). Re­
and the Digital Sector; and the Ministry of Agricul­
ture, Agrifood and Forestry. 
The strategy development process was further facili­
tated by various stakeholder workshops at national 
and regional level. The strategy document was offi­
cially adopted in January 2017. Two months later, a 
strategic committee on bioeconomy was established 
to support its implementation.

97
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The French bioeconomy strategy pursues a compre­
hensive approach to fostering bioeconomy develop­
ment. 
When promoting innovation, the focus is on increas­
ing public and private R&D investment. The French 
government has been providing funding for bioecon­
omy-related research and innovation programs since 
2010. For example, the “Future Investments” funding 
program, which focuses on promoting cutting-edge 
technology, will provide, over a period of ten years, 
EUR 1.5 billion for infrastructure, research, and train­
ing in the area of biotechnology, agricultural science, 
bioinformatics, and nanobiotechnology.248 In 2020, 
INRA and IRSTEA merged to form INRAE, France’s 
new National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food 
and Environment, with a new bioeconomy thematic 
research area. This focuses on exploiting biomass 
as a source of renewable carbon to produce bioma­
terials, biofuels and bioenergy, and waste recycling 
(e.g., wastewater, solid waste from agriculture or the 
agrifood industry) through a circular bioeconomy 
approach.249 In 2015, the European Center for Bio­
technology and Bioeconomy (CEBB) was established 
to promote multi-disciplinary research for the sus­
tainable production of biological resources, to foster 
biorefinery development and the agrifood industry. As 
the CEBB is situated near the Bazancourt-Pomacle 
biorefinery plant, it directly links academic research 
and its transfer into economic production.250 
Beyond this, public R&D will concentrate on better un­
derstanding photosynthesis, metabolism, and environ­
mental interactions. Advances in genetics are consid­
ered promising for increasing the overall efficiency of 
production systems and for facilitating their adaptation 
to climate change. Innovation partnerships between 
stakeholders in the primary sector and the chemical 
industry should also be encouraged. 
Developing and supporting clusters is also highlighted, 
with the aim of creating synergies between the agrifood 
and industrial sectors. In France, research and industry 
collaborations have been organized on a regional basis 
claiming uncultivated land and abandoned farmland, 
in addition to maritime and aquatic areas, also aims 
to increase the mobilization of biomass resources. 
In this respect, the strategy prioritizes the utilization 
of waste resources and residues from primary in­
dustries, as well as urban and industrial waste, e.g. 
for energy production. The action plan published in 
2018 also highlights the development of new value 
chains, e.g. based on animal by-products. 
A special characteristic of the strategy is its empha­
sis on the bioeconomy’s local dimension and the 
conversion of locally produced biomass into high 
value biobased products, such as food and feed­
stuffs, chemicals, biomaterials and bioenergy. At the 
same time, further biorefinery development and the 
integration of physical, chemical, and biological pro­
cesses and technologies (including nanotechnology, 
biotechnology, and ICT) aims to ensure sustainable 
and efficient conversion of biomass resources. Here, 
for example, the emphasis is on state-of-the-art 
bioenergy obtained from wood and organic waste 
resources. Ligno-cellulosic resources are also con­
sidered important for chemical applications in the 
pharmaceutical and food industries.
Another characteristic of the strategy is the promi­
nent role and involvement of society, which is seen 
as a prerequisite for successful transformation to a 
bioeconomy. Here, for example, the strategy docu­
ment identifies changing trends in consumer diets, 
which require investigation by conducting further 
research into consumer behavior and preferences. 
The strategy also highlights new and alternative 
food resources, e.g. from the sea, which should 
be identified to ensure the future protein supply. 
Furthermore, special consideration will be given to 
sea regions and their huge deposits of biological 
resources. In this respect, the focus is on identifying 
overseas bioresources and evaluating their potential 
for industrial use.

98
since 2005, within the framework “pôles de compétitiv­
ité”. Pôle IAR – le pole de la bioéconomie is the leading 
French bioeconomy cluster, AXELERA is the cluster for 
chemistry-environment in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes 
region of France, and Mer Bretagne Atlantique and 
Méditerranée focus on the maritime sector.
Support for infrastructure development concentrates in 
particular on the funding of shared R&D facilities and on 
biorefinery development. After Finland, France has some 
of the strongest biorefineries in Europe. France has a 
strong industrial biobased sector with several large 
chemical and fuel companies active in the bioeconomy 
(e.g. France is the EU’s largest producer of bioethanol 
and has several large agro-industrial companies).
Measures related to promoting commercialization con­
centrate in particular on bringing biobased products to 
the market. The emphasis is therefore on increased 
marketing efforts, e.g. by showcasing biobased prod­
ucts from around the world on the www.agrobiobase.
com website. This website provides information on 
product origin and the product’s environmental ben­
efits. At the same time, it provides a B2B platform for 
developing the market for biobased products. Other 
tools for promoting commercialization are mentioned, 
e.g. demonstration platforms, living labs, and feasibil­
ity studies. The action plan of 2018 also highlights the 
need to facilitate access to capital for biobased com­
panies and to raise awareness of potential investors, 
such as banks, business angels, pension funds, invest­
ment funds, etc. The Biobased-Industries Consortium 
(BBI) should be increasingly considered for financing 
public-private bioeconomy projects. 
The government considers it extremely important to 
educate and train the workforce for the future bioecon­
omy. The focus here is on inter-disciplinary education 
and capacity building, including technical and vocational 
training, as well as life-long learning opportunities. Es­
tablishing the European Center for Biotechnology and 
Bioeconomy has leveraged the scientific and technical 
expertise of AgroParisTech, CentraleSupélec, the NEOMA 
Business School and the University of Reims Cham­
pagne-Ardenne. In this respect, it has also increased the 
support for bioeconomic-relevant chairs and academic 
programs (e.g. in the area of biotechnology, biomateri­
als, and green chemistry). The strategy document also 
stresses the need to strengthen the demand side of 
the bioeconomy, i.e. by raising awareness of biobased 
products through standards, certifications, and labels 
(e.g. a dedicated label for biobased products). The strat­
egy draws attention to the review of the French law on 
public procurement, which will also take biobased char­
acteristics into account. In addition, favorable taxation, 
subsidies and price setting measures (e.g. by means of 
a regulated purchase price for the electricity produced 
using by biogas and biomethane) will incentivize the use 
of biofuels. The action plan of 2018 addresses the de­
mand side by proposing several measures. For example, 
it foresees the establishment of a bioeconomy website 
which provides information, i.e. on R&D projects and 
success stories for the general public and bioeconomy 
professionals. It also mentions the development of an ex­
hibition concept which will showcase the bioeconomy in 
everyday life, and the setting up of a bioeconomy award 
which honors successful projects and companies. As a 
flagship project, the action plan highlights the building 
of a biobased Olympic village for the Olympic Games 
in 2024, which could showcase biobased materials in 
construction, e.g. wood, hemp, flax fiber, etc. 
Promoting policy coherence at regional, national and 
EU level is considered critical for bioeconomy devel­
opment. With a view to good governance, the strat­
egy plans to nominate a national bioeconomy council 
which would be composed of stakeholders from indus­
try, NGOs, academics, and research institutes, as well 
as local, regional, and national decision-makers. The 
policy document also highlights the need to encourage 
multi-stakeholder dialogues (especially at local level) to 
promote outreach and participation. It also prioritizes 
monitoring biomass resources, e.g. by strengthening 
the national resource observatory (ONRB). 
The strategy also emphasizes international collabo­
ration in the bioeconomy. France intends to actively 
engage in bioeconomy-related discourse conducted on 
international policy and research fora, e.g. within the 
European Union, the Organization for Economic Coop­
eration and Development (OECD), the International En­
ergy Agency, the United Nations Environment Program, 
and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. 
In order to create bioeconomy-friendly framework 
conditions, the strategy proposes regulations foster­
ing the use of biofuels and biobased, compostable 
plastic bags but also regulations supporting the use 
of biobased innovation in the construction sector (e.g. 
using hemp materials in construction).

99
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
No monitoring framework is mentioned.
In August 2018, at the Châlons-en-Champagne fair, the 
regions of Ile-de-France, Hauts-de-France and Grand 
Est signed a Biopact, aimed at strengthening coopera­
tion and pooling of their regions’ resources in order to 
pursue a territorial strategy for the bioeconomy and 
agro-resources. This three-year action plan aims to give 
these territories visibility at national and international 
level, and also intends to boost cross-border coopera­
tion to bring European projects to the fore.
In September 2018, the Hauts-de-France region in 
northern France adopted a regional Bioeconomy Mas­
terplan.251 The region has a strong higher-education 
and research infrastructure, many competitive clus­
ters (e.g. IAR), and an innovative agriculture, food and 
chemistry industry. The roadmap perceives the bio­
economy in line with the “Third Industrial Revolution” 
by seeking to encourage renewable energies, energy 
efficiency, and a circular economy. This strategic plan 
presents four major ambitions and 40 actions: 1) 
becoming a European leader in proteins (vegetable 
proteins, insects, micro algae, and dairy proteins), 2) 
establishing a sustainable biobased materials sector 
(e.g. transport and construction), 3) achieving 25% 
biogas in renewable energy produced by 2025, and 4) 
promoting bioproduction (e.g. through biotechnology 
and biobased chemistry). 
In October 2019, the Region Grand Est adopted its 
Regional Plan for the Bioeconomy: a strategy serving 
the growth and competitiveness of businesses in the 
region.252 The Bioeconomy Strategy is based on five 
priorities: 1) establishing energy strategies at the local 
level, 2) developing territorial biorefineries, 3) deploying 
sustainable agriculture to produce better and more, 4) 
biomaterials to build and renovate buildings, 5) food 
with biobased ingredients, sustainable packaging, and 
increased traceability.
REFERENCES
236	 Ministry of Ecological Transition. (2011). National Adaptation Plan - France 
(2011-2015). Available at https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/metadata/
publications/national-adaptation-plan-france-2011-2015 [22.08.20]
237 Ministry for the Ecological Transition. (2011). Stratégie nationale de la 
biodiversité. Available at https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/fr/fr-nbsap-v2-en.pdf 
[22.08.20]
238	 Ministry for Industrial Renewal. (2013). The new face of industry in France. 
Available at https://www.economie.gouv.fr/files/nouvelle_france_industrielle_
english.pdf [22.08.20]
239 Ministry of Higher Education and Research. (2013). France Europe 2020: A 
Strategic Agenda for Research, Technology Transfer and Innovation. Available at 
https://www.france-science.com/IMG/pdf/france-europe-2020_-_a_strategic_
agenda_for_research_technology_transfer_and_innovation.pdf [22.08.20]
240 Ministry of Higher Education and Research. (2015). Stratégie National de 
Recherche. Available at https://cache.media.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.
fr/file/Strategie_Recherche/26/9/strategie_nationale_recherche_397269.pdf 
[22.08.20]
241 Ministry of Ecological Transition. (2014). La stratégie nationale de transition 
écologique vers un développement durable (SNTEDD) 2014-2020. Available at 
http://www.consultations-publiques.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/
Avant_projet_SNTEDD_20_mars_2014.pdf [22.08.20]
242 Ministry of Agriculture and Food. (2016). Le projet agro-écologique en 12 clés. 
Available at https://agriculture.gouv.fr/le-projet-agro-ecologique-en-12-cles 
[22.08.20]
243 Ministry of Ecological Transition. (2019). Stratégies de façade maritime. 
Available at https://www.merlittoral2030.gouv.fr/ [22.08.20]
244 Economic, Social and Environmental Council. (2017). Vers une bioéconomie 
durable. Available at https://www.lecese.fr/sites/default/files/pdf/
Avis/2017/2017_08_bioeconomie_durable.pdf [22.08.20]
245 Ministry of Agriculture. (2018). A bioeconomy strategy for France: 2018-2020 
Action plan. Available at https://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/
locale/piece-jointe/2018/10/france-bioeconomy_plan.pdf [22.08.20]
246 Ministry of Ecological Transition. (2018). 50 measures for a 100% circular 
economy. Available at https://www.ecologique-solidaire.gouv.fr/sites/default/
files/FREC%20anglais.pdf [22.08.20]
247 Ministry of Agriculture. (2018). Stratégie nationale de mobilisation de la 
biomasse (SNMB). Available at https://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/
Stratégie%20Nationale%20de%20Mobilisation%20de%20la%20Biomasse.pdf 
[22.08.20]
248	 French National Research Agency. (2018). Investments for the Future. Available 
at http://www.agence-nationale-recherche.fr/en/about-anr/ investments-for-
the-future/ [22.02.18].
249 INRAE. (2020). Bioeconomy. Avalable at https://www.inrae.fr/en/bioeconomy 
[22.08.20]
250 CEBB. (2017). Qui sommes nous. Available at http://cebb-innovation.eu 
[22.02.18].
251 Region Hauts-de-France. (2018). Master Plan de la Bioéconomie en Hauts-
de-France. Available at  https://www.hautsdefrance.fr/categorie/dossiers/
bioeconomie/ [22.08.20]
252	 Region Grand Est. (2019). Regional Plan for the Bioeconomy. Available at 
https://www.grandest.fr/developper-bioeconomie-grand-est/ [22.08.20]

100
Germany
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
With a dedicated National Research Strategy Bio­
Economy253 published in 2010 and a dedicated Na­
tional Policy Strategy on Bioeconomy254 published 
three years later, Germany established itself as one 
of the world leaders in bioeconomy policy. In 2009, 
an independent expert committee (the German Bio­
economy Council) was set up to advise the Federal 
German Government on bioeconomy policy ques­
tions and to promote stakeholder dialogue. While 
the National Research Strategy BioEconomy was 
the first dedicated policy strategy envisioning a natu­
ral cycle-oriented, biobased economy, the National 
Policy Strategy on Bioeconomy defined the goals 
and measures to support the structural transition 
and adapt framework conditions. It set priorities 
for a coherent and sustainable bioeconomy policy 
in Germany, linking industrial and energy policy, 
agricultural, forestry and fisheries policy, climate 
and environmental policy, as well as research and 
development policy.
In the coalition agreement255 adopted in 2014, the 
German Government demonstrated its commitment 
to promoting bioeconomy development with the aim 
of driving a transition from an economy based pri­
marily on fossil fuels to a resource-efficient economy 
based on renewable resources, thus supporting the 
energy transition (Energiewende).
The Sustainable Development Strategy for Germany 
of 2016 highlighted the bioeconomy’s contribution 
to the SDGs on growth, industrial innovation, sus­
tainable production, and consumption (SDGs 8, 9, 
12, 15).256 In order to implement the National Sus­
tainable Development Strategy and the High-Tech 
Strategy (2014), the Federal Ministry of Education 
and Research (BMBF) set up the third framework 
research program on sustainable development 
(FONA). It recognized the bioeconomy as a pillar of 
the green economy, combining technology, economy, 
and ecology on a systemic, sustainable basis. For ex­
ample, the program addressed new industrial value 
chains within its research priorities.257 
In 2017, the bioeconomy was mentioned as one 
of six new future topics in the High-Tech Forum’s 
recommendations on German innovation policy. In 
addition to digitalization, the biologization of eco­
nomic processes was named as a key driver for so­
cial change.258 
The Coalition Agreement of 2018259 reaffirmed that 
the bioeconomy could help drive the transition to 
a renewable resource-based economy. It further 
highlighted an interdepartmental agenda “From bi­
ology to innovation,” led by the Federal Ministry of 
Education and Research and the Federal Ministry for 
Economic Affairs and Energy, which was developed 
together with industry, science and civil society with 
the aim of integrating biological knowledge, biotech­
nological and bioinspired processes even more ro­
bustly into the areas of life and business.260

101
The new High-Tech Strategy 2025,261 published in 
2018, additionally looked to expand the industrial, 
structural change towards a sustainable, biobased 
economy that had been initiated by making the en­
tire range of biobased processes available for in­
dustrial use. Moreover, the strategy recognized the 
modern life sciences and the interplay of biotech­
nology, nanotechnology, and digital technologies. A 
newly established Dialogue Platform on Industrial 
Bioeconomy also helped initiate dialogue between 
industry and social actors at an early stage. The 
Evaluation Report of the High-Tech Strategy,262 pub­
lished in September 2019, emphasized that in future 
the bioeconomy should be driven forward within the 
framework of one overall strategy and not be divided 
into a research and a political strategy. 
The final report of the Coal Commission263 in 2019, 
which was aimed at transitioning coal-mining areas 
and driving the energy transition forward, mentioned 
the necessity of promoting special bioeconomy/re­
source efficiency research priorities in the Lusatian 
mining district, as well as the work of the Lusatian 
Bioeconomy and Resource Efficiency Cluster (LCBR). 
It also sought to transform the Rhenish mining area 
into a model region for closed cycles and recycling 
management.
Efforts to implement a sustainable bioeconomy 
were intensified in 2019 by pooling previously taken 
measures and policies and merging them into a new 
strategy. In January 2020, the new German Bioecon­
omy Strategy264 was published. It harmonizes the 
various subgoals of the previous policy documents 
and links the corresponding measures more closely 
with one another. While considering new knowledge 
and current bioeconomy developments, the strategy 
focuses on expanding a biobased economy in Ger­
many and setting new priorities.
On assuming the EU Council Presidency, the Ger­
man Government published the Programme of Ger­
many’s Presidency of the Council of the European 
Union in the Fields of Education, Research and 
Innovation265 in July 2020. The bioeconomy was 
named as a key area of action and as an essential 
building block to creating a sustainable, climate-
neutral Europe in line with the current European 
Green Deal. It further highlighted the Science Year 
2020|21 on the Bioeconomy and the third Global 
Bioeconomy Summit (GBS2020) in November 2020 
as important elements that would help to further the 
expansion of a sustainable bioeconomy in Germany, 
Europe and worldwide.
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
The new bioeconomy strategy was adopted by the 
Federal Cabinet in January 2020 and was presented 
jointly by Anja Karliczek, the Minister for Education 
and Research, and Julia Klöckner, the Minister for 
Food and Agriculture. 
The strategy is in line with the German Sustainable 
Development Strategy and the High-Tech Strategy 
2025. The German Government aims to contribute 
to its sustainability policy by strengthening the Ger­
man biobased economy. The German bioeconomy 
strategy also includes the objectives and priorities 
of the revised EU Bioeconomy Strategy, published in 
2018, which puts a stronger emphasis on sustain­
ability and resilience.

102
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The new strategy is the result of a comprehensive 
agenda process that incorporated various confer­
ences, stakeholder workshops and consultations 
with representatives from business, research, poli­
tics and civil society; recommendations of the Ger­
man Bioeconomy Council (2016)266; an evaluation 
report of the National Research Strategy BioEcon­
omy (2010)267, and an agenda seminar in 2018. In 
addition, the strategy is based on a comprehensive 
progress report of the National Policy Strategy on 
Bioeconomy (2013)268. 
The draft strategy was shared with various stake­
holders for comments. The strategy was then re­
vised and finalized by the German Government. The 
Federal Ministry of Education and Research and the 
Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture were and 
will be in charge of developing and implementing 
the new bioeconomy strategy. An Inter-ministerial 
Working Group (IMAG) will supervise the implemen­
tation process.
Compared to the 2010 and 2013 strategies, the 
bioeconomy strategy of 2020 refers to a more com­
prehensive and advanced understanding of the 
bioeconomy. The bioeconomy is recognized as a 
cross-sectoral concept and a core element of a sus­
tainable economy. It is defined as “(…) the produc­
tion, exploitation and use of biological resources, 
processes and systems to provide products, pro­
cesses and services in all economic sectors within 
the frame of a sustainable economic system.” 
According to the strategy document, a product, pro­
cess or service is considered part of the bioeconomy 
depending on the type of biological resource (any­
thing from raw agriculture, forestry and marine (esp. 
fisheries and aquaculture) materials and microbial 
production to biogenic residues and waste materials). 
However, the definition refers not only to biological 
resources, but also to biological principles and pro­
cesses which should be considered as part of the 
bioeconomy to an even greater extent in the future.
 
The strategy provides a holistic view of sustainable 
solutions for production and consumption by con­
sidering systemic relationships, e.g. the interactions 
between biological systems and their environment. 
The strategy highlights the importance of connecting 
different perspectives and considering interactions 
on all levels, ranging from organisms and ecosys­
tems to the planetary climate balance.
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
By envisioning a sustainable biobased economy based 
on natural material cycles, the new bioeconomy strat­
egy pursues six key goals: 1) develop bioeconomy so­
lutions for the sustainability agenda; 2) identify and 
tap the potential of the bioeconomy within ecological 
limits; 3) expand and apply biological knowledge; 4) 
sustainably align the resource base of the economy 
and replace fossil raw materials; 5) position Germany 
as the leading innovation location for the bioeconomy, 
and 6) integrate society and intensify national and in­
ternational cooperation.
With its new bioeconomy strategy, the German Gov­
ernment is committed to promoting sustainable de­
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

103
velopment. The bioeconomy is seen as contributing 
to the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development of 
the United Nations as it addresses several aspects 
and subaspects of its related UN sustainable devel­
opment goals.
The strategy document emphasizes that the bio­
economy is particularly suited as a model for sus­
tainably developing rural areas and structurally weak 
regions, provided that the processing of biogenic 
raw materials is carried out directly at the site of 
extraction or in its immediate vicinity, so that posi­
tive effects of value and job creation emerge in rural 
areas.
Two new, overarching guidelines are forward-looking 
and serve as a foundation for all measures to be im­
plemented: 1) harnessing biological knowledge and 
responsible innovation for sustainable, climate-neu­
tral development, and 2) using biogenic raw materials 
for a sustainable, circular economy. While the first 
guideline points to the importance of a sustainable 
resource base and to the innovation potential of bio­
logical knowledge and new technologies, the second 
links bioeconomy directly to the circular economy by 
focusing on expanding traditional value chains and on 
linking value chains to create new and efficient value 
creation networks, following the guiding principle of 
cascade and cycle use. 
The strategy highlights that securing global food sup­
plies should always take priority, and consideration 
must be given to ethical principles and socially recog­
nized goals such as environmental protection, land­
scape conservation, and animal welfare. In this re­
spect, the German Government acknowledges that not 
all sustainability goals can be achieved simultaneously, 
and that it is necessary to weigh opportunities, chal­
lenges, and trade-offs. Promoting systemic thinking 
and holistic approaches should help to create syner­
gies, identify such conflicts, and reduce them based 
on scientific knowledge.
So far, the strategy paper has not been accompanied 
by an implementation concept or a dedicated action 
plan with concrete measures and milestones. The task 
of drawing up a roadmap of practical implementation 
will be assigned to a new, independent advisory body 
which will involve all relevant stakeholder groups. 
The German Government announced at the strategy’s 
release that it will provide a budget of EUR 3.6 billion 
for the strategy’s implementation from 2020 to 2024. 
EUR 1.1 billion of this budget will go to the Federal 
Ministry of Education and Research for bioeconomy-
related research, including institutional funding269. 
For comparison, the National Research Strategy Bio­
Economy (2010) awarded EUR 2.4 billion for the period 
between 2010 and 2016. 
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The previous German policy document on bioeconomy 
highlighted the following priority areas: 1) global food 
security and defusing the competition among land 
use; 2) sustainable production and provision of biore­
sources (with special focus on agriculture production); 
3) healthy and safe foods; 4) industrial application of 
renewable resources; 5) growth markets, innovative 
technologies and products; 6) processes and value-
adding networks, and 7) development of biobased 
energy.
While the new bioeconomy strategy incorporates these 
target areas, the importance of digitalization and con­
verging technologies is emphasized more strongly than 
before (e.g. by anchoring them in research funding and 
naming this as a field of action). The strategy empha­
sizes that the combination of biology with technological 
advances through digitalization and new process tech­
nologies (e.g. based on nanotechnology, miniaturiza­
tion, automation, and artificial intelligence) can result 
in new, sustainable innovations in production. In this 
respect, the strategy highlights the need to promote 
systems biology approaches and the merging of data 
obtained in the omics.
Metabolic engineering and synthetic biology also 
receive increased attention. The strategy recognizes 
that biotechnological research and new research ap­
proaches to artificial production systems will provide 
opportunities to develop new materials and products

104
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The strategy emphasizes the important role of re­
search, suitable economic and legal framework con­
ditions, dialogue with social groups and their partici­
pation, and international cooperation. The strategy, 
however, focuses mainly on merging the existing 
catalogues of measures from the policy documents 
of 2010 and 2013. These support measures and 
funding programs are publicly available.270 There 
is no dedicated action plan yet, but a new advisory 
body will be commissioned to develop recommenda­
tions for specific political measures to implement 
the National Bioeconomy Strategy.
With regard to research and innovation, the new pol­
icy strategy recognizes R&D as an important driver 
for bioeconomy development. Focus is placed on 
funding interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary and sys­
temic research approaches beyond the subareas 
of the life sciences. Besides promoting natural and 
technical sciences, support should also be given to 
social sciences and ethical issues. The involvement 
of society and other research activities aimed at 
shaping social change are also considered in re­
search funding and as an overarching instrument.
The strategy highlights the need to enable network­
ing of the stakeholders (e.g. clusters) and cross-
disciplinary cooperation, i.e. by developing virtual 
interdisciplinary centers, and new multidisciplinary 
and cross-sectoral funding concepts for converging 
areas of knowledge and technologies.
The strategy highlights that breakthrough innova­
tions require the provision of opportunities for sci­
ence to pursue unfamiliar paths, i.e. by supporting 
open research without giving preference to certain 
methods and technologies. 
It also emphasizes that research must be inten­
sified, covering basic to application-oriented ap­
proaches, pilot plants and demonstrators and also 
experimental developments. With regard to startup 
support, the strategy mentions the Central Innova­
tion Program for SMEs (ZIM) and that “measures 
to promote SMEs and startups are currently being 
further developed.”
The strategy promotes all kinds of technical, social, 
and systemic innovations. The focus, however, is on 
safe innovations, particularly the harmonization of 
digital data, efficient data management systems, 
further development of interface concepts, and the 
development and use of standards.
Monitoring approaches should also be promoted as 
an overarching instrument. The new strategy rec­
with tailor-made properties (e.g. fully recyclable biopo­
lymers, novel biopharmaceuticals or environmentally 
friendly chemicals). In addition, the strategy highlights 
that the development of novel biotechnological pro­
cesses is essential and that new concepts for coupling 
and cascade use and optimized biorefinery concepts 
should be addressed holistically.
The strategy places additional focus on waste streams 
(e.g. organic waste, municipal or industrial wastewater, 
or industrial waste gases such as carbon dioxide or 
synthesis gas). Furthermore, the strategy highlights the 
need for innovative methods and processes for effi­
cient processing and recycling of important resources 
such as rare metals or phosphorus. 
In the agriculture and forestry sector, the strategy high­
lights the need to develop holistic agroecological sys­
tems with the help of key technologies and concepts 
that bring together existing agricultural techniques and 
ecological requirements in novel ways (i.e. from smart 
and organic farming approaches to (modular) high-
tech production systems, and largely closed circula­
tion systems such as vertical farming).
The strategy further states that it will be crucial to pro­
vide socially desirable bioservices such as resource 
and environmentally-friendly solutions that address 
increased sustainable consumption.

105
ognizes that to successfully design a sustainable 
bioeconomy, it is important to measure and assess 
the exact economic, ecological and social effects 
of biobased management. However, the focus ap­
pears to remain on understanding biomass flows 
and cycles by further assessing the availability of 
and demand for biomass.
With regard to international research cooperation, 
the German Government intends to continue to im­
prove the conditions for international learning and 
research, to establish transnational research net­
works, and promote bilateral research cooperation 
with selected countries. Research cooperation in 
Europe should also be further strengthened by in­
tensive exchange with EU countries in appropriate 
working groups – including the Standing Committee 
on Agricultural Research (SCAR) and the States Rep­
resentative Group of the Biobased Industries Joint 
Undertaking (BBI JU).
The strategy focuses on infrastructures for bioecon­
omy research and technology transfer. However, it 
remains open which measures will be taken, and 
what kind of spaces should be created to enable the 
targeted development of scientific knowledge into 
marketable and competitive applications.
At the state level, however, interesting infrastructure 
investments have recently been made. In January 
2020, for example, the Finnish Group UPM, one of 
the world’s leading producers of paper, pulp and 
wood products, announced its investment in an 
industrial scale biorefinery at the Leuna Chemical 
Park to convert solid wood into next generation bio­
chemicals. The company will invest EUR 550 million 
in construction of the plant which is expected to 
start up by the end of 2022. In addition, the federal 
state of Saxony-Anhalt announced that InfraLeuna 
GmbH will also invest around EUR 100 million in the 
chemical park’s infrastructure.272(270) 
In light of commercialization efforts, instruments 
for market introduction and the establishment of 
biobased products and processes refer only to dia­
logue formats and consumer awareness. It remains 
open to what extent these actions will steer con­
sumer and investment behavior towards sustain­
able, biobased offers. 
Reference is made to science communication and 
open dialogue formats with broad social participa­
tion as a form of demand-side policies. As an ex­
ample, in 2018 the Federal Ministry for Economic Af­
fairs and Energy initiated a dialogue platform called 
“Industrial Bioeconomy” with representatives from 
industry, associations, science, and society with 
the aim of identifying obstacles to converting the 
economy into a sustainable biobased economy and 
of developing joint solutions to the problems. Pub­
licly funded citizen science projects will also be pro­
moted in cooperation with educational institutions 
such as museums or botanical gardens.
The strategy further refers to the development of 
indicators for possible certification systems that 
clarify the additional benefits and sustainability of 
biobased products.
Initial and continuing vocational education and train­
ing and the promotion of young talent are described 
as overarching instruments in the strategy. The strat­
egy recognizes the need for bioeconomy specialists 
with interdisciplinary expertise at the interfaces of 
sustainability, production processes, markets, and 
consumption. In this respect, it promotes knowledge 
and interdisciplinary networking in science, project 
funding, new training, and further education pro­
grams as well as courses at vocational and technical 
schools, technical colleges, and universities. It is 
also considered important to integrate converging 
technologies into bioeconomic education programs 
and to impart basic business knowledge. Special 
prizes and funding modules should create incen­
tives for bioeconomic career planning in science or 
industry as part of research funding.
With regard to framework conditions, the strategy 
leaves open, for example, how German capital mar­
kets can be activated to help companies in the bio­
economy establish biobased innovations, and how 
regulatory policies will be shaped for a social and 
ecological market economy.
Good governance measures refer to policy coher­
ence and the paper sets out important objectives. 
Their implementation, however, remains vague. The 
Inter-ministerial Working Group (IMAG) and a new 
advisory body should ensure that policy decisions 
are coherent across administrative levels. The strat­

106
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
egy further proposes a federal states working group 
and the establishment of an informal round table on 
national bioeconomy policy at EU level.
International cooperation is seen as an essential 
tool for achieving the overarching goals. To promote 
opportunities for exchange and best practices, the 
German Government will intensify cooperation within 
Germany, the European Union, and with international 
partners. It is recognized that the Global Bioeconomy 
Summit has established itself as a relevant platform 
for exchange with international experts, even beyond 
research. Initiated by the German Bioeconomy Coun­
cil in 2015 and funded by the German Government, 
the high-level summit has developed into an institu­
tion that provides important stimuli for the further 
development and coordination of various bioecono­
my approaches. The strategy paper also suggests 
that the bioeconomy should receive greater atten­
tion in future international processes (e.g. G20, G7, 
and annual COP conferences) and that measures 
and strategies should be harmonized internationally, 
i.e. through intensified cooperation with the United 
Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
Due to dynamic developments in the bioeconomy, 
the strategy document states that in the coming 
years the strategy itself and all resulting measures 
that the German Government undertakes will be 
reviewed for effectiveness and be updated as nec­
essary.
As a further development of the German Bioeconomy 
Council (in office from 2009–2012 and 2012–2019), 
a new body will be established to advise the Ger­
man Government. Members of the advisory board 
should represent a wide range of perspectives on 
the bioeconomy. The board should include different 
disciplines of science and industry, as well as rep­
resentatives of civil society organizations. The new 
advisory body will be tasked with developing recom­
mendations and statements on bioeconomy devel­
opments, and on the promotion of public debates 
on the bioeconomy. It will also be commissioned 
to develop recommendations for specific political 
measures for implementation of the National Bio­
economy Strategy and will be expected to update 
them during the term of the strategy.
Numerous Federal German states promote the de­
velopment of the bioeconomy with their programs 
and initiatives.271 
Baden-Wuerttemberg, for example, was one of the 
first German states to have its own bioeconomy re­
search strategy and a state research program entitled 
“Bioeconomy Baden-Wuerttemberg” in 2013. In June 
2019, the Baden-Wuerttemberg government adopted 
an interdepartmental regional policy strategy, “Sus­
tainable Bioeconomy Baden-Wuerttemberg”. The 
regional strategy, which sets out a framework for a 
sustainable, cycle-oriented bioeconomy in Baden-
Wuerttemberg, also describes suitable fields of action 
and 37 measures. In addition, it intends to estab­
lish a regional bioeconomy council to supervise the 
strategy’s implementation. The Baden-Wuerttemberg 
government will provide a total of EUR 50 million from 
2020 to 2024 for implementation of the planned 
measures. The state strategy pursues four overarch­
ing goals: 1) using innovative biological concepts to 
tap renewable or recyclable sources of raw materials; 
2) reducing greenhouse gas emissions, conserving 
natural resources and strengthening biodiversity; 3) 
making Baden-Wuerttemberg an exemplary federal 
state for the transformation towards a sustainable 
and cycle-oriented economy, and 4) strengthening 
rural areas in Baden-Wuerttemberg.

107
REFERENCES
253	German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). (2011). 
National Research Strategy BioEconomy 2030. Available at http://
biotech2030.ru/wp-content/uploads/docs/int/bioeconomy_2030_germany.
pdf [24.08.20]
254	German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) (2014) National 
Policy Strategy on Bioeconomy. Available at http://www.bioways.eu/
download.php?f=62&l=en&key=c21c2ea7e095424f3545c66da7b98821 
[24.08.20]
255	The German Federal Government/CDU, CSU, SPD. 2013. Coalition 
agreement of the 18th legislative period of the Bundestag. Available 
at https://www.cdu.de/sites/default/files/media/dokumente/
koalitionsvertrag.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=startothek-
Newsletter+vom+27.11.2013&utm_source=newsletter [24.08.20]
256	The German Federal Government. (2016). German Sustainable 
Development Strategy. Available at https://www.bundesregierung.de/
resource/blob/997532/188836/7d1716e5d5576bec62c9d16ca908e
80e/2017-06-20-nachhaltigkeit-neuauflage-engl-data.pdf?download=1 
[24.08.20]
257	 German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). (2016). 
Research for Sustainable Development (FONA). Available at https://
www.fona.de/en/about-fona/research-for-sustainable-development.php 
[25.08.20]
258	German Bioeconomy Council. (2017). Bioeconomy Council welcomes 
recommendations of High-Tech Forum. Available at https://
biooekonomierat.de/en/news/biologization-and-digitization-of-the-economy-
complement-each-other-the-new-high-tech-strategy/ [25.08.20]
259	The German Federal Government/CDU, CSU, SPD. (2018). Coalition 
agreement of the 19th legislative period of the Bundestag. Available at 
https://www.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/656734/847984/5b8b
c23590d4cb2892b31c987ad672b7/2018-03-14-koalitionsvertrag-data.
pdf?download=1 [24.08.20]
260	German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). (2018). Press 
release 118/2018. Available at https://www.bmbf.de/de/startschuss-fuer-
die-bio-agenda-7438.html [24.08.20]
261	 The German Federal Government. (2018). Research and innovation that 
benefit the people - The High-Tech Strategy 2025. Available at https://www.
bmbf.de/upload_filestore/pub/Research_and_innovation_that_benefit_the_
people.pdf [25.08.20]
262	The German Federal Government. (2019). The High-Tech Strategy 
2025Progress Report. Available at https://www.hightech-strategie.de/files/
BMBF_HTSFortschrittsbericht_EN-Barr.pdf [25.08.20]
263	German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi). (2019). 
Commission on Growth, Structural Change and Employment – Final 
Report. Available at https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Publikationen/
commission-on-growth-structural-change-and-employment.pdf?__
blob=publicationFile&v=3 [24.08.20]
264	German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Federal 
Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL). (2020). National Bioeconomy 
Strategy. Available at https://www.bmbf.de/upload_filestore/pub/BMBF_
Nationale_Biooekonomiestrategie_Langfassung_eng.pdf [24.08.20]
265	German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). (2020). 
Programme of Germany’s Presidency of the Council of the European Union 
in the Fields of Education, Research and Innovation. Available at https://
www.bmbf.de/upload_filestore/pub/Programme_of_Germanys_Presidency_
of_the_Council_of_the_European_Union_in_the_Fields_of_Education_
Research_and_Innovation.pdf [24.08.20]
266	German Bioeconomy Council (2016) Recommendations of the German 
Bioeconomy Council - Further Development of the “National Research 
Strategy BioEconomy 2030”. Available at https://biooekonomierat.de/
fileadmin/Publikationen/Englisch/BOER_Empfehlungspapier_ENG_final.pdf 
[24.08.20]
267	Fraunhofer ISI (2017) Evaluation of the „National Research Strategy 
Bioeconomy 2030“. Available at https://www.isi.fraunhofer.de/content/
dam/isi/dokumente/cct/2017/Evaluation_NFSB_Abschlussbericht.pdf 
[25.08.20]
268	German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) (2016) Progress 
report on the National Policy Strategy Bioeconomy. Available at https://www.
bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Broschueren/Fortschrittsbericht-
Biooekonomie.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 [25.08.20]
269	Graf, P. (2020) “Bundesregierung setzt auf Bioökonomie” Bioökonomie.de. 
Available at https://biooekonomie.de/nachrichten/bundesregierung-setzt-
auf-biooekonomie [25.08.20]
270 Lohmann, B. (2020). Finnische UPM baut Bioraffinerie in Leuna. Available 
at https://biooekonomie.de/nachrichten/finnische-upm-baut-bioraffinerie-
leuna [25.08.20]
271 Bioökonomie in Deutschland“. (2020). Bioökonomie.de. Available at https://
biooekonomie.de/biooekonomie-deutschland [25.08.20]
272	 Beham, S. (2020). “Aiwangers Vision einer bayernweiten 
Bioökonomiestrategie”. BR.de. Available at https://www.br.de/
nachrichten/bayern/aiwangers-vision-einer-bayernweiten-
biooekonomiestrategie,RsNGQTX [25.08.20]
Bavaria was the first German federal state to con­
vene a bioeconomy council in 2015 for the “Bio­
economy for Bavaria” initiative on behalf of the 
State Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry. In 
March 2020, Hubert Aiwanger, the Bavarian Minister 
of Economic Affairs, gave the starting signal for a 
Bavaria-wide bioeconomy strategy under the motto 
“Future.Bioeconomy.Bavaria.”272 The strategy is ex­
pected to be published in November 2020.
Under the leadership of the Ministry of Innovation, 
Science and Research, the government of North 
Rhine-Westphalia published key points for a bio­
economy strategy for the state in 2013. North Rhine-
Westphalia is the first region in Europe to extend the 
concept of the bioeconomy to include the health 
sector, in accordance with the definition of the Orga­
nization for Economic Cooperation and Development 
(OECD). Particular federal state-specific priorities are 
seen in North Rhine-Westphalia’s strong life science 
sector. A dedicated regional bioeconomy strategy 
for the state is currently under development and is 
expected to be published by the end of 2020.

108
Ireland
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
In 2008, the national advisory body for agriculture 
and food, Teagasc, published the foresight report 
“Towards 2030 – Teagasc’s role in Transforming 
Ireland’s Agri-Food Sector and the Wider Bioecon­
omy.” This report identified the research, innova­
tion and support priorities for the next quarter cen­
tury that would help evolve the economy into a new 
knowledge-based bioeconomy.  
Until 2012, the bioeconomy was predominantly 
treated within the wider context of the green and 
blue economy. In the comprehensive policy state­
ment, “Delivering our Green Potential” (2012)273, 
the government committed itself to developing a 
bioeconomy strategy as part of a broader green 
economy strategy. With the strategy paper “Har­
nessing our Ocean Wealth” (2012)274, the govern­
ment formulated an integrated marine roadmap for 
developing the Irish blue economy.
In 2015 the government demonstrated further ambi­
tions for promoting an Irish bioeconomy by funding the 
two-year Bio-Éire project, “A Bio Economy for Ireland 
- An Evaluation of Development Opportunities, Poli­
cies and Initiatives Shaping Ireland’s Transformation 
to a Sustainable Low Carbon Bioeconomy”, as part 
of the national Agri-Food Strategy Food Wise 2025 
(2015)275. 
Findings from the Bio-Éire project would then lay the 
foundation for the development of Ireland’s first na­
tional bioeconomy strategy, the National Policy State­
ment on the Bioeconomy276, published in 2018. 
The strategy outlines the Government’s vision to be 
a global leader in the bioeconomy, especially in light 
of the potential economic consequences of Brexit, 
and to integrate sustainable economic development 
into the economic model in order to transition to 
a low carbon and circular economy. In 2019, the 
government published the Bioeconomy Implemen­
tation Group’s First Progress Report277 highlighting 
the progress made since the publication of Ireland’s 
National Policy Statement. 
While only about ten percent of Ireland is covered by for­
est, the Council for Forest Research and Development 
(COFORD) in its 2017 report on Growing the Irish Forest 
Bioeconomy278 envisioned forestry as leading the drive 
towards land-use carbon neutrality in Ireland.

109
The National Policy Statement on the Bioeconomy, 
approved by the Irish Government in December 2017 
and published in February 2018, delivers on commit­
ments set out in the National Development Plan – 
Innovation 2020 (2015), the Action Plan for Jobs 
(2017), the Action Plan for Rural Development (2017), 
and the National Climate Mitigation Plan (2017). 
Specifically, the overarching Project Ireland 2040 
National Planning Framework (2019) recognizes the 
transition to a circular economy and bioeconomy 
as essential, especially in rural areas. As a central 
initiative of this framework, the Regional Enterprise 
Development Fund (REDF) also provides significant 
funding for many bioeconomy-related activities.
The first Progress Report (2019) also aligns each of 
its recommendations and action plan for the next 
phase of the bioeconomy implementation with these 
wider government policies. 
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The National Policy Statement was prepared by 
the Department of the Taoiseach, the Prime Min­
ister’s Office. Prior to its publication in 2018, an 
Interdepartmental Group on the Bioeconomy was 
established in November 2016, chaired by the De­
partment of the Taoiseach, and representing seven 
other government departments asked specifically 
to produce this high-level national policy statement 
on the bioeconomy. 
After the establishment of the Interdepartmental 
Group on the Bioeconomy in 2016, an initial scop­
ing exercise was conducted with Departments and 
reporting agencies. In 2017, the Department of 
the Taoiseach, in conjunction with Teagasc, held a 
consultative workshop to bring together key stake­
holders and external experts, which led to the publi­
cation of a discussion document for public consulta­
tion. Submissions from interested parties during the 
public consultation were then incorporated into the 
preparation of the national policy statement. 
In the Policy Statement, the bioeconomy “extends 
across sectors - from farming and the agri-food busi­
nesses, marine and maritime industries, forestry, 
novel protein production, water and waste man­
agement, energy suppliers, and biopharmaceutical 
products.” The Policy Statement considers “using 
these renewable resources and their associated 
waste streams for conversion into value-added 
products [as] at the heart of what is known as the 
bioeconomy.” The First Progress Report also refers 
to the 2018 updated EU Bioeconomy Strategy defi­
nition, which covers all sectors and systems that 
rely on biological resources (animals, plants, micro-
organisms and derived biomass, including organic 
waste), their functions and principles.
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

110
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The National Policy Statement positions itself as a 
response to climate change that goes beyond target 
compliance and carbon mitigation and instead inte­
grates sustainable development into the Irish eco­
nomic model. In addition, it focuses on increasing the 
commercial potential of the bioeconomy as well as 
protecting the agri-food and maritime sectors cope 
with the uncertainties of Brexit.
The Statement emphasizes that the bioeconomy 
should promote circularity through the promotion of 
innovations that reuse and recycle materials and maxi­
mize resource efficiency. It especially places value on 
the use of waste streams for conversion into value-
added products. While not directly mentioning the 
SDGs, the Statement recognizes the bioeconomy as 
crucial for sustainability. 
The Statement sets out a policy framework to underpin 
the development of the bioeconomy, with four guid­
ing principles, and four strategic objectives. The four 
guiding principles include, 1) sustainability principle 
(e.g. the necessity of both environmental and social 
feasibility assessments, a holistic viewpoint of bio­
mass, and avoiding the degradation of resilience or 
biodiversity in the ecosystem), 2) cascading principle 
(e.g. higher value applications are preferentially derived 
from biological resources prior to their use in energy 
and fuel generation), 3) precautionary principle (e.g. 
use of risk management approach), and 4) Food First 
principle (e.g. priority given to food and nutrition se­
curity). The four strategic policy objectives include, 1) 
sustainable economy and society, 2) decarbonization 
of the economy, 3) jobs and competitiveness, and 4) 
regional prosperity. While a central objective is to move 
toward a decarbonized economy by 2050, the govern­
ment recognizes that the bioeconomy also provides an 
impetus for rural development and employment.
An Action Plan with seven key actions is provided to­
gether with a Progress Report, which reviews the ac­
tions taken since 2018 and develops further actions 
for 2019 and 2020 with identified leads, co-leads and 
key consultative stakeholders. The seven key actions 
include 1) sectoral coherence, 2) establishing a net­
work of commercial entities and public bodies working 
on the bioeconomy, 3) promoting collaboration be­
tween academia and industry, 4) reassessing the defi­
nition of waste, 5) supporting the commercial viability 
of value chains identified by the Bio-Eire project, 7) 
examining how public awareness can be built up.
The strategy considers food, forestry and marine as 
core sectors of the Irish bioeconomy, with significant 
action devoted to helping primary producers in agri-
food and marine become part of bioeconomy value 
chains. Current enterprise activity in the bioeconomy 
is being driven mainly by the potential of Ireland’s 
natural resources (i.e. one of the largest seabed ter­
ritories in Europe, the only country in Europe with over 
50% of grasslands, and a large agri-food sector).
While biorefining is still in a nascent stage in Ireland, 
the biomaterials and biochemicals component of the 
bioeconomy is seen as the area with the greatest 
potential for high value products and export (e.g. the 
industrial-scale biorefinery AgriChemWhey project led 
by Glanbia working with by-products from the dairy 
processing industry, the pilot-scale marine biorefinery 
from BioMarine Ingredients that takes non-food chain 
pelagic species and converts raw material into cost 
competitive, proteins, oil and calcium, the Biorefin­
ery Glas project multi-product small-scale biorefin­
ery, which optimizes the use of grass).  Significant 
emphasis is placed on waste management and the 
valorization of marine discard and agricultural waste. 
The role of cities/regional towns in becoming circular 
bioeconomy hubs including the possible use of mu­
nicipal solid biowaste and wastewater for recovery of 
bioresources is being explored.

111
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The Policy Statement and corresponding first Prog­
ress Report pursue a holistic approach to supporting 
bioeconomy development. The following measures 
are funded through different national policies and 
European funding mechanisms. 
Research and innovation are promoted through 
increased funding for R&D at the national and EU 
level as well as through engagement with private 
investors. These efforts are marked by significant in­
dustrial engagement and collaboration. The National 
Policy Statement seeks to maintain on-going contact 
and to further support, engage, and leverage the 
activities of bioeconomy related innovation clusters 
and research centers.   
In recent years, Ireland has created and funded sev­
eral research centers focused on the bioeconomy. 
Over EUR 17 million investment was made by one of 
Ireland’s national research funders, Science Founda­
tion Ireland (SFI) to develop the BioOrbic Bioeconomy 
SFI Research Centre, formally known as BEACON. 
BioOrbic performs fundamental and applied research 
through collaboration with five research institutions 
and industry partners. BioOrbic sits at the National 
Bioeconomy Campus in Lisheen, Tipperary County.
The very first bioeconomy innovation cluster, the Irish 
Bioeconomy Foundation (IBF), was established in 2017 
at the National Bioeconomy Campus in Lisheen. IBF 
was awarded EUR 5 million from Enterprise Ireland 
(EI) in 2017 to develop a piloting biorefinery facility at 
Lisheen. Other innovation clusters include the Marine 
Innovation Park, Páirc na Mara in Connemara and the 
BioConnect Innovation Centre in Co. Monaghan (IBio­
IC). IBioIC is led by six industries and seven academic 
partners and with the help of a EUR 5 million Enter­
prise investment works with agri-food producers in the 
region to grow and develop new bio-based products.
The largest-ever support for agri-business in Ireland 
was funded through a EUR 118 million EIB invest­
ment to enable technology company Devenish to 
develop a Global Innovation Centre in Dowth, County 
Meath. The center’s hosts the ‘One Health – from 
Soil to Society’ research, development and inno­
vation program and funds innovation-related capi­
tal projects and research into optimized circular 
biobased products including projects on animal nu­
trition, food innovation, health and sustainability. 
With regard to small-scale biorefineries, the Depart­
ment of Agriculture, Food and Marine (DAFM) co-
funded the biorefinery Glas in Cork, which is one of 
the first bioeconomy initiatives in Europe that looks 
at moving farmers further up the bioeconomy value-
chain. The project will demonstrate an integrated 
and mobile multi product small-scale biorefinery 
which will help farmers become bio-processors. 
DAFM has also funded a number of collaborative, 
academic-led bioeconomy-related research projects, 
including the previously mentioned Bio-Éire research 
project, led by Teagasc, which focuses on identifying 
interlinking cross-sectoral value chains in the bioecon­
omy. Fifteen out of the eighteen BioÉire value chains 
have had scientific and technological development 
undertaken in Irish or EU funded research and innova­
tion activities involving Irish participants. In addition, 
other value chains not identified by the BioÉire partici­
pants have also been advanced including projects at 
demonstration and pre-commercial large-scale level. 
Other notable research projects co-funded by DAFM 
include, Agri Bio Circular Economy (ABC Economy) and 
Other relevant sectors include bioenergy and biofuels 
through the use of sustainable and reliable biomass, 
and a growing bio-pharmaceutical sector. Here we see 
movement in the bio-based nutraceuticals and func­
tional food markets where the government is activity 
supporting the company, Nuritas, via Enterprise Ire­
land and other opportunities being offered by the EU. 
With 80 percent of the agri-food sector based in rural 
Ireland, there is a strong emphasis on rural job de­
velopment. Engagement and mobilization of regional 
actors, including the Regional Assemblies is fostered 
in order to identify potential growth in regions.

112
BioCircle, which look to assess the available biomass, 
value chain development, valorization and market-
based opportunities and socio-economic impact. 
Other recommendations include: publishing a feasi­
bility study and eventually securing funding for the 
establishment of National Marine Biomaterials Re­
pository; providing research opportunity for a fore­
sight analysis to examine Bioeconomy & Low Carbon 
Growth Opportunities; and using a citizen-science 
initiative and RTE-Brainstorm to enable public debate, 
and develop understanding of primary producer, con­
sumer and citizen perspectives of the bioeconomy.
Much investment has gone to establishing the 
necessary innovation infrastructure. With regard 
to biorefineries, the AgriChemWhey project led by 
Glanbia, which has received around EUR 32 million 
in EU research and innovation funds, is building an 
industrial-scale biorefinery to take by-products from 
the dairy processing industry and convert them into 
lactic acid, which can in turn be used to make value-
added bio-based products such as biodegradable 
plastics, bio-based fertilizer and other minerals.
The implementation Group is tasked above all with 
helping to establish the conditions required for the 
commercial viability of the bioeconomy. The market-
focused Marine Innovation and Development Cen­
tre in Galway will provide enterprise and incubation 
space for marine enterprises including enterprises 
working on the bioeconomy. The center will also pro­
vide specialist training and business development 
support through collaboration with regional stake­
holders and higher education institutes.
The development of a Bioeconomy Innovation Plat­
form to examine the provision of specialized bio­
economy business support services with the aim to 
combine regulatory, technological and nontechno­
logical service will also be investigated.
Furthermore, the implementation group is charged 
with examining the 2019 Department of Business, 
Enterprise and Innovation (DBEI) mapping and analy­
sis report of Circular Economy & Bioeconomy enter­
prise opportunities to assess whether the current 
policy options are suitable or sufficient for the de­
velopment of cross-cutting bioeconomy approaches, 
business models and new value chains.  
With regard to education, training, and skill develop­
ment in the bioeconomy, a number of initiatives have 
been developed including: a second-level bioecon­
omy teaching resource for distribution to all Irish 
secondary school science teachers; a third-level cur­
riculum to account for bioeconomy developments; a 
Bioeconomy Training Network; and a MSc in circular 
Bioeconomy with Biobased Business in alignment 
with IT Tralee, UCD and Teagasc,
It is further recommended to develop and pilot sec­
ond-level, vocational and higher-education curricula, 
including the involvement of social partners and the 
development of entrepreneurship programs.
Demand-side policies are also supported. Increased 
communication and awareness raising is called for 
and exemplified in the establishment in 2018 of 
the Bioeconomy Network, a public-private outreach 
network with an information portal. 2018 also wit­
nessed the launch of a Bioeconomy Ireland Day to 
engage industry, the farming community, Govern­
ment and wider society in the bioeconomy. The event 
was expanded in 2019 to become the Irish Bioecon­
omy Week from the 11th to 18th of October.
The implementation group further recommends iden­
tifying opportunities for use of certification, standards 
and labels as well as green public procurement to sup­
port market development for bio-based products.
Furthermore, a number of framework conditions are 
mentioned. A quality protocol is identified, which sets 
out end of waste criteria for the production and use of 
poultry; the conditions also explore the development 
of risk assessments and management protocols re­
garding the use of by-products. In addition, a techni­
cal working group on biological residual flows was 
established. While no roadmap has been developed 
for a streamlined process, a proposal for a systemic 
approach for management of residual waste flows for 
use in the bioeconomy was prepared in Q4 2019. 
Further identification of measures to address the 
key regulator barriers to the development of the 
bioeconomy, including establishing “End of Waste” 
criteria for certain bio-wastes is also called for.
With regard to good governance, the Irish govern­
ment expresses a strong desire to ensure greater

113
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
sectoral coherence within the bioeconomy. This is 
exemplified in the preparation of a sectoral coher­
ence report in Q4 2019. Additional efforts include 
the secondment of a Teagasc representative in the 
Bioeconomy Strategy Unit of DG Research and In­
novation to help with engagement at the EU level. 
While increased engagement with the EU innovation 
system is seen as paramount, there is no reference 
to other international collaborations.
The bioeconomy implementation group will explore 
the development of standard requirements and key 
performance indicators for national bioeconomy 
implementation.
The Statement mandates the establishment of a 
high-level implementation group jointly chaired by 
the Departments of Agriculture, Food and Marine 
and Communications and Climate Action and En­
vironment and required to submit annual progress 
reports. The Group consisted of eleven Departments 
and eight agencies. 
The Progress Report developed by the Implementation 
Group provides a set of twelve key recommendations, 
each aligning with a corresponding government policy 
for the next phase of bioeconomy implementation. The 
progress report further recommends clear measures 
for 2019 and 2020 for each of the 7 key actions identi­
fied in the National Policy Statement. 
In order to ensure strategy implementation, a Bio­
economy Forum was launched in October of 2019 to 
liaise with relevant industry bodies and other stake­
holders in the bioeconomy, and to provide advice 
and guidance on the policy framework. This panel 
of high-level actors will review, and the implemen­
tation group will report regularly on the progress 
of the Action Plan and is committed to adapting or 
discontinuing activities that do not contribute to the 
objectives of the National Policy Statement. 
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
No, however the bioeconomy is promoted through re­
gional policy objectives (RPOs) in the Regional Spatial 
and Economic Strategies (RSES) developed by the 
three Regional Assemblies of Northern and Western, 
Eastern and Midlands, and the Southern Regions. 
These strategies are tasked with undertaking a bio­
economy feasibility study for their region in order to 
identify areas of potential growth to inform investment 
decisions under Project Ireland 2040. 
273 Government of Ireland. (2012). Delivering our green Potential: government 
Policy Statement on growth and employment in the green economy. 
Available at https://dbei.gov.ie/en/Publications/Publication-files/Delivering-
Our-Green-Potential.pdf [03.09.20]
274 Taoiseach. (2012). Harnessing Our Ocean Wealth: An Integrated Marine Plan 
for Ireland. Available at https://www.ouroceanwealth.ie/sites/default/files/
sites/default/files/Publications/2012/HarnessingOurOceanWealthReport.
pdf [03.09.20]
275	 Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM). (2015). Local 
Roots Global Reach: Foodwise 2025: a 10-year vision for the Irish agri-food 
industry. Available at https://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/
foodindustrydevelopmenttrademarkets/agri-foodandtheeconomy/
foodwise2025/report/FoodWise2025.pdf [03.09.20]
276	 Government of Ireland. (2018). National Policy Statement on the 
Bioeconomy. Available at https://assets.gov.ie/2244/241018115730-
41d795e366bf4000a6bc0b69a136bda4.pdf. [01.04.20]
277	 Government of Ireland. (2019). Bioeconomy Implementation Group’s First 
Progress Report to Government. Available at https://www.agriculture.gov.
ie/media/migration/research/bioeconomy/BIGProgressReport050919.pdf. 
[01.04.20]
278	 COFORD (DAFM). (2017). Growing the Irish Forest Bioeconomy. Available at 
http://www.coford.ie/media/coford/content/publications/projectreports/
COFORD%20Bioeconomy%20Report%202017-1.pdf [03.09.20]
REFERENCES

114
Italy
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Italy, behind Germany and France, is one of the lead­
ers in the EU in terms of bioeconomy turnover, above 
all in food and agriculture. Initially, the concept of the 
“green economy” had greater political prominence 
than that of the bioeconomy. One area of key impor­
tance has been and continues to be the chemical 
industry’s transition to green or plant-based chem­
istry. For example, Italy took a pioneering role in 
market development and banned businesses from 
providing non-biodegradable plastic bags in 2011, 
which seems to have made a significant contribution 
towards stimulating green chemistry, especially in 
the North. 
In 2010, Italy implemented a National Marine Strat­
egy,279 a National Biodiversity Strategy,280 and a 
National Action Plan for Renewable Energy281 in line 
with European Union Directives. Italy, in compari­
son with other member countries, has successfully 
coordinated many of its strategies with European 
programs. 
In 2013, the Ministry for Economic Development 
set up the Sustainable Growth Fund (Fondo per la 
Crescita Sostenibile) with the particular aim of sup­
porting SMEs. With a total funding of approximately 
EUR 300 million for R&D projects, it targets key in­
novation areas of the EU Horizon 2020 program. 
The bioeconomy has also received support from the 
Environmental Annex to the Stability Law 2014, in 
particular due to Green Public Procurement (GPP), 
with minimum environmental criteria for new pur­
chases by the public sector defined by labeling and 
certifications (e.g. Emas, Ecolabel, Environmental 
Footprints, Made Green in Italy). 
Italy developed a Strategy Action Plan on Innovation 
& Research in the Agriculture, Food and Forestry 
Sectors in 2015 to incorporate the priorities of the 
EU’s Horizon 2020. In response to the 2030 Agenda, 
a National Strategy for Sustainable Development 
(SnSvS)282 was published in 2017. All these docu­
ments would form the basis for the development of 
a dedicated national bioeconomy strategy in 2017, 
Bioeconomy in Italy: A unique opportunity to re­
connect Economy, Society and the Environment 
(BIT I).283 
“Towards a Model of Circular Economy for Italy - 
Overview and Strategic Framework” (2018)284 
helped define Italy’s strategic position in the circular 
economy and is part of the broader national strategy 
for sustainable development. It is the starting point 
for the realization of an official “National Action Plan 
on the Circular Economy.” The strategy seeks to pur­
sue an economic transition, integrating bioeconomy 
and the circular economy models, and makes specif­
ic reference to biorefineries, which can economically, 
environmentally and socially revitalize territories.
In 2018, a new law on forestry and forest supply 
chains, the National Law on Forests came into ef­

115
fect in Italy and in 2019 drafting of the National For­
est Strategy 2019-2039 began. This aims to ensure 
the sustainable management of forest resources in 
Italy in a 20-year plan.
The first bioeconomy strategy, BIT I, was updated 
at the request of the Presidency of the Council of 
Ministers, and in May 2019 the revised strategy, BIT 
II “Bioeconomy in Italy: A new bioeconomy strategy 
for a sustainable Italy,” was formally presented. Its 
aim was to more efficiently interconnect the main 
pillars of the Italian bioeconomy.285 A year later, the 
BIT II Implementation Action Plan286 was published 
along with a National plan for post-Covid recovery 
via a circular bioeconomy.287 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
In April 2017, the Italian government officially ad­
opted its first bioeconomy strategy entitled “Bio­
economy in Italy: A unique opportunity to reconnect 
economy, society and environment” also known as 
BIT I. The document emphasizes that the bioecon­
omy strategy is considered part of the implementa­
tion process of both the National Smart Specializa­
tion Strategy and the Italian National Strategy for 
Sustainable Development. Within the framework of 
the National Smart Specialization Strategy, Italy has 
designed strategic plans for the agrifood, biobased 
industry and the blue bioeconomy. More than other 
European countries, the Italian bioeconomy strategy 
considers integration of the bioeconomy sectors and 
EU-funded R&I with structural and smart specializa­
tion interventions.
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
In September 2016, the Presidency of the Council of 
Ministers of Renzi’s government decided to prepare a 
national bioeconomy strategy for the country; a task 
force, consisting of delegates from the Presidency of 
the Council of Ministers, the Ministry for Economic 
Development, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and 
Forestry, the Ministry for Education, University and 
Research, the Ministry of the Environment, Land and 
Sea, the Committee of Italian Regions, the Agency for 
Territorial Cohesion, and the Italian Technology Clus­
ters for Green Chemistry, AgriFood and Blue Growth, 
prepared a first draft of the strategy (BIT I). The draft 
version was officially presented at the Ecomondo 
2016 trade fair and posted on the web of the Italian 
Agency for Territorial Cohesion. The feedback and 
comments collected over three months were ana­
lyzed and included in the final document which was 
then officially presented on February 2017. 
In March 2019, the Presidency of the Council of Min­
isters of the “Conte 1” government decided to set up 
a National Bioeconomy Coordination Group under its 
National Committee for Biosafety, Biotechnology and 
Life Sciences (CNBBSV) and asked it to update the 
former national bioeconomy strategy and promote 
its implementation. The Group, consisting of repre­
sentatives from the same institutions which worked 
on BIT I, prepared BIT II, presented it officially at the 
Italian Presidency of the Council Ministers in May 
2019, and then left it open to comments and sug­
gestions from stakeholders and citizens. 
In summer 2020, the National Bioeconomy Coordi­
nation Group prepared the BIT II-related Implemen­
tation Action Plan.

116
In the Italian context, bioeconomy development 
concentrates on increasing the added value from 
more efficient interconnection between the pri­
mary production sectors and those involved in the 
transformation of food and non-food biomass and 
biowaste. BIT I and BIT II define the bioeconomy 
as encompassing the integration of “the sustain­
able production of renewable biological resources 
and the conversion of these resources and waste 
streams into value-added products such as food, 
feed, biobased products and bioenergy”.
In 2017, the Italian bioeconomy turnover was EUR 
330 billion per year and accounted for 2 million jobs 
(BIT II). According to a Banca Intesa study, in 2018 
its turnover was approximately EUR 345 billion per 
year and accounted for 2 million jobs. It represented 
10 percent in terms of production and 7.7 percent 
in terms of employment in Italy.288 Unlike the BIT I 
analysis, BIT II and the Banca Intesa analyses also 
consider the wood and furniture value chains and 
water and organic waste management.
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
On a global scale, the national strategy addresses 
Italy’s response and contribution to the great so­
cietal challenges, such as food security for an in­
creasing world population, climate change and criti­
cal ecosystem resilience. Domestically, the strategy 
clearly envisions increasing Italy’s competitiveness 
through innovation and promoting green growth. Its 
primary aim is to reduce dependence on fossil fu­
els and non-renewables. Positive rural and coastal 
development, while preventing biodiversity loss and 
protecting ecosystems, are considered key objec­
tives of the bioeconomy strategy.
Both BIT I and its update BIT II respond to the in­
creasing importance of the circular economy con­
cept in EU policy. The strategy refers to a transition 
towards a “circular bioeconomy” which reflects a 
vision “where the production and use of renewable 
bioresources and their conversion into value-added 
products is part of a circular system that will make 
businesses more economically viable and sustain­
able in the long term.”
The objectives of BIT II are to interconnect more 
efficiently the main pillars composing the Italian 
bioeconomy, namely the production of renewable 
biological resources and their conversion into 
valuable food, feed, bio- based products, wooden 
products, and bioenergy, along with the transfor­
mation and valorization of bio-waste streams. The 
general objective in BIT II was revised, based on 
a new economic analysis of the bioeconomy, to 
increase Italy’s bioeconomy turnover (around EUR 
330 billion/y in 2017) and jobs (about 2 million) 
by 15 percent by 2030 and increase the level of 
circularity in the economy.289
BIT I announced the development of a dedicated 
action plan and BIT II created a national inter-min­
isterial bioeconomy taskforce coordinated by the 
Presidency of the Council of Ministers tasked with 
developing the national Implementation Action Plan 
(IAP), which was released in summer 2020. 
The BIT II IAP uniquely views the circular bioeconomy 
model as a resilient tool to accelerate the post-Covid-
19 departure. The IAP provides for actions in four 
main macro areas: 1) promoting the development and 
adoption of policies, standards, labels and emerging 
market- based actions and incentives; 2) launching pi­
lot actions at local level and in cities in the domains of 
agrifood, biobased, forestry and marine and maritime 
sectors; 3) enhancing the knowledge, protection and 
restoration of national biodiversity and ecosystems, 
and ecosystem services and their resilience/adapta­
tion to climate changes; 4) promoting awareness, skill 
upgrading, education, attitude, training, and entrepre­
neurships across the bioeconomy.
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

117
For years, Italian bioeconomy development has been 
led by stakeholders in the chemical industry who are 
pursuing the transition to green or biomass-based 
chemistry. Pioneering companies in this field develop 
and produce biomaterials and bioproducts by bring­
ing together chemical, agricultural and environmental 
expertise. Furthermore, several biobased innovation 
centers and clusters play an active role in the develop­
ment of bioindustry.290 Consequently, the national bio­
economy strategy considers agriculture, forestry and 
the agrifood sector as well as the marine bioeconomy 
and biobased industries as the core sectors of “an in­
tegrated Italian bioeconomy ecosystem.” The strategy 
seeks to create networks among different bioeconomy 
sectors and their value chains, to increase the effi­
ciency and sustainability of biobased value chains, and 
to generate value from local biodiversity and circular 
economy approaches. It also aims to promote sustain­
able bioeconomy in the wider Mediterranean area.
Government support for the agricultural and forestry 
sector concentrates on boosting more sustainable 
and resilient primary production, e.g. by exploring the 
sustainability potential of different agricultural and for­
estry models (including climate-smart agriculture and 
forestry, precision farming, ecological intensification, 
agroecology, etc.) and by examining the role of urban 
and peri-urban agriculture. The strategy uniquely fo­
cuses on urban issues, pointing to opportunities in the 
food industry (e.g. adopting new urban food systems) 
and in urban regeneration projects (e.g. BioCities). 
In the forestry sector, the strategy generally emphasizes 
the need to improve forest management. It highlights 
the importance of modernizing the timber industry to 
develop new products and expand the use of high-tech 
wood-based materials, e.g. in the construction sector. 
With regard to the development of biobased industry, 
the strategy focuses on producing next-generation bio­
fuels and bioplastics, developing biopharmaceuticals 
and cosmetics, promoting biobased building materials, 
and increasing the production of biofertilizers, biolubri­
cants and essential amino acids for feed production.
A new focus on microbiomes as enabling factors for 
biomass production, to protect crops, to restore and 
better manage soils, to improve human and planetary 
health, and to spawn new sustainable solutions is ap­
parent and aligned with the national initiative on mi­
crobiomes launched by CNBBSV in 2018 and currently 
under implementation.291
Looking at the marine bioeconomy, the strategy par­
ticularly recognizes that the Mediterranean region 
faces huge environmental challenges, but it also sees 
opportunities for blue growth and jobs. The Italian gov­
ernment has already initiated several projects (such as 
the PRIMA and the BLUEMED initiatives) for promoting 
sustainable water management and food systems in 
the Mediterranean region.
In addition, the national strategy highlights the need 
for better coordination between regional, national and 
EU policies and initiatives. It emphasizes the role of the 
Italian regions in social and economic development. 
Regional approaches are critical for implementing cir­
cular economy activities and for improving environmen­
tal resilience and adaptation to climate change. In this 
respect, the promotion of key enabling technologies, 
such as industrial and environmental biotechnologies, 
‘omics’ and big data, digitization and precision farming, 
is considered vitally important.
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
Three flagship projects are proposed with invest­
ments totaling EUR 570 million in the areas of 
1) multi-purpose and multi-product biorefineries; 
2) urban biowaste and wastewater valorization; 
3) reconversion of industrial sites. Furthermore, it 
addresses existing barriers, such as the lack of a 
clear and stable regulatory framework at both the 
European and national level, by proposing a num­
ber of actions to overcome legislative barriers.

118
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The Italian strategy provides a bundle of support 
measures to foster bioeconomy development. 
In the field of research and innovation, the strategy 
seeks to leverage existing support and publicly fund­
ed programs at EU, national and regional level. This 
will be realized by mainstreaming bioeconomy issues 
in the Cohesion Policy Funds and by providing direct 
funding grants and tax incentives. Public investments 
should concentrate on improving resource manage­
ment, i.e. by implementing farming and forestry sys­
tems to improve soil fertility and water quality, and 
by increasing photosynthesis capacity and carbon 
dioxide sequestration. The focus of R&I investments 
should rely on creating value from local biodiversity, 
resources and circularity. This also relates to the con­
version of abandoned land and industrial sites (e.g. 
former chemical complexes). Future R&I investments 
should also focus on the sustainable exploitation of 
marine resources (such as seaweed, phytoplankton, 
by-products and side products from fishery and aqua­
culture) for food, fine chemicals and energy, while 
protecting the marine environment and biodiversity. 
In order to encourage the development of a sustain­
able and competitive agrifood sector, the R&I agenda 
further focuses on improving food safety and secu­
rity, and promoting healthy diets, e.g. by developing 
smart nutrition solutions, identifying consumer prefer­
ences and behavior, and identifying alternative food 
resources (including insects and algae) and novel 
food microbes. It also stresses the need to increase 
efficiency in food production, e.g. by considering the 
potential of food (processing) wastes for biochemi­
cals and biofuels. 
While bioeconomy development has been largely 
pioneered by companies in green chemistry through 
a “bottom up approach,” the state has concentrated 
on funding research and supporting clusters that 
take part in EU programs in the areas of biotech­
nology and biobased chemistry (e.g. tech clusters 
for Agrifood,292 Green Chemistry (SPRING),293 Blue 
Growth.294 )
Innovation is also encouraged by the BIT II IAP in the 
form of a support measure for startups through open-
access infrastructures for pre-industrial scaling up. 
Measures related to infrastructure development 
concentrate on investing in R&D facilities, technol­
ogy clusters, demonstration plants and test beds to 
promote the scaling-up of process technologies and 
new biobased products. With an impressive number 
of flagship installations in the field of bioeconomy, 
Italy is playing in the top league of European coun­
tries such as France and Finland. Examples include 
the large-scale demonstration plant for biobased 
succinic acid in Cassano Spinola, as well as the con­
version of bio(chemical) plants (closed or no longer 
profitable) into bioeconomy infrastructures for the 
production of biochemical and biomaterials. There 
is also a flagship biotech plant near Venice for the 
production of bio-BDO from renewable feedstock, 
and the implementation of a zero waste biorefinery 
for the production of biochemicals, biopolymers and 
biomaterials close to Rome. 
With regard to commercialization, BIT II IAP encour­
ages investors to finance the bioeconomy (e.g. banks, 
business angels, insurers, pension funds, investment 
funds, crowdfunding schemes) and to improve ac­
cess-to-finance for projects, by helping improve their 
bankability and investment-readiness, structuring 
their financing and liaising with private investors. 
With regard to demand-side measures, the strategy 
and BIT II IAP aim to stimulate demand for biobased 
products and services by implementing measures 
such as standards, labeling, green public procure­
ment and communication campaigns. Life cycle 
thinking and ecodesign approaches are to be pro­
moted. A methodological framework is to be devel­
oped for companies to communicate cost-benefit 
analyses of biobased products, which should help 
to better demonstrate the comparative advantages 
to buyers. Consumer information and communica­
tion are listed as important measures for increasing 
public awareness. BIT II IAP adds a support measure 
for promoting the use of sustainability standards, 
certification schemes and labels to help create a 
level playing field for biobased products, and high­
lights the European project STAR-ProBio.
Furthermore, BIT II IAP should promote citizens’ 
awareness and engagement through campaigns

119
to showcase bioeconomy products, through “open 
days” in companies active in the bioeconomy, and 
by participating in the National Bioeconomy Day 
launched by the SPRING Cluster.
The BIT I and BIT II strategies as well as the IAP un­
derline the social dimension of bioeconomy and the 
importance of education, training and societal par­
ticipation. Cross-disciplinary education and profes­
sional training measures are considered necessary 
not only to increase awareness but also to develop 
a skilled workforce for the bioeconomy. The range 
of measures proposed encompasses new technical 
programs for schools, academic bioeconomy cours­
es and post-graduate education in bioeconomy. In 
January 2017, the Universities of Milano-Bicocca, 
Naples “Federico II”, Turin and Bologna launched the 
first European master’s program in “Bioeconomy in 
the Circular Economy”. This master’s program repre­
sents a public-private partnership between the four 
Italian universities named, three industrial partners 
and an Italian banking group.295 
EU, national and regional policies and activities 
should be aligned to ensure bioeconomy-friendly 
framework conditions. This includes, for example, 
reviewing regulations designed to facilitate and 
support the development and commercialization of 
biobased products and the industrial use of wastes 
and residues. 
With regard to good governance measures, a new 
support measure in BIT II strives to strengthen re­
gional coordination, policy harmonization and best-
practice sharing. 
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
With regard to good governance, BIT II established 
a National Bioeconomy Coordination Group (NBCG) 
to support the strategy implementation process and 
to ensure better stakeholder coordination. As men­
tioned above, it is an inter-ministerial group, coordi­
nated by the Presidency of the Council of Ministers 
and consisting of the representatives from the same 
Presidency of the Council of Ministers, the Ministry 
for Economic Development, the Ministry of Agricul­
ture, Food and Forestry, the Ministry for Education, 
University and Research, the Ministry of the Envi­
ronment, Land and Sea, the Committee of Italian 
Regions, the Agency for Territorial Cohesion, and 
the Italian Technology Clusters for Green Chemistry, 
AgriFood and Blue Growth. This group developed the 
BIT II Implementation Action Plan (IAP) via a national 
consultation, which is to be updated regularly, and 
is tasked with implementing and monitoring the Bio­
economy nationwide. 
The strategy also defines a set of concrete indica­
tors for monitoring the strategy’s implementation 
process. These indicators are based on the EU key 
performance indicators (KPI) and the sustainability 
indicators proposed by the EU initiative. The indica­
tors relate to biomass availability, productive struc­
ture, employment structure, human capacity, innova­
tion, investment, demographics, markets, ensuring 
food security, managing natural resources, reduc­
ing dependence on non-renewable resources, cop­
ing with climate change, and enhancing economic 
growth.296 BIT II plans to adjust its indicators based 
on the new monitoring system (BioMonitor Project) 
being developed at EU level.

120
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
At regional level, the Conference of Regions and Au­
tonomous Provinces of Italy developed a common 
position paper on bioeconomy development in 2016. 
More than 20 regions have collaborated on defining 
strategic positions in the area of marine bioeconomy, 
agrifood and biobased industries. Regional bioecon­
omy development will be co-funded primarily by Eu­
ropean funds targeting the Research and Innovation 
Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3).297 
At the launch of BIT II in May 2019, a manifesto was 
signed to support the “industrial revolution” of the 
bioeconomy in Puglia, which formalized an alliance 
between the Puglia Region, the University of Bari 
and Confindustria Puglia.298 
The Basilicata Region’s Smart Specialisation Strat­
egy (S3) identified the bioeconomy as one of its five 
specialization areas for regional development and 
has been particularly active in agrifood production 
and green chemistry.299 
REFERENCES
279	 Ministry of the Environment and the Protection of Land and Sea. (2010). 
National Marine Strategy. Available at http://www.strategiamarina.
isprambiente.it/consultazioni/consultazioni-2014 [05.10.20]
280	Ministry of the Environment and the Protection of Land and Sea. (2010). 
Italian National Biodiversity Strategy. Available at https://www.cbd.int/doc/
world/it/it-nbsap-01-en.pdf [23.08.20]
281	 Ministry for Economic Development. (2010). Italian National Renewable 
Energy Action Plan. Available at http://www.buildup.eu/sites/default/files/
content/national_renewable_energy_action_plan_italy_en.pdf [23.08.20]
282	Ministry of the Environment and the Protection of Land and Sea. (2017). 
La Strategia Nazionale per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile (SNSvS). Available at 
https://www.minambiente.it/pagina/la-strategia-nazionale-lo-sviluppo-
sostenibile [23.08.20]
283 Presidency of Council of Ministers. (2017). Bioeconomy in Italy: A unique 
opportunity to reconnect the Economy, Society, and the Environment (BIT 
I). Available at http://cnbbsv.palazzochigi.it/media/1768/bit1_en.pdf 
[23.08.20]
284	Ministry of the Environment and the Protection of Land and Sea. (2018). 
Towards a Model of Circular Economy for Italy: Overview and Strategic 
Framework. Available at https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/sites/
default/files/strategy_-_towards_a_model_eng_completo.pdf [23.08.20]
285 Presidency of the Council of Ministers. (2019). Bioeconomy in Italy: A new 
bioeconomy strategy for a sustainable Italy (BIT II). Available at http://
cnbbsv.palazzochigi.it/media/1953/bit-ii-2019-en.pdf [23.08.20]
286	Presidency of the Council of Ministers. (2020). Implementation Action 
Plan (2020- 2025) for the Italian Bioeconomy Strategy BIT II. Available at 
http://cnbbsv.palazzochigi.it/media/1962/implementation-action-plan_
bioeconomy_28_-7-2020.pdf [23.08.20]
287 Presidency of the Council of Ministers. (2020). The Circular Bioeconomy: 
Its Role for the Economic, Social, Health, and Environmental Recovery 
of the Country. Available at http://cnbbsv.palazzochigi.it/media/1958/
bioeconomiacircolare_ripresapaese_cnbbsv_watermark-logged.pdf 
[23.08.20]
288 Intesa Sanpaolo-Assobiotec. (2020). Bioeconomy in Europe: 6th Report. 
Available at https://assobiotec.federchimica.it/docs/default-source/default-
document-library/bioeconomia-executive-summary.pdf?sfvrsn=4233127c_0 
[23.08.20]
289	I BIT I called for an increase in Italy’s bioeconomy turnover (about EUR 250 
billion/y in 2015) and jobs (about 1.7 M) by 20 percent by 2030, while 
increasing the level of circularity in the economy.
290	Bonaccorso, M. (2017a). Industrial Renaissance. Renewable Matter 
14/2017. Available at https://www.renewablematter.eu/articles/article/
industrial-renaissance [05.10.20]
291	 National Committee of Biosafety, Biotechnology and Life Sciences 
(CNBBSV). (2019). Implementation Action Plan (2020-2025) for the 
Italian Microbiome Initiative. Available at http://cnbbsv.palazzochigi.it/
media/1963/implementation-action-plan_microbiome_2872020-cnbbsv.
pdf [23.08.20]
292	I clusteragrifood.it
293	clusterspring.it
294	clusterbig.it
295 Bonaccorso, M. (2017b). In Italy starts the first edition of the first Master in 
Bioeconomy in the Circular economy. Available at https://ilbioeconomista.
com/2017/01/24/in-italy-starts-the-first-edition-of-the-first-master-in-
bioeconomy-in-the-circular-economy/ [05.10.20]
296	These indicators were slightly adjusted in BIT II to include the value added of 
bioeconomy subsectors
297	 Conference of the Italian Autonomous Regions. (2016). Documento delle 
regioni e delle province autonome di posizionamento sulla bioeconomia 
in attuazione della strategia nazionale di specializzazione intelligente 
(SNSI). Available at http://www.regioni.it/download/conferenze/485361/ 
[27.11.17].
298	Presentation of the V Report on Bioeconomy in Europe, Bari. (n.d.). Available 
at http://www.clusterspring.it/notizie/presentation-of-the-v-report-on-
bioeconomy-in-europe-bari/ [23.08.20]
299	Braia, L. (2016). The smart specialisation Strategy and the Bioeconomy 
Cluster in the Basilicata Region. Available at https://www.slideshare.
net/LucaBraia1/luca-braia-the-smart-specialisation-strategy-and-the-
bioeconomy-cluster-in-the-basilicata-region [05.10.20]

121

122
Latvia
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Prior to the release of its dedicated strategy, Ru­
ral Development support (EAFRD) through the EU 
provided an important source of funding for the de­
velopment of rural bioeconomy value chains and 
associated infrastructure in Latvia. In addition, the 
country’s 2014 Smart Specialization Strategy (RIS3) 
specifically targeted the bioeconomy in two out of 
five priorities, namely, “Knowledge-intensive bio 
economy” and “Biomedicine, medical technologies, 
bio-pharmacy and biotechnologies.”300 
In 2010, the “Strategy for Sustainable Development 
of Latvia until 2030”301 was adopted with the ob­
jective of becoming an EU leader in preservation, 
increase, and sustainable use of natural capital. Its 
focus was centered on the management of natural 
capital, creation of market instruments, capitaliza­
tion of natural assets, and promotion of sustainable 
lifestyles. 
A strategic objective of the “National Development 
Plan for Latvia for 2014 – 2020”302 is to promote 
economic activity in the regions, with one measure 
intended to support the development of agricultural, 
fisheries and forestry production, further process­
ing of products, and services (including niche prod­
ucts and services). It further seeks to promote the 
sustainable use and biological diversity of land and 
other natural resources and “green” production and 
“green” consumption.
In 2017, Latvia become the first Baltic state to 
publish a dedicated national bioeconomy strategy, 
called the “Latvian Bio-economy Strategy 2030”.303 
With this strategy, Latvia demonstrated a strong de­
sire to not only ensure the strength of its traditional 
primary sectors, but also foster a “new” bioeconomy 
industry. 
In 2018, Latvia joined the BIOEAST initiative, which 
brings countries in Central and Eastern Europe to­
gether to develop a knowledge-based bioeconomy. 
The central aim of the initiative is the circular use of 
biomass in order to avoid waste and generate new 
bio-based value chains. Latvia is also represented 
in the Baltic Sea Region Bioeconomy Council, which 
is an informal policy dialogue platform composed of 
15 – 20 members.304 In addition, the EU’s Strategy 
for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR) includes the bio­
economy under one of its policy areas with a number 
of projects, for which Latvia is a partner.305

123
At the end of 2017, the Latvian government pub­
lished the “Latvian Bio-economy strategy 2030” 
(LI-BRA). The strategy was developed in compliance 
with the Latvian Sustainable Development Strategy 
2030 and the National Development Plan 2014-
2020 and is also strongly aligned with the Europe­
an Union’s bioeconomy strategy of 2012, and also 
takes into account the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea 
Region (EUSBSR) and the European Commission’s 
Circular Economy Package (2015).
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The strategy development process was led by the 
Latvian Ministry of Agriculture and is characterized 
by broad stakeholder involvement. Representa­
tives from associations, research institutions and 
the inter-ministerial steering group (composed of 
the Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Economics, 
Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional 
Development, Ministry of Education and Science, 
Ministry of Welfare) were invited to provide input to 
the bioeconomy strategy.
According to the Latvian strategy, the bioeconomy 
encompasses the sustainable utilization of renew­
able natural resources (including plants, animals, 
micro-organisms, etc.) for producing food, feed, in­
dustrial products and energy. The strategy highlights 
the importance of the life sciences and converging 
technologies (such as biotechnology, nanotechnol­
ogy and ICT) for producing more sustainable and 
environmentally friendly products, as well as com­
pletely new products. The strategy specifically em­
phasizes that the term bioeconomy also refers to the 
promotion of biobased services, for example, in the 
construction, catering, or accommodation sectors.
In 2017, bioeconomy turnover according to the EU 
was EUR 7 billion, value added EUR 2 billion, and 
126,000 people were employed in the sector.306 
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
The strategy is aligned with the UN Sustainable Devel­
opment Agenda 2030 and highlights the potential of 
bioeconomy to contribute to a number of the SDGs. 
With reference to the EC Curricular Economy Package 
(2015), the strategy aims to be aligned with fundamen­
tal principles of the circular economy.
The strategy sees itself as a response to decreasing 
employment in the bioeconomy sector due in large 
part to structural changes in the agriculture sector 
(e.g. reduction in the number of small farms and in­
creasing production efficiency requiring fewer employ­
ees). It therefore defines three quantitative targets: 1) 
employment in the bioeconomy should increase by 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

124
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The Latvian bioeconomy strategy pursues a com­
prehensive approach to fostering bioeconomy de­
velopment.
In order to promote research and innovation, it particu­
larly stresses the need for increased public R&D invest­
ment. For example, a National Research Program on 
Bioeconomy should be established to guide long-term 
R&D activities. The strategy also prioritizes coopera­
tion between public and private actors, mainly in the 
form of public-private partnerships. In addition, public 
R&D activities should be coordinated by a Strategic 
Bioeconomy Research Alliance, an initiative set up 
in 2014, which unites 14 research institutions from 
agriculture, food and forestry. The government also 
envisages public support and co-financing for pilot and 
demonstration projects. 
Measures related to infrastructure development fo­
cus mainly on investment in the research infrastruc­
The Latvian bioeconomy strategy concentrates on the 
sustainable production and utilization of biobased re­
sources. It specifically targets businesses in the pri­
mary industries (including agriculture, forestry and 
fisheries) and in manufacturing, such as the food and 
feed industry, the wood industry, the chemical and 
pharmaceutical industry and also the textile industry. 
It highlights, for example, the promotion of innovative 
plant and animal breeding technologies, sustainable 
resource management practices, and improved land 
use efficiency. The strategy further emphasizes the 
need for increased public R&D on environmental pro­
tection (particularly with respect to soil fertility, water 
and air quality), climate resistant crops and tree spe­
cies, organic farming, and animal health and welfare.
The Latvian government mentions exploring untapped 
marine bioresources (such as seaweed, mussels 
and algae) for the production of chemicals and phar­
maceuticals, and also innovative, higher-value food 
products (such as functional foods). The strategy 
highlights the promotion of sustainable fisheries and 
aquaculture as a prerequisite.
Biorefinery development should contribute to produc­
ing advanced biofuels (e.g. from cellulose), platform 
chemicals, biodegradable plastics, and biobased sur­
factants based on vegetable oils, fats, sugar, algae 
and waste. In addition, the strategy document points 
to circular bioeconomy approaches for preventing 
waste at all stages of the value chain.
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
up to 128,000 employees by 2030, 2) added value 
of bioeconomy products should increase to at least 
EUR 3.8 billion by 2030 and the value of bioeconomy-
related exports should be boosted to at least EUR 9 
billion by 2030. 
The strategy specifically focuses on the promotion of 
rural development and the creation of local jobs and 
increased per capita incomes. Furthermore, the gov­
ernment seeks to reduce Latvia’s dependence on fos­
sil fuels by developing innovative, higher value-added 
bio-based products and services.
Five main action directions are presented: 1) attrac­
tive business environment for entrepreneurship in bio­
economy, 2) result-oriented efficient and sustainable 
resource management, 3) development of knowledge 
and innovations in bioeconomy sectors, 4) promotion 
of manufacturing the produce in bioeconomy, 5) social­
ly responsible and sustainable development. The strat­
egy does not identify specific measures, milestones, 
nor the sources of financing. There is no indication of 
an action plan being developed.

125
ture, but also on investment in the logistics infrastruc­
ture, such as roads, ports, warehouses, business 
parks, etc. While Latvia is considered a “data-driven 
nation” both in terms of technical infrastructure with 
nationwide internet coverage and in public adminis­
tration, the strategy does not make specific reference 
to digitalization (e.g. digital agriculture and precision 
farming). Biorefineries do not exist so far, but the po­
tential of a biorefinery based on macroalgae is being 
investigated.307 
The strategy sees the development of the future bio­
economy as depending heavily on a highly qualified 
workforce. The Latvian strategy therefore highlights 
the promotion of measures related to capacity building 
and education, including interdisciplinary and multi- 
disciplinary training and education programs, as well 
as higher education and life-long learning opportuni­
ties. At the same time, the strategy emphasizes fur­
ther training courses to improve entrepreneurial and 
business skills. 
The Latvian strategy has a business-oriented ap­
proach. With regard to supporting commercializa­
tion, the bioeconomy strategy focuses on promoting 
knowledge transfer and creating business-friendly 
framework conditions, e.g. by reducing administrative 
burdens in business, incentives for local entrepre­
neurship and also by means of stable tax policies. In 
addition, export promotion policies (e.g. in the form of 
export credit guarantees) and marketing efforts are 
considered important.
Public procurement policies targeting wood for the 
construction of public buildings, organically certified 
products, environmentally friendly packaging or locally 
produced products are proposed as demand-side in­
struments. Moreover, public awareness of bio-based 
products should be increased by means of dedicated 
information and education campaigns, and by adopting 
internationally recognized certification schemes and 
labels (e.g. FSC, PEFC, SBP). In addition, the strategy 
seeks to create and promote the brand of Latvia, em­
phasizing the significance of bioeconomy.
Among the measures mentioned for ensuring bioecon­
omy-friendly framework conditions are regulations 
for sustainable forestry and agriculture (e.g. land use 
policies based on functional land use principles). The 
government also seeks to provide a level-playing field 
for bio-based business and to ensure fair competition 
among actors. The strategy highlights the need for in­
creased cooperation among law enforcement agencies 
aimed at controlling the business of small producers 
and traders so as to avoid price distortions, especially 
in the area of un-processed food. 
The strategy proposes several measures to promote 
good governance in the bioeconomy (e.g. bioeconomy 
impact assessment for all strategic policy documents). 
International cooperation is encouraged between na­
tional and international research projects, particularly 
with countries in the Baltic Sea region and other EU 
member states. The aim is also to foster trade agree­
ments with countries in Africa and Asia. 
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
No monitoring framework is put in place. Progress 
will be monitored for the three strategic targets of 
the Strategy (employment, value-added, and ex­
port).
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
No.

126
REFERENCES
300	Ministry of Education and Science. (2014). Smart Specialisation Strategy. 
Available at https://izm.gov.lv/en/Science/smart-specialisation-strategy 
[21.08.20]
301	 Parliament of the Republic of Latvia. (2010). Sustainable Development 
Strategy of Latvia until 2030. Available at http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/
pdf/lat174235.pdf [21.08.20]
302	Parliament of the Republic of Latvia. (2012). National Development Plan of 
Latvia for 2014–2020. Available at http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/
lat174236.pdf [21.08.20]
303	Ministry of Agriculture. (2017). Latvian Bioeconomy Strategy 2030 
(Translation). Available at https://www.zm.gov.lv/public/files/CMS_Static_
Page_Doc/00/00/01/46/58/E2758-LatvianBioeconomyStrategy2030.pdf 
304 BSR Bioeconomy Council. Available at http://www.bsrbioeconomy.net/
council.html [21.08.20]
305	Council of the European Union. (2009). Presidency Conclusions. Available at  
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/
ec/110889.pdf [21.08.20]
306	Ronzon, T., & M’Barek, R. (2018). Socioeconomic Indicators to Monitor the 
EU’s Bioeconomy in Transition. Available at https://www.mdpi.com/2071-
1050/10/6/1745/htm [21.08.20]
307 Lohmann, B. (2020). Lettland. Available at https://biooekonomie.de/
lettland [21.08.20]

127

128
Nordics
In Northern Europe, the Nordic Council of Ministers, 
an official body for inter-governmental cooperation 
in the Nordic Region, has promoted bioeconomy 
development on a macro-regional level since 2012. 
The Nordic Council of Ministers consists of the Min­
isters for Nordic Cooperation (involving Denmark, 
Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, 
Greenland, and Åland) and 10 ministerial councils 
which cover different sectors and are supported by 
16 committees of senior officials.308 
The bioeconomy has been high on the political agen­
da of several annual programs for the Presidency of 
the Nordic Council of Ministers. In addition, specific 
actions have been taken in the North-West Atlantic, 
the Arctic region and the Baltic Sea Region. For ex­
ample, in 2014, the Nordic Council of Ministers com­
missioned an opportunity report for bioeconomy 
development in the West Nordic Countries,309 in­
cluding Greenland, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands. In 
2016, the Nordic Council of Ministers, together with 
the Arctic Economic Council, decided to put more 
emphasis on bioeconomic development in the Arctic 
with the Arctic Cooperation Programme, aimed at 
qualifying knowledge of the business environment 
and taking the bioeconomy business environment 
to the next level.310 In the Baltic Sea Region, the 
Nordic Council of Ministers leads the Action Plan 
for the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea 
Region (EUSBSR) to promote cooperation within 
the bioeconomy and within the following countries: 
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithu­
ania, Poland, and Sweden.311 
In 2017, the Nordic Council of Ministers published a 
selection of 25 Nordic bioeconomy case studies312 
illustrating the diverse bioeconomy activities in the 
Nordic countries and helping to raise awareness of 
the bioeconomy, its importance and potential within 
the public.
In 2018, the Nordic Council of Ministers adopted 
the “Nordic Bioeconomy Programme: 15 Action 
Points for Sustainable Change”313 under the Nordic 
cooperation which aims to create a strong Nordic 
community, while seeking to safeguard Nordic and 
regional interests and principles in the global com­
munity.
The Nordic Council of Ministers, in partnership with 
Nordic Sustainability and Nordregio, carried out an 
analysis, part of which identified current trends and 
policy insights for sustainable bioeconomy develop­
ment in the Nordic countries. The report, published 
in 2020, addresses topics on biofuels, alternative 
protein sources, and circular economy, and pays 
special attention to the impact of the COVID-19 pan­
demic.314
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade?

129
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
The Nordic Bioeconomy Programme builds on Agen­
da 2030 as well as the work of the Nordic Council 
of Ministers for Environment, Climate and Energy. 
It seeks to maintain and strengthen the Nordic re­
gion’s leading position in the conversion of differ­
ent types of biomass into valuable and sustainable 
technologies, products, and services. Furthermore, 
as the Nordic countries have already developed their 
own national policy approaches to the bioeconomy, 
which differ in both form and content, the Nordic 
Council of Ministers’ strategic program aims to add 
value to national bioeconomy policy efforts and cre­
ate synergies by integrating these national Nordic 
strategies.
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
Under the Icelandic Presidency in 2014, the Nordic 
Council of Ministers appointed the Nordic Bioecono­
my Panel with the objective of developing a strategic 
program for the Nordic bioeconomy. The program 
was discussed at several meetings of the panel, as 
well as in relevant councils of ministers and com­
mittees of senior officials. The Nordic bioeconomy 
program thus presents the outcome of various con­
sultation activities and focuses primarily on the pe­
riod 2018 – 2022. Further relevant actors involved in 
the policy development process included the Nordic 
institutions (particularly NordForsk, Nordregio, Nor­
dic Innovation, NordGen, Nordic Forest Research, 
and the Nordic Joint Committee for Agriculture and 
Food Research).
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
According to the strategy document the bioeconomy 
“(…) encompasses the utilization of renewable bio­
logical resources and the conversion of these re­
sources (including side streams and waste streams) 
into value-added products, technology and services.” 
The focus is on products like food, feed, biobased 
products, chemicals, materials, and bioenergy, but 
also services, such as water and air quality, shelter 
and recreation (e.g. walking, skiing and foraging for 
berries and mushrooms), and non-anthropogenic 
outcomes like biodiversity. Furthermore, the Nordic 
bioeconomy perspective includes better manage­
ment of the carbon cycle in relation to human ac­
tivities and the interplay between food, energy, and 
other biobased goods.
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
In the Nordic bioeconomy program, the Nordic Coun­
cil of Ministers bundles its environmental, social and 
economic ambitions for a more sustainable Nordic 
Region. The aim is to develop a new era of bioecon­

130
The focus of the strategic bioeconomy program is on 
the primary production. As the Nordic region is a major 
producer of primary biomass (approx. 30 percent of 
Europe’s forest production and more than 50 percent 
of the total marine harvest in Europe), the strategy 
emphasizes the potential benefit from adding value to 
biomass products through the promotion of resource 
efficiency and digitalization. It highlights that digital 
technologies and big data are increasingly playing 
a key role in the bioeconomy, as finding new ways to 
manage and process data would enable better un­
derstanding and more sustainable utilization of the 
different biological resources.315 
In particular, primary industries in rural areas are seen 
as offering opportunities for young people and women 
to stay in rural regions and to maintain a degree of self-
sufficiency in terms of energy, food and feed, fibers and 
contributing to increased resilience and security.
The strategic program further recognizes the huge 
potential of the Nordic region in food production and 
reduction of food waste in urban areas. The program 
thus focuses on promoting innovations in food produc­
tion systems and on developing new, sustainable and 
healthy food, and pharmaceutical products.
The strategy states that the diversity of biomass avail­
able in the Nordic region enables the parallel develop­
ment of relevant value-chains. By bringing together 
different stakeholders within research and innovation, 
primary production and industry (e.g. through the cre­
ation of networks), it is envisaged that biorefining in 
one sector should create synergies for other sectors 
and regions. 
Further priority areas highlighted in the document in­
clude timber construction, packaging, bioenergy, ma­
rine resources, and the borders between aquatic and 
terrestrial ecosystems.
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
omy, which builds up new industries, creates new 
jobs and achieves new standards for resource effi­
ciency. In this respect, it seeks to increase the com­
petitiveness of Nordic biobased industries and food 
industries by developing new value chains, guiding 
the transition of traditional biobased industries into 
technologically advanced industries and optimizing 
the production and value creation of biomass. The 
strategic program should help in answering the key 
question of how biological sectors can contribute 
to serving the needs of a growing population and 
mitigate climate change through the replacement 
of fossil-based products and improved use of global 
resources.
The document states that the bioeconomy can signif­
icantly contribute to the United Nations COP process 
and to reaching the 17 Sustainable Development 
Goals for 2030. It further includes five sustainability 
principles outlined in the appendix which set out the 
overarching criteria for a sustainable bioeconomy 
in the Nordic region: 1) responsible use of shared 
resources; 2) safe, sufficient and nutritious food for 
all; 3) a livable planet; 4) sustainable fair societies; 
5) changing mindsets and consumer behavior.
The document further defines a shared vision for the 
Nordic Bioeconomy, summarized as follows: com­
petitive biobased industries, sustainable resource 
management, resilient and diverse ecosystems, and 
inclusive economic development.
While introducing prioritized, short-term targets that 
can be achieved with the help of soft measures and 
funding already available, the policy strategy identi­
fies 15 action points allocated to three broad cat­
egories: 1) innovate (supporting research, innova­
tion and human capital); 2) accelerate (policies and 
market development), and 3) network (forging new 
and stronger connections). However, a budget for 
implementation is not documented.

131
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
With regard to research and innovation, the focus of 
the strategy is on increasing R&D funding through­
out the value chain within Nordic co-operation. Nor­
dForsk and Nordic Innovation are identified as key 
players in terms of providing future R&D funds. In 
addition, more bioeconomy R&D funding should be 
made available at the EU level.
There is also focus on mapping the interaction be­
tween biological by-products and the development 
of second and third-generation biofuels, and inves­
tigating how the bioeconomy can most efficiently 
contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases.
In addition, the strategy promises investment sup­
port to scale up demo and pilot projects within the 
Nordic bioeconomy. In this regard, an investment 
fund should be set up to boost interest in estab­
lishing biobased startups and to help them bridge 
the gap between pilot and demonstration, as well 
as helping bridge the gap between demonstration 
and industrialization. This should be achieved, for 
instance, by establishing strategic partnerships with 
existing financial institutions or via new “green” ven­
ture capital in line with the Nordic Green Bonds.
Industrial clusters and public-private partnerships 
(e.g. SME clusters around biorefineries) should be 
fostered as a tool for sharing best practices and 
facilitating development and innovation. Open ac­
cess to test and demonstration centers should 
be ensured through public-private partnerships or 
solely through public or private funding. This should 
help with the lack of access to innovation centers in 
rural areas by providing employment opportunities 
at hubs for local expertise. Furthermore, setting up 
a digital Nordic/Baltic Bioeconomy Portal should 
facilitate public-private partnerships and cluster-to-
cluster collaboration.
With regard to commercialization, the strategy fo­
cuses on providing market analysis and the map­
ping of Nordic/Baltic positions of strength within 
the bioeconomy (particularly in the areas of digita­
lization, climate work, social inclusion, and gender 
equality). 
Moreover, subsidies and/or tax incentives should 
promote investment in the bioeconomy and business 
development, with a view to making the biobased 
products economically competitive and establishing 
a Nordic brand. A virtual or more formally structured 
network (e.g. of Nordic stakeholders) should further 
provide expert assistance on commercialization, 
marketing, product registration, and funding oppor­
tunities.
In order to promote the demand side of the bioecon­
omy, targeted public procurement at national and EU 
level should be introduced and biobased chemicals, 
materials and energy prioritized. In addition, coher­
ent certification frameworks and harmonized labels 
and standards should contribute to building on the 
Nordic ecolabeling scheme and to developing a Nor­
dic biobased brand that emphasizes sustainability. 
The program also looks to influence consumer be­
havior, attract young people to the bioeconomy and 
promote exports. 
The strategy document recognizes that bioeconomy 
development requires a well-educated and compe­
tent workforce with many skills. This is why innova­
tive educational approaches should be fostered, 
especially in the lower levels of the school system. 
In addition, the strategy strives to establish Nordic 
bachelor’s and master’s programs and apprentice­
ships, promote the exchange of PhD students, cre­
ate new vocational training systems (allowing for 
trends such as interdisciplinary value chains and 
new technologies), and start the dialogue with rel­
evant stakeholders for developing new education 
and training programs.
With regard to promoting good governance, the 
strategy focuses on promoting coherent policies 
and aligning existing strategies and R&D programs, 
both nationally and internationally. In this respect, 
the pan-Nordic institutions should make a significant 
contribution by aligning their strategies and focusing 
on activities to facilitate sustainable change in the 
bioeconomy. Furthermore, the active dialogue on 
sustainable bioeconomy development should be pro­
moted with the EU and other international players.

132
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
The strategy document does not make clear how the 
program will be monitored or evaluated. 
To date, the macro-regional cooperation among the 
Nordic countries is an established, institutionalized 
regional bioeconomy cooperation that is unique in 
the world and that, with secure financial means, 
also promotes national and regional bioeconomy 
development.
REFERENCES
308  Mathisen, M. (2019). Nordic Bioeconomy Programme. Available at https://
colloque.inrae.fr/bioeconomy2019/content/download/4055/44494/
version/1/file/04.+M-MATHISEN+nordic_bioeconomy_strategy.pdf 
[11.09.20]
309	Matis. (2014). Future Opportunities for Bioeconomy in the West Nordic 
Countries. Available at https://www.matis.is/media/matis/utgafa/
Bioeconomy-in-the-West-Nordic-countries-37-14.pdf [11.09.20]
310	 Nordic Council of Ministers. (2018). Arctic Business Analysis Bioeconomy. 
Available at http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1175656/
FULLTEXT01.pdf [11.09.20]
311	 The Nordic Council of Ministers. (n.d.). Bioeconomy in the Baltic Sea Region. 
Available at http://bsrbioeconomy.net/about.html [11.09.20]
312 Nordic Council of Ministers. (2018). Nordic Bioeconomy: 25 cases for 
sustainable change. Available at http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/
diva2:1065456/FULLTEXT01.pdf [11.09.20]
313 Nordic Council of Ministers. (2018). Nordic Bioeconomy Programme: 15 
Action Points for Sustainable Change. Available at  https://norden.diva-
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1222743/FULLTEXT01.pdf [11.09.20]
314	 Nordice Council of Ministers. (2020). Ten Trends For the Sustainable 
Bioeconomy in the Nordic Artic and Baltic Sea Region. Available at https://
pub.norden.org/nord2020-037/nord2020-037.pdf [19.10.20]
315	 Ferlic, J. (2018). Nordic countries lead from the front with new bioeconomy 
action plan. Available at https://news.bio-based.eu/nordic-countries-lead-
from-the-front-with-new-bioeconomy-action-plan/ [11.09.20]
The strategy further highlights the important role of 
the EU regional innovation strategies and smart spe­
cialization strategies for developing new industries 
and technologies in the bioeconomy. 
In addition, macro-regional collaboration with the 
Baltic Sea and the Arctic region seeking to create 
multi-level platforms should be promoted, e.g. by 
continuing the work of the Nordic Bioeconomy Panel. 
According to the strategy document, the Nordic insti­
tutions play a key role in maintaining these connec­
tions in relation to the bioeconomy.
Interestingly, the strategy emphasizes regulatory 
frameworks to support green alternatives to fos­
sil-based products and services and thus lays the 
foundation for setting policy targets for the use of 
biomass, for the mandatory use or prohibition of 
products, or even for direct financial incentives in 
the form of taxes on products that are to be discour­
aged, and subsidies for new solutions.
In addition, the strategy highlights the need for 
cross-border freedom of movement to increase the 
long-term commercial viability of innovative bioecon­
omy products.

133

134
Norway
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy 
over the past decade? 
Norway is rich in both terrestrial and aquatic biologi­
cal resources and political support over the years 
has fostered a strong research environment. Over 
the years, bioeconomy development has become 
closely related to the topic of climate change and 
sustainable development. Recently, key questions 
center on how to develop more sustainable con­
sumption patterns, i.e. what the diets of the future 
are, how can food production (incl. salmon) be in­
creased in a sustainable way, what are alternative 
food sources of the future.
Norway is one of the pioneers of fostering the sustain­
able use of marine resources and developing innova­
tive marine bioindustries. In 2009, the government 
released the “Marine Bioprospecting Strategy”316 
as well as the “Strategy for an environmentally sus­
tainable Norwegian aquaculture industry”317. The 
bioprospecting strategy is oriented towards innova­
tion and commercialization and seeks to strengthen 
the pharmaceutical and processing industries. While 
the aquaculture strategy largely refers to industry 
development, it also includes environmental aspects 
of sustainable farming. The aquaculture strategy also 
seeks to strengthen international cooperation (e.g. 
2014 bilateral agreement with Germany) in order to 
ensure sustainable fisheries.318 
In 2011, the “National Strategy for Biotechnology” 
(2011 – 2020)319 defined a more comprehensive de­
velopment path for biotechnological innovation and 
commercialization across biotechnology sectors. 
More specifically, biotechnology should contribute to 
food safety as well as to “greening” of the industry 
and energy sectors.
A broader vision of an innovation-driven “biobased 
society” was presented in 2012 with the release of 
the “Research Programme on Sustainable Innova­
tion in Food and Biobased Industries” (BIONÆR),320 
which aims to strengthen the level of profitability 
and sustainability in the bio-based industries within 
agriculture and land-based biological resources. 
In order to bundle scientific competencies related to 
bioeconomy and biobased industries, the Norwegian 
Institute of Bioeconomy Research (NIBIO) was cre­
ated in 2015 by merging the country’s most impor­
tant agricultural and forestry research institutes. 
In November 2016, the Government published its 
first dedicated bioeconomy strategy under the title 
“Familiar resources – undreamt possibilities”321 
and, three years later in 2019, a corresponding Joint 
Action Plan for Research and Innovation322 from the 
Research Council, Innovation Norway and Siva.
The Norwegian Government considers bioeconomy 
as an essential part of its future circular economy 
and, as announced in the bioeconomy strategy, 
published a White Paper on waste policy and the 
circular economy in 2017.323

135
In 2017, “Better growth, lower emissions – the 
Norwegian Government’s strategy for green 
competitiveness.“324 was launched with the goals 
of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, increasing 
value creation, and ensuring high employment. The 
circular economy is highlighted prominently, and 
reference is made to the bioeconomy strategy as 
a means to ensure the sustainable use of biologi­
cal resources and as an area that offers promising 
“green solutions.”
Since publishing a national bioeconomy strategy, 
Norway has developed into one of the most locally 
structured bioeconomies in the world with a number 
of dedicated regional strategies. 
Over the years Norway has had a very active role 
in the bioeconomy activities of the Nordic Coun­
cil and the Nordic Council of Ministers. In 2018, 
Norway joined a regional collaboration, the Nordic 
co-operation, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, 
Sweden, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland, 
and under the leadership of the Nordic Council of 
Ministers pursues a strategic program for the Nordic 
bioeconomy. The Nordic Bioeconomy Programme 
presents a range of activities aimed at promoting 
the bioeconomy in the region, primarily covering the 
period 2018 – 2022.325 
Norway recently took over the chair (from 2019 – 2021) 
of the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC), an inter­
governmental cooperation between Norway, Finland, 
Russia, and Sweden which works on advancing the 
transition to a low carbon society. Norway also holds 
the chair of the Barents Forest Sector Network and 
has prioritized the forest-based bioeconomy.
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
The Norwegian government published its bioecon­
omy strategy “Familiar resources – undreamt pos­
sibilities” in November 2016. In 2019, its action plan 
was published by the Norwegian Research Council 
together with the public I&R agency, Innovation Nor­
way, and the Industrial Development Corporation 
of Norway (SIVA), a government cooperation with 
the aim of improving national infrastructure for in­
novation.
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The strategy is a result of a broad collaboration be­
tween the Ministries of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, 
Agriculture and Food, Climate and Environment, Edu­
cation and Research, Local Government and Modern­
ization, Petroleum and Energy, Transport and Com­
munications, and Foreign Affairs. National institutions 
such as Innovation Norway, the Research Council of 
Norway and the Norwegian Environmental Agency 
were especially important advisers in the process.
The Norwegian government initiated the develop­
ment of a dedicated bioeconomy strategy in March 
2015. It was developed over an eighteen-month 
consultative, multi-stakeholder process which in­
volved a national conference as well as a series of 
international expert workshops and regional meet­
ings. Industry representatives, research institutions, 
and NGOs were also given the opportunity to provide 
written input to a draft version. 
The Norwegian Research Council, Innovation Nor­
way, and SIVA are the authors of the action plan 
published in February 2019.

136
Bioeconomy is defined as the “sustainable, effective 
and profitable production, extraction and use of renew­
able, biological resources for food and feed, health 
products, energy, industrial materials, chemicals, pa­
per, textiles, and numerous other products.” The bio­
economy therefore encompasses almost all sectors, 
which produce, process or use biological resources 
in whatever form. It is especially the marine industry 
that raises productivity and value creation within the 
bioeconomy in Norway. 
As highlighted in the action plan, the report “Socio­
economic indicators for the Norwegian bioeconomy in 
transition”326 published in 2020 provides an overview 
of value creation and employment in biobased sectors 
in Norway using the same methods as used by Ronzon 
and M’Barek (2018)327 to measure the European Union. 
Their analysis reveals a high level of productivity and 
a relatively low share of workers in the bioeconomic 
sectors (144,000 employed in 2008 versus 130,000 
in 2017). Productivity strongly increased from NOK 76 
billion added value in 2008 to NOK 130 billion in 2017, 
with the fishing and aquaculture sectors largely respon­
sible for this impressive growth spurt. Overall, food-
related sectors accounted for more than 80 percent 
of the total added value in the Norwegian bioeconomy. 
In addition, pharmaceuticals experienced a dramatic 
shift towards biobased production. The report further 
points out that the bioeconomy is important for secur­
ing jobs in rural areas.
The Norwegian bioeconomy strategy seeks to lay the 
foundations for a common understanding of bioecon­
omy and its national opportunities and challenges. The 
strategy points out three overarching objectives - in­
creased value creation, reduction in climate gas emis­
sions, increased resource efficiency and sustainability 
- and four focus areas. It clearly pursues economic 
goals, such as the creation of wealth and employment, 
and improvement of the country’s competitiveness. 
The bioeconomy should contribute to sustainable de­
velopment, specifically to a more circular and envi­
ronmentally friendly, low-emission economy. Further 
development of the bioeconomy is closely linked to a 
circular economy. The SDGs are not explicitly stated in 
the strategy, but there are clear aspirations to reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to more sus­
tainable utilization of renewable biological resources.
The Action Plan can be seen as a guiding document 
for how the main policy actors (the Research Council 
of Norway, Innovation Norway, and Siva) will work to­
gether to ensure a smooth transition between relevant 
institutions and instruments within and across gov­
ernment agencies. Four “subobjectives” are defined 
as: 1) offering the right and customized instruments, 
2) simplifying the transition between different instru­
ments, 3) mobilizing research and innovation within 
the bioeconomy, 4) promoting research and innovation 
collaboration. The strategy is not intended to replace 
other white papers and programs, but to enable cross-
over cooperation and innovation. 
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
As Norway is rich in natural resources, the national bio­
economy strategy emphasizes the primary industries, 
especially the forest and marine sectors. The strategy 
focuses on four priority areas: 1) co-operation across 
sectors, industries, and thematic areas, 2) developing 
markets for biobased products, 3) sustainable pro­
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6

137
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
The Norwegian dedicated bioeconomy strategy pro­
motes a comprehensive array of instruments.
With a view to promoting research and innovation, the 
strategy supports public R&D and encourages innova­
tion projects along the entire bioeconomy value chain. 
In 2020, funds for the public sector were announced 
under the heading “A circular biobased economy.” The 
action plan calls for life cycle analyses and potentially 
requires that such analyses are included in the an­
nouncement of selected projects. Biodiversity mapping 
is supported to make production and extraction activi­
ties in the primary industries more sustainable. 
In order to strengthen (societal) dialogue and innovation 
activities across disciplines and across national borders, 
the strategy proposes support for networking activities, 
cooperation platforms, the establishment of public-
private partnerships, and bilateral collaboration with 
selected countries. Cluster development is encouraged 
to increase cooperation across sectors, industries and 
thematic areas, and to establish new business fields. 
Three main cooperation platforms for development of 
the bioeconomy are the SFI Centre for Research-based 
Innovation, Norwegian Innovation Clusters (NIC), and the 
Innovation Program of Siva. To further develop these col­
laboration platforms, greater focus is placed on enabling 
technologies rather than raw sources.
With regard to research and innovation, the Action Plan 
specifically points to the various instruments offered 
by the Research Council of Norway, Innovation Norway, 
and Siva along the entire project development chain 
from basic research to market access. For example, 
Norwegian companies can apply to Innovation Norway, 
through the environmental technology scheme, for 
grants to develop, construct, and test new environ­
mental technology. 
The Action Plan also highlights co-financing of test and 
demonstration facilities that can be shared by several 
companies and R&D institutions. 
Infrastructure support is focused mainly on the re­
search and innovation sector. SIVA, a state-owned real 
estate company investing in industry parks and Sci­
ence and Technology parks, has no special schemes 
dedicated to supporting the bioeconomy. It has, howev­
er, invested about NOK 250 million in total in physical 
infrastructure aimed at bioeconomy-related activity.
Norway is home to one of the most advanced biorefin­
eries in operation today, based on lignocellulosic feed­
stock and run by Borregard in Sarpsborg. The Research 
Council of Norway and Innovation Norway were involved 
in financing the R&D project that laid the foundations for 
the factory. In 2016, Borregaard opened the world’s first 
commercial-scale facility for microfibrillated cellulose.
duction of biological resources, 4) efficient use and 
profitable processing of biological resources. 
In addition to the four priority areas, the strategy 
emphasizes the promotion of key enabling technolo­
gies (including biotechnology, nanotechnology, and 
ICT) to facilitate the development of new biobased 
processes, products and services, such as the mi­
crobial production of biopharmaceuticals and food 
ingredients, and the anaerobic fermentation of bio­
gas. Digitalization plays an important role in pro­
moting the sustainable production and utilization 
of these bioresources and cutting labor costs. The 
strategy specifically addresses goal conflicts and op­
portunities to minimize them, for example by minimiz­
ing waste and optimizing efficiency of use. Biorefinery 
development in the food and wood industry is also 
considered a promising route in Norway. 
The action plan sets priorities in the following areas: 
1) circular economy ( e.g. increased use of residual 
waste and side streams), 2) bioeconomy as a platform 
for technology development (e.g. biotechnology, au­
tomation and other digital solutions), 3) strengthen 
exports ( e.g. recruit foreign companies for trade and 
research collaboration), 4) active participation in EU 
and international work, 5) dissemination of knowledge 
(e.g. arrange regional thematic meetings and active 
dialogue with stakeholders).

138
Norway has a long tradition of private- public co-opera­
tion, and many public instruments are in place to support 
innovation and business development. Commercializa­
tion and the efficient use and value-oriented processing 
of biobased resources should be supported by public 
certification schemes and subsidies for sustainable for­
estry. Examples highlighted in the Action Plan include 
Innovation Norway’s “Bioeconomy scheme (Bioøkonomi­
ordningen)”, which managed about NOK 90 in 2019 for 
activities within the biobased business sector. 
Demand-side measures are considered necessary to 
stimulate markets for biobased products, e.g. by de­
veloping product and labeling standards and certifica­
tion systems. Publicly-funded information campaigns, 
education materials, and product labeling should 
further raise awareness of biobased products. The 
public sector should serve as a role model and use its 
purchasing power to leverage market demand, e.g. by 
implementing suitable public procurement practices 
and by constructing biobased buildings. 
With regard to bioeconomy friendly framework condi­
tions, Norway already has many years of experience 
in environmental taxation in line with the country’s 
climate policy. In this context, the government pro­
poses several regulatory improvements to create a 
level playing field for biobased products, for example 
taxes or quota for fossil-based products to account for 
negative environmental and climate effects. In addi­
tion, regulatory changes are considered necessary to 
promote circular economy approaches and the use of 
residues, e.g. in the field of wastewater treatment. With 
a view to the sustainable production and extraction of 
biological resources, the strategy intends to develop 
new regulations for the harvesting and exploitation of 
microalgae, to revise bioprospecting regulations, and 
to adapt legislation to promote investments in sustain­
able fisheries. 
With regard to good governance measures, interna­
tional collaboration in the bioeconomy is stimulated by 
Norwegian participation in the EU Framework Program 
for R&I and the country’s OECD membership.
The action plan provides a framework and direction 
for the work of the three main actors and above all 
seeks to ensure the most efficient allocation of tasks 
between these institutions and the different instru­
ments they offer. For example, a collaboration com­
mittee has been established for the three main actors 
and there is a working group of professional advisers in 
the bioeconomy composed of various actors. The work­
ing group meets regularly to create greater ownership 
of common tasks and objectives in the bioeconomy 
and aims to organize an annual seminar in 2020 and 
beyond for relevant employees across various bodies. 
In addition, there are plans to simplify the sharing of 
information between the three main actors especially 
in the early phase of projects.
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
The strategy paper covers a period of 10 years and 
will be assessed by a mid-term evaluation (audit) 
after five years.
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
Norway is one of the few countries in the world that 
has several dedicated regional bioeconomy strate­
gies. The focus is on bioeconomy clusters and on 
how to use a multi-stakeholder approach. In this 
respect, some regions concentrate on agricultural 
resources, some on forestry resources, and some 
on fishery resources.
The Bioeconomy Strategy for Innlandet 2017 – 2024,328 
a business strategy with an action plan, looks to

139
contribute to increased competitiveness and value 
chain creation and to the “green shift” in Norway. 
Innlandet has a significant proportion of the coun­
try’s biological resources and the strategy sets five 
goals to become a leading player in the bioecono­
my: 1) knowledge and competence, 2) market and 
competitiveness, 3) biological resources and waste 
streams, 4) cooperation, 4) visibility and commu­
nication. The strategy was prepared with collabo­
ration between the county municipalities and the 
County Governor of Hedmark and Oppland, and re­
sponsibility for implementation lies with the steer­
ing group. In addition, a Council for Bioeconomic 
Growth (BioRåd) has been established to report to 
the steering group. 
The Bioeconomy Strategy for the Gjøvik Region 
2018 – 2022329 is a follow-up to the above-men­
tioned Innlandet bioeconomy strategy and strives 
to build on its comparative advantage in R&D and 
business development to become a leader in sus­
tainable biobased industries. 
The Strategy for Bioeconomy in Rogaland 2018 –
2030330 sees itself as part of a “green shift” and 
seeks to move from a linear to a circular economy in 
order to become a bioeconomy powerhouse in Nor­
way. Its overarching goals include increasing job cre­
ation, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, increasing 
biomass production from land and sea by at least 
20 percent by 2030 (biomass should be primarily in 
high protein), increase production of raw materials for 
feed to cover at least 30 percent of the needs of the 
agriculture and aquaculture industries in Rogaland, 
and becoming an internationally recognized center 
of competence for research on the bioeconomy. It 
includes an Action Plan with the county municipality 
responsible for its implementation and a Bio-Council 
with industry representatives and working groups for 
the focus areas. It requires yearly reporting to regional 
authorities and more in-depth reporting on goals and 
deliverables every four years.
Namdalen in the county of Trøndelag developed its 
own Bioeconomy in Namdalen - proposed regional 
strategy331 in 2018. As a large raw material supplier, 
Namdalen looks to increase biomass production and 
value creation with this strategy.
In the county of Viken, Østfold developed its own 
strategy in 2016, Strategy for Bioeconomy in Øst­
fold.332 It seeks to increase value creation and em­
ployment in the bioeconomy, enhance the regional 
innovation system, and ensure maximum resource 
utilization of available biomass through a number of 
comprehensive measures. 
316 	Norwegian Ministries of Fisheries and Costal Affairs, Education and Research, 
Trade and Industry and Foreign Affairs. (2009). Marine bioprospecting – a source 
of new and sustainable wealth growth. Available at https://www.regjeringen.no/
globalassets/upload/fkd/vedlegg/rapporter/2009/marine_bioprospecting_
report.pdf [21.08.2020]
317	 Norwegian Ministries of Fisheries and Costal Affairs. (2009). Strategy for an 
Environmentally Sustainable Norwegian Aquaculture Industry. Available at 
https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/fkd/vedlegg/diverse/2009/
strategy-for-an-sustainable-aquaculture.pdf [21.08.2020]
318	 Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2014). The Government‘s Germany Strategy. 
Available at https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/ud/vedlegg/
europa/tyskland_strategi2014.pdf [08.07.20]
319	 Ministry of Education and Research. (2012). National Strategy for Biotechnology. 
Available at https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/kd/vedlegg/
forskning/national_strategy_for_biotechnology_2011-2020.pdf [21.08.20]
320	 BIONÆR. (2018). Research Programme on Sustainable Innovation in Food and 
Biobased Industries. Available at https://www.forskningsradet.no/en/about-the-
research-council/programmes/bionar/ [21.08.20]
321	 Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries. (2016). Familiar resources – undreamt 
possibilities. Available at https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/5b2dc02e8dd
047adba138d7aa8b4dcc1/nfd_biookonomi_strategi_engelsk_uu.pdf [21.08.20]
322	 The Research Council of Norway. (2019). Joint Action Plan for Research and 
Innovation. Available at https://www.forskningsradet.no/contentassets/
fec0c769a9c14f3abd647bec4c437cbb/biookonomi_handlingsplan_endelig.pdf 
[21.08.20]
323	 Ministry of Climate and the Environment. (2017). White Paper on waste 
policy and the circular economy. Available at https://www.regjeringen.
no/contentassets/4c45f38bddee47a7b7847af108894c0c/no/pdfs/
stm201620170045000dddpdfs.pdf [21.08.20]
324	 The Ministry of Climate and Environment. (2018). Better growth, lower 
emissions– the Norwegian Government’s strategy for green competitiveness. 
Available at https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/4a98ed15ec264d0e93
8863448ebf7ba8/t-1562e.pdf [21.08.20]
325  Nordic Council of Ministers. (2018). Nordic Bioeconomy Programme: 15 Action 
Points for sustainable change. Available at https://norden.diva-portal.org/
smash/get/diva2:1222743/FULLTEXT01.pdf [21.08.20]
326 	Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education. 
(2020). Socioeconomic Indicators to Monitor Norway’s Bioeconomy in 
Transition. Available at https://www.innovasjonnorge.no/contentassets/
e1709928616d4c5bb962f9388e7673a3/nifureport2020-5.pdf [21.08.20]
327	 Ronzon, T., & M’Barek, R. (2018). Socioeconomic Indicators to Monitor the 
EU’s Bioeconomy in Transition. Available at https://www.mdpi.com/2071-
1050/10/6/1745/htm [21.08.20]
328	 The county governor of Oppland et al. (2017). Bioeconomy Strategy for Innlandet 
2017-2024. Available at https://www.hedmark.org/globalassets/hedmark/
naringsutvikling/dokumenter/biookonomistrategi-for-innlandet-2017---2024.pdf 
[21.08.2020]
329	 Gjøvik Region Development. (2018). Bioeconomy Strategy for the Gjøvik Region 
2018 – 2022 (Consultation Draft). Available at https://www.gjovikregionen.
no/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Bio%C3%B8konomistrategi-for-
Gj%C3%B8vikregionen-h%C3%B8ringsutkast.pdf [21.08.20]
330	 Rogaland County Municipality. (2018). Strategy for Bioeconomy in Rogaland 
2018 - 2030. Available at https://www.rogfk.no/_f/p1/i976e4777-83b5-
4eeb-a1d3-f98f5241121f/strategi-for-biookonomi-i-rogaland-20182030.pdf 
[21.08.20]
331	 Trøndelag Forskning og Utvikling. (2018). Bioeconomy in Namdalen - proposed 
regional strategy. Available at https://tfou.no/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/
tfou-notat-2018-110.pdf  [21.08.20]
332	 Østfold County Municipality. (2016). Strategy for Bioeconomy in Østfold. Available 
at https://bioeconomyregion.com/app/uploads/2019/05/%C3%98stfold-
strategi-for-biookonomi-september-2016.pdf [21.08.20]
REFERENCES

140
Spain
1
What have been the major bioeconomy policy developments over the 
past decade?
In 2016, the Spanish government adopted the first 
national bioeconomy strategy. The document titled 
“The Spanish Bioeconomy Strategy: 2030 Horizon” 
reflects the government’s goal to develop a sustain­
able Spanish bioeconomy in the coming 15 years.333 
In 2018 a second dedicated Bioeconomy Action 
Plan was released.334 The bioeconomy has also 
been included, in a comprehensive fashion, among 
the Spanish research and innovation objectives, 
within the framework of the revision of the State R 
& D Plan for the period 2017 – 2020. 
Unlike any other country in Europe, the development 
of the bioeconomy in Spain has been characterized 
by a strong regional focus (partially supported by 
the EU and the National Rural Development Pro­
gramme). Several autonomous communities have 
started to develop their own initiatives in the area of 
the bioeconomy. All 17 Spanish regions featured the 
bioeconomy in their “smart” specialization strategies 
and almost half are working on their own strategies. 
As of 2020, Extremadura, Andalusia, Basque and 
Castilla León have finalized strategies. 
At the beginning of June 2020, the Spanish Govern­
ment published España Circular 2030, a Strategy 
for Circular Economy in Spain until 2030. It seeks 
to contribute to Spain’s efforts to transition to a 
sustainable, decarbonized, resource-efficient and 
competitive economy and contains the objectives 
of a 30% reduction in the national consumption of 
resources and a 15% reduction in waste generation 
(as compared to 2010).335 
With the adoption of a dedicated bioeconomy strate­
gy in 2016, the Spanish government sought early on 
to embed the bioeconomy comprehensively into the 
political context. More recently, the concept of the 
circular economy has gained political relevance.
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?

141
The first initiative for a national bioeconomy strat­
egy was taken by the Ministry of the Economy and 
Competitiveness and the Ministry of Agriculture, 
Food and the Environment in early 2014. A work­
ing group, composed of private and public experts 
and chaired by the Secretary of State for Research, 
Development and Innovation (SEIDI), was set up to 
elaborate a first strategy draft. From this point, the 
document underwent public consultation, address­
ing more than 200 key experts identified through 
a survey, as well as public feedback. The strategy 
was finalized and adopted in March 2016. From the 
beginning, the regions of Spain have also played a 
strong part by vocalizing their interest and their role 
in implementing biobased activities.
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4
The national bioeconomy strategy defines the bio­
economy as “the set of economic activities based on 
products and services, generating economic value, 
making efficient and sustainable use of resources 
of biological origin as fundamental elements.” The 
definition covers the production and commercializa­
tion of food, forestry products, bioenergy, and other 
biobased products by means of physical, chemical, 
biochemical, and biological processes.
Based on statistical analyses of the Bioeconomy 
Knowledge Center in 2017, the bioeconomy in Spain 
generated a turnover of EUR 219 million, added val­
ue of EUR 65 million and employed 1.42 million.336
The national bioeconomy strategy has two elements. 
From a global perspective, they address the great 
societal challenges Spain is already facing, includ­
ing climate change and global food security. In the 
regional and national context, the strategies intend 
to increase competitiveness and boost economic 
growth by promoting innovative technologies and 
the internationalization of biobased companies. 
Moreover, Spain seeks to develop a diversified and 
more environmentally sustainable economy in which 
bioeconomy is seen to contribute specifically to rural 
development and stronger territorial cohesion. 
No direct reference is made to the SDGs, however 
the strategy can be viewed as in line with advancing 
the transition to a circular economy, as launched by 
the European Commission in 2015. 
On adoption of the strategy in 2016, the government 
also published the First Annual Action Plan for 2016 
with five main actions and a budget estimate. The 
strategy document proposed the publication of annu­
al action plans at the beginning of each financial year. 
However, the second action plan was published in 
2018. The five main actions and most of the submea­
sures from the first action plan remain the same: 1) 
to promote public and private research and company 
investments in innovation, 2) to reinforce the social, 
political and administrative context, 3) to promote 
the competitiveness and development of the market, 
4) to develop demand for new products, 5) plan to 
expand and promote the bioeconomy. 
It was announced that the Spanish Strategy on Bio­
economy would be updated in 2019, but this has not 
yet taken place.337 
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5

142
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
Spain takes a comprehensive approach to develop­
ing the national bioeconomy. The first action plan 
provides a budget estimate for research and inno­
vation funding composed of European Union funds 
(H2020), general state administration funds, and 
regional administration funds. In 2016, the available 
funds were estimated to add up to EUR 230 million. 
The strategy document plans for a total bioeconomy 
budget of EUR 1.1 billion up to 2020. No further 
funds are defined in the second action plan.
The Spanish strategy defines a mix of public re­
search and innovation programs funded under Ho­
rizon2020 and RIS 3, which provide EUR 570 million. 
It further specifies the support for new multidisci­
plinary alliances which will be funded, e.g. under 
Horizon2020, the State Scientific and Technical 
Research and Innovation Plan and further innova­
tion programs in the context of Rural Development 
Programs (PDR), providing around EUR 696 million. 
The promotion of public-private sector collaboration 
in order to enhance existing value chains and to cre­
From the beginning, the national bioeconomy strategy 
document explicitly emphasizes that the transition to 
a sustainable bioeconomy will be driven by innovations 
in the biosciences and digitization. The strategy builds 
strongly on the competency and economic importance 
of the agrifood and forestry sectors to promote more 
sustainable production and lead bioeconomy develop­
ment. In this respect, new technologies and innova­
tion should contribute to improving the efficiency of 
productive, organizational and logistics processes. 
For example, cropping systems should be improved 
by sustainable intensification practices and “omics” 
technologies as well as precision farming tools. New 
processing, packing, conservation, and cold chain 
technologies should help to reduce waste throughout 
the supply chain while also improving the nutritional 
quality of traditional and new functional products. In 
the forestry sector, the strategy stresses the imple­
mentation of sustainable resource management sys­
tems. Knowledge gained in the field of genetics and 
genomics should contribute to increasing the sector’s 
productivity. In doing so, the useful life of traditional 
wood products (e.g. construction, packaging, furniture, 
etc.) should be extended. The strategy promotes the 
development of high-tech materials, such as wood 
composites, to increase added value as well as mate­
rial efficiency. 
The strategy document seeks to foster positive spill­
over effects from the primary sector to bioinnovation 
in other industrial sectors. For example, by support­
ing biorefining projects, which use residues and by-
products from agriculture and the food industry, to 
develop a range of new biomaterials and bioproducts 
(including biolubricants, bioplastics, food additives, 
cosmetics, solvents, chemicals, etc.). Advances are 
also anticipated in the bioenergy field, in particular by 
developing new ways of synthesizing biofuels through 
the use of thermochemical or biochemical technolo­
gies and of using alternative feedstocks, especially 
organic waste and residues. Furthermore, the Spanish 
strategy targets the promotion of marine biotechnol­
ogy and development of the blue bioeconomy, which 
uses a variety of marine compounds (such as enzymes, 
polymers, carbohydrates, etc.) to obtain pharmaceuti­
cals, chemicals, and other bioproducts. Great potential 
is also attributed to the production of biomass from 
non-conventional sources (such as algae and micro­
organisms). Spain has been impacted by hot weather 
conditions and seasonal droughts. Consequently, the 
policy paper stresses that bioeconomy development 
can only be based on the efficient and sustainable use 
of water resources, i.e. by promoting adequate water 
management and water reuse across sectors. 
The strategy also highlights the importance of the bio­
economy’s social dimension and underlines the need 
for public engagement. In particular, the acceptance 
of new and innovative technologies would create the 
basis for further bioeconomy development.338 
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6

143
ate new ones is an important pillar in the strategy. 
Successful public-private partnership models will be 
analyzed to develop a database of best practices for 
bioeconomy-related public research projects.
The government promotes clusters and IT platforms, 
including campuses of excellence, to build up a 
state-of-the art bioeconomy infrastructure and to 
enhance networking activities among stakehold­
ers. Co-funding by the private sector is considered 
important in these activities, e.g. when it comes to 
pilot and demonstration plants. However, a large 
commercial biorefinery on the scale of France or 
Finland is not yet foreseen. 
With respect to measures promoting capacity build­
ing and education, the strategy places emphasis on 
new training and education programs that answer 
the needs of the private sector, such as bioeconomy 
curricula in universities. The policy document also 
highlights the need for train-the-trainer programs to 
ensure the professional management of research 
projects at universities. In terms of fostering public 
awareness and further education, the strategy sup­
ports the development of tools and materials for 
self-learning, including open access platforms. As of 
2018, 21 dissemination and training courses were 
organized (8 by the central administration and the 
autonomous regional communities, 7 by universi­
ties, and 6 by private entities).339 
The Second Action Plan specifies developing at least 
2 courses for those engaged in training in the man­
agement and financing of bioeconomy-related proj­
ects (e.g. in Castilla León and Andalusia).
The government seeks to mainstream commercial­
ization support for bio-based products in existing 
policies and measures of the ministries, and in the 
activities of the trade promotion agencies. The strat­
egy also supports communicating and demonstrat­
ing the various success stories of biobased innova­
tions and their positive effects (including increased 
productivity and job creation) to foster awareness in 
the business community. 
Another package of measures relates to promot­
ing bioeconomy development on the demand side, 
including the organization of an annual bioeconomy 
conference (not yet delivered) for which the action 
plan in 2016 foresaw a budget of EUR 10,700. To 
raise awareness of the bioeconomy, the strategy 
stresses the need to create stakeholder dialogue 
platforms and design a communication strategy. 
The strategy also highlights the development of a 
public procurement policy and labeling systems to 
increase demand for biobased products. In addi­
tion, the strategy lists the need to give visibility to 
bioeconomy actions through a specific website and 
newsletter. 
The Second Action Plan highlights results from the 
report by the Spanish Foundation for Science and 
Technology (FECYT) on social perception of the bio­
economy. This project was based on discussions with 
20 focus groups throughout the country and resulted 
in varied conclusions: among them the limited knowl­
edge of what underpins the bioeconomy and the 
need to improve information and communication.
The strategy highlights the need to improve the regu­
latory framework conditions to provide incentives 
for bioeconomy development and remove barriers. 
This should be achieved, for example, by identifying 
and overcoming legal and administrative hurdles in 
order to bring biobased products to the market. 
The Spanish bioeconomy strategy seeks to foster 
good governance in the bioeconomy, notably by 
forming a Spanish Bioeconomy Observatory, which 
includes a Bioeconomy Strategy Monitoring Group 
composed of representatives from ministries and 
autonomous communities. A Strategy Management 
Committee, composed of representatives from the 
Strategy Monitoring Group, a Technical Scientific 
Support Group, and the Technological Networks 
Group will monitor and reinforce the implementa­
tion of support measures. 
With a view to international collaboration, the gov­
ernment seeks mainly to increase cooperation and 
exchange with other EU member states and with 
the Latin American countries active in bioeconomy 
development. Furthermore, the strategy stresses 
the importance of international monitoring activities 
and seeks to contribute to such efforts. 
The Second Action Plan calls for the preparation of 
a map of the bioeconomy in Spain identifying indica­
tors and capacities (e.g. research groups, facilities,

144
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
Implementation is monitored through the Bioecon­
omy Strategy Monitoring Group, the Strategy Man­
agement Committee, a Technical Scientific Support 
Group, and the Technological Networks Group.
projects under development, and technology compa­
nies working in the field) as well as smart monitoring 
and gathering of financing opportunities, collabora­
tion, and market prospecting. 
At the regional level, 8 out of 17 autonomous regions 
are promoting bioeconomy developments.340 
In 2017, the Extremadura regional government an­
nounced the “Extremadura 2030” policy strategy 
which targets various bioeconomy-related topics.341 
Bioeconomy policy is treated under the umbrella of 
the green and circular economy. The strategy seeks 
to strengthen regional specialization in the agrifood, 
forestry and wood processing, clean energy, green 
tourism, and health sectors. It calls for improved 
resource management, i.e. by means of reuse and 
recycling technologies as well as sustainable water 
management practices. Agroecological practices 
are also considered important for promoting green 
agriculture. In addition, the strategy aims to encour­
age new business models for the “4th industrial 
revolution” which are based particularly on circular 
approaches but also on integrating physics, digital, 
and biological technologies.
The Andalusian Circular Bioeconomy Strategy342, 
approved by the Andalusian Government in Sep­
tember 2018, focuses on the areas of bioeconomy 
activities that are less developed in the community 
and therefore need greater institutional support. It 
sets the time horizon for 2030 and dedicates EUR 
1.4 million aimed at specific actions that have been 
developed with the collaboration of more than 50 
external experts from the sectors of interest. It sees 
the bioeconomy as key to sustainable development 
as well as an opportunity for increased knowledge 
and business for the industries and the citizens of 
Andalusia. Relevant sectors for the bioeconomy in­
clude agriculture, forestry, fishing, food, and paper 
production, as well as part of the chemical, biotech­
nology, and energy industries.
The Government of Castilla y León released the first 
Agrifood Bioeconomy Strategy in Spain in 2019.343 
The main objectives of the plan are to 1) increase 
the profitability of agricultural and livestock farms 
and related industries through sustainable and com­
petitive production in a climate change environment, 
2) to use by-products/residues from agricultural or 
livestock production and reincorporate them into 
the agrifood value chain under the principles of the 
circular economy, 3) develop new treatment and ex­
traction processes to obtain sustainable bioprod­
ucts and cleaner energy, 4) efficient and sustainable 
use of water. The plan establishes five lines of action 
through 42 programs to achieve the objectives. The 
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock will allocate EUR 
5 million a year to boost the agrifood bioeconomy. The 
plan is the result of the work carried out through the 
Agri-Food Research and Innovation Map, launched in 
2016, with a budget of EUR 10 million per year, and 
with 168 projects underway in the sector.
A new regional bioeconomy strategy was released 
with an emphasis on showing the possibilities of 
the circular forest-based bioeconomy in the Basque 
Country and how it can help to create new produc­
tive models that promote sustainable economic de­
velopment.344 
In 2018, plans were announced for the creation of 
an Aragonese Bioeconomy Strategy. In the same

145
333	Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment. (2016). Spanish 
Bioeconomic Strategy: Horizon 2030. Available at http://agripa.org/
download-doc/102159 [21.08.20]
334	Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment. (2018). Spanish 
Bioeconomic Strategy: Horizon 2030 – Action plan 2018. Available at 
http://agripa.org/attachment/5e8c2a70-c40a-41b9-be6c-798d7d009eb2/
planactuacion2018_eebio [21.08.20]
335	Spanish Government. (2020). España Circular 2030 - Spanish Strategy for 
the Circular Economy. Available at https://www.miteco.gob.es/es/calidad-y-
evaluacion-ambiental/temas/economia-circular/espanacircular2030_def1_
tcm30-509532.PDF [21.08.20]
336	Ronzon, T., and M’Barek, R. (2018). Socioeconomic Indicators to Monitor 
the EU’s Bioeconomy in Transition. Available at https://www.mdpi.
com/2071-1050/10/6/1745/htm [21.08.20]
337	 Escudero, J. (2019). Overview of state of play on bioeconomy in Spain. 
Available at https://bioeast.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ws3_spain.
pdf [21.08.20]
338 Bonaccorso, M. (2017). Sustainable Ambition: Dossier Spain. Available 
at https://renewablematter.eu/articles/article/sustainable-ambition 
[21.08.20]
339 Laínez, M and Periago, M. J. (2018). The Bioeconomy: An Opportunity for 
the Spanish Economy. Available at https://www.intechopen.com/books/
elements-of-bioeconomy/the-bioeconomy-an-opportunity-for-the-spanish-
economy [21.08.20]
340	Lainez, M. (2018). BioSpain 2018 - The Spanish Strategy on Bioeconomy. 
Available at https://biospain2018.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/01-
manuel-lanez-bioeconomia-biospain-sevilla-1.pdf [21.08.20]
341	 Regional Government of Extremadura. (2017). Marco Regional de Impulso 
a la Economía Verde y Circular en Extremadura. Available at https://
extremadura2030.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/marco_070617_v.f_
sin-anexos.pdf [21.08.20]
342	Regional Government of Andalucia. (2018). Andalusian Circular 
Bioeconomy Strategy. Available at http://www.bioeconomiaandalucia.
es/documents/1056091/1338555/Executive+summary.+Andal
usian+circular+bioeconomy+strategy/13c3b81a-daf9-4b3f-8d56-
29082ed33551?version=1.0 [21.08.20]
343 	Regional Government of Castilla y León. (2019). Plan de impulso a 
la Bioeconomía Agroalimentaria. Available at http://www.itacyl.es/
documents/20143/0/PlanImpulsoBioeconomiaAgroalimentaria_2019.
pdf/34554980-e0c5-bcca-6420-b5c8ec857cd8 [21.08.20]
344 	Newsletter 11th Bioeconomy Stakeholders Panel. (2019). Available at 
https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/pdf/newsletter_bioeconomy_
stakeholders_panel_july2019.pdf [26.08.20]
345 Estrategia Aragonesa de Bioeconomía. (2018). Available at https://www.
cita-aragon.es/es/noticias/el-presidente-de-aragon-inaugura-el-centro-de-
innovacion-en-bioeconomia-rural-en-teruel-que [26.08.20]
346	Generalitat Valenciana. (2016). Generalitat Valenciana actions related to 
Bioeconomy. Available at http://www.ivia.gva.es/documents/16186258
2/163649402/160930_Acciones+Generalitat+y+Bioeconom%C3%ADa.
pdf/8346956e-cd8b-4154-838a-ece7dc8a7b7a [21.08.20]
347 	Generalitat de Catalunya. (2020). Catalan Bioeconomy Strategy for the 
period 2021-2030. Available at https://web.gencat.cat/es/actualitat/
detall/Estrategia-de-la-bioeconomia-de-Catalunya-2021-2030 [11.02.2020]
REFERENCES
year, the President of Aragon, Javier Lambán, in­
augurated the Center for Innovation in Rural Bio­
economy.345 
The preparation of a bioeconomy strategy is un­
derway in Valencia. A first “Workshop on European 
Bioeconomy Strategy. Opportunities for Comunitat 
Valenciana” was held in September 2016, which 
concluded with setting-up a Standing Group to be 
led by the Regional Government to articulate the 
strategy of the region in bioeconomy and a corre­
sponding Action Plan.346 
The Government in Catalonia has approved the ba­
sis for a Catalan Bioeconomy Strategy for the period 
2021 – 2030, which should be drafted in line with 
the SDGs and the EC Strategy. It is seen as both a 
necessity and an opportunity for the agricultural, for­
estry, and fishing sector to improve competitiveness 
and sustainability. The Strategy is expected to be 
deployed in triennial action plans, the first of which 
will be applied in the period 2021 – 2023.347 
In addition, the governments of Asturias, and Region 
Murcia are in the process of preparing bioeconomy 
strategies.

146
United Kingdom
1
What have been the major developments in bioeconomy policy over the 
past decade?
As a biologically resource-poor country, the UK has 
sought to capitalize on its strengths in adding value to 
byproducts and waste and building off a strong knowl­
edge base that is well connected to industry.
In 2011, the Natural Environment White Paper 
(NEWP)348 laid out a sustainable vision for agriculture 
for the next 50 years. This would give rise to the “green 
food” project, for example, dedicated to sustainable 
intensification in agriculture and the food supply chain. 
This year also brought about the publication of the 
Anaerobic Digestion Strategy and Action Plan349 the 
aim of which was to help divert waste from landfills, 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and produce re­
newable energy.
Following a Biomass Strategy350 in 2007, a specific UK 
Bioenergy Strategy351 was adopted in 2012, envisag­
ing the use of biomass as mandatory in order to meet 
the targets of the UK’s decarbonization by 2050 and 
emphasizing the use of various waste materials and 
perennial energy crops. 
The High-value Manufacturing Strategy352 of 2012 was 
a re-industrialization strategy aimed particularly at the 
commercialization of innovative technologies. Among 
other actions, it fostered industrial projects associated 
with the development of biofuels, bio-based plastics 
and materials, and industrial biotechnology. According­
ly, the 2014 – 2015 strategic plan of the UK innovation 
agency (InnovateUK) explicitly named the agricultural 
sciences, biosciences, and advanced material sciences 
as key areas for a high-value industry, the food supply 
chain, and resource efficiency. The Biotechnology and 
Biological Science Research Council (BBSRC) also con­
centrated on the promotion of biosciences in its 2010 
strategic plan titled “The Age of Bioscience.”
The first strategy for agricultural technologies, Agri-
tech Industrial Strategy,353 was published in 2013, 
specifically aimed at technology transfer and the com­
mercialization of agricultural and forestry research. 
The UK published its own innovation strategy for forest­
ry in 2013 with the Science and Innovation Strategy 
for Forestry.354 The aim of the strategy was to strength­
en the ecosystems and resilience of the forests, and 
contribute to a sustainable, low-carbon timber industry. 
Similar key aims for marine research were defined in 
the Marine Science Strategy 2010 – 2015.355 
In a 2015 parliament-driven policy report on “Building a 
high value bioeconomy: opportunities from waste”,356 
an attempt was made to prepare a national bioecon­
omy strategy and to leverage biogenic residues and 
waste as a resource for high-value products and in turn 
promote a circular economy. Similarly, the UK Synthetic 
Biology Strategy Plan “Biodesign for the Bioeconomy” 
(2016),357 based on the Synthetic Biology Roadmap 
(2012),358 placed synthetic biology at the innovative 
heart of the bioeconomy and set out to achieve a GBP 
10 billion market for synthetic biology by 2030.

147
The Clean Growth Strategy (2017)359 sets out to de­
carbonize all sectors of the UK economy through the 
2020s and strives to support the bioeconomy by devel­
oping less carbon-intensive products such as biobased 
chemicals, plastics, and other materials. 
After much anticipation from academia and industry 
and over two years of development, the UK launched 
its own dedicated bioeconomy strategy in 2018, “Grow­
ing the Bioeconomy: Improving lives and strengthen­
ing our economy: A national bioeconomy strategy 
to 2030,”360 with the aim of doubling the size of the 
bioeconomy’s impact. Previous roadmaps and strate­
gies were updated and bundled together under the 
leadership of the Department for Business, Energy and 
Industrial Strategy (BEIS) to form an industrial strategy 
that focuses on capitalizing on world-class R&D and 
leveraging greater investment. 
The “25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment” 
(2018),361 which provides a comprehensive plan for 
the UK’s natural environment, contains many ele­
ments relevant for the bioeconomy, such as waste 
management and plastics pollution. The plan addition­
ally called for the publication of a new Resources and 
Waste Strategy (2018)362 which sets the targets of a 
zero avoidable-waste economy by 2050, phasing out 
avoidable plastic waste by 2042, and eliminating food 
waste from landfill by 2030. 
The establishment of the national funding agency, UK 
Research and Innovation (UKRI), in 2017 by the Higher 
Education and Research Act brought together seven 
Research Councils, Innovate UK and Research England 
as one organization, to invest in science and research 
with a combined budget of more than GBP 7 billion. 
2
How is the dedicated bioeconomy strategy embedded into the wider 
policy context?
The Bioeconomy Strategy seeks to be consistent 
with the broader priorities of delivering clean air, 
clean growth, and increased productivity. The strat­
egy sits alongside the government’s UK Industrial 
Strategy White Paper (2017), the 25-Year Plan to Im­
prove the Environment (2018), and the Clean Growth 
Strategy (2017) which all call for the publication of 
the bioeconomy strategy as a measure to achieve 
their goals. 
The Strategy is also critically linked to the wider 
goals, actions and funding of the Industrial Strategy 
and its four Grand Challenges (Clean Growth, AI and 
Data Economy, Aging Society, Mobility). 
Who is the author of the strategy, and how were stakeholders 
consulted and engaged in the different phases of the strategy process? 
3
The dedicated strategy is a joint strategy between 
industry, represented by the Bioeconomy Strategy 
Consortium, and the Department for Business, En­
ergy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), making the strat­
egy more industry forward than many other national 
bioeconomy strategies in Europe and elsewhere.
In December 2016, BEIS published a joint call for 
evidence, together with five industry sector lead­
ership councils, to collect input from the country’s 
bioeconomy stakeholders. The resulting document, 
the Government Response to the Bioeconomy Call 
for Evidence (2018), brought together over 100 re­
sponses from businesses, the research community, 
trade bodies, NGOs, public authorities, and inter­
ested individuals. The development of the strategy 
brought together various other groups representing 
agri-food technology, chemistry, industrial biotech­
nology, medicines manufacturing, and synthetic bi­
ology. These groups worked alongside government 
departments, research councils, and innovation 
bodies across the UK.

148
The strategy seeks to build a world-class bioeconomy 
in the UK, removing the country’s reliance on finite fos­
sil resources while increasing productivity across the 
country. It envisions the UK as a global leader in devel­
oping, manufacturing, using, and exporting biobased 
solutions by 2030. In particular, the potential of the 
bioeconomy is seen in its contribution to industry and 
innovation. The strategy positions itself, in part as a 
response to Brexit, by focusing on improving a highly 
skilled workforce, promoting interdisciplinary research, 
and improving coordination. Furthermore, an innovative 
biobased economy is viewed as offering opportunities 
for the development of a more circular economy. The 
SDGs are not specifically mentioned.
The long-term vision is underpinned by four high-level 
goals, namely, 1) capitalizing on the UK’s world class 
R&D; 2) maximizing productivity and potential from 
existing bioeconomy assets; 3) delivering measur­
able benefits for the UK economy; 4) creating the 
right societal and market conditions to allow biobased 
products and services to thrive. The Strategy sets a 
quantitative target of doubling the size of the bio­
economy from GBP 220 billion in 2014 to GBP 440 
billion by 2030. 
The Bioeconomy Strategy Consortium is tasked with 
developing a ‘delivery plan’ to realize the actions set 
out in the strategy. A key aspect of the delivery plan is 
to develop a bioeconomy sector deal, a partnership be­
tween the government and industry on sector-specific 
issues. Currently, sector deals relating to the bioecono­
my include the Life Science Sector Deal (2018) as well 
as the Chemistry Council Sector Deal (2018).
The strategy defines the bioeconomy as “… the eco­
nomic potential of harnessing the power of biosci­
ence. A thriving bioeconomy produces innovative 
products, processes and services that rely on re­
newable biological resources instead of fossil fuel 
alternatives.” Notably, this definition includes all 
sectors of the economy, even medicine. Under this 
definition, the UK bioeconomy contributed GBP 220 
billion in gross value added in 2014 and supported 
5.2 million jobs. 
The strategy’s action plan also called for continued 
dialogue with stakeholders on bioeconomy issues 
through a stakeholder engagement platform.
What is the main purpose of the dedicated policy strategy, and how 
does it relate to the SDGs and the Circular Economy? How does it 
introduce visions, targets, milestones, and action plans?
5
How is “bioeconomy” defined in the main policy strategy?
4

149
What policy instruments are put forth in the strategy 
(and its action plan)?
7
With regard to research and innovation, funding for 
the strategy is based on the Industrial Strategy Chal­
lenge Fund, GBP 4.7 billion worth of research fund­
ing to be made available over the next four years 
including GBP 1 billion for a range of innovation ar­
eas linked to the bioeconomy, such as healthcare 
and medicine, robotics and artificial intelligence, 
and manufacturing and materials of the future. Al­
though funding for the UK’s networks and innovation 
centers which foster academic-industry partner­
ships, such as the BBSRC NIBBs, totals GBP 8.2 
million as of 2017, there are no specific amounts 
committed to them in the strategy. The Bioeconomy 
Strategy further points to initiatives such as the UK 
Plastics Pact, which provides up to GBP 60 million 
for Smart Sustainable Plastics Packaging, GBP 20 
million of which goes to the Plastics Research In­
novation Fund, as a measure for fostering a thriving 
circular bioeconomy. 
The Strategy specifically looks to explore the benefits 
of a “market intelligence tool” to support evidence-
based decision-making in resources allocation. It 
looks at various potential high-value uses of existing 
natural resources, showing the relative value that 
can be derived from different feedstocks such as 
food waste, industrial by-products, and other forms 
of biomass while ensuring the natural environment 
is protected and enhanced. 
What are the priority areas of the strategy?
6
The Strategy holistically spans all industrial sectors 
from agriculture and medicine to manufacturing 
and energy. Thematic priorities are based on the 
Industrial Strategy’s four Grand Challenges: support­
ing clean growth through low carbon alternatives, 
fusing expertise in bioscience with AI, meeting the 
needs of an aging society through the manufacture 
of medicines, and developing advanced fuels and 
lightweight materials to advance mobility.
Emphasis is strongly placed on the fields of synthet­
ic biology and industrial biotechnology which are 
seen as key to transformations, such as better medi­
cines, cheaper or more effective materials, healthier 
sustainable foods, and a cleaner environment. The 
bioeconomy is viewed as being rooted in industrial 
clusters and knowledge centers. This is exempli­
fied in the government’s support of multidisciplinary 
networks like the Networks in Industrial Biotechnol­
ogy and Bioenergy (BBSRC NIBB) and the Industrial 
Biotechnology Innovation Centre (IBioIC) in Glasgow. 
Other examples include the alliance of four open ac­
cess biorefinery centers, known as BioPilotsUK, and 
the regional innovation cluster, BioVale, in Yorkshire 
and Humber which focuses on value from biowastes 
and advanced biorefining. By matching research and 
innovation with entrepreneurship, the strategy seeks 
to bring forward more innovative products and pro­
cesses. Startups in the synthetic biology sector have 
received significant support over the years, coupled 
with a well-funded nationwide Synbio network which 
has received almost GBP 300 million in investments 
through the Synbio for Growth Programme. 
With regard to materials, weight is given to investing 
in the area of biobased plastics and chemicals (e.g. 
UK Plastics Pact, biobased alternatives to adipic 
acid, biobased alternatives to pesticides, standards 
for biodegradable compostable and biobased plas­
tics). 
The strategy regards transport fuels from waste 
and industrial by-products as another key area, e.g. 
transforming carbon-rich industrial waste gases 
from steel mills into jet fuel and the use of gasifi­
cation technology to convert household waste into 
transport fuel.
In the field of medicine, areas of interest include the 
processing of alternative waste materials to produce 
penicillin antibiotics and the use of gene-sequencing 
to combat the spread of malaria.

150
How is the implementation of the strategy monitored and evaluated? 
8
The bioeconomy strategy consortium is responsible 
for the delivery plan. The delivery plan is supported 
by a governance group made up of representatives 
from government, industry, and the research com­
munity. A lead coordinator is assigned to three ac­
tion groups (government, UK Research and Innova­
tion, and Industry) to help with coordination. The 
Strategy also seeks to involve different government 
bodies in the creation of this action plan, such as 
local/regional authorities, Local Enterprise Partner­
ships and the Devolved Administrations.
In order to evaluate and monitor the actions set out 
in the delivery plan, the governance group is charged 
with establishing a set of key bioeconomy metrics, 
including economic, environmental and societal im­
pact, which can be monitored and reported on a 
regional level across the UK. The main metrics for 
measuring success, however, are economic (GVA, 
jobs, and productivity). 
Investments from the Industrial Biotechnology (IB) 
Catalyst, which awarded GBP 76 million between 
2014 and 2016, are celebrated for helping to ac­
celerate the commercialization of industrial biotech­
nology-derived products and processes. 
With regard to education and capacity building, the 
Strategy emphasizes STEM education, vocational 
training and continuous professional development. 
It contains a commitment to education and training, 
with GBP 406 million being put into STEM subjects 
as well as GBP 64 million for the creation of a Na­
tional Retraining Scheme. 
These build on previous capacity building programs 
such as the SynbiCITE LEAP – Leadership Excellence 
Accelerator Programme in the synthetic biology indus­
try, the Knowledge Transfer Network set up by Innovate 
UK, and the National Productivity and Investment Fund 
(NPIF), which supports industrial partnerships and new 
fellowships for early and mid-career researchers. 
Demand-side actions are favored, such as the 
launch of Green Great Britain Week in October 2018, 
which seeks to inform business and the public on 
how they can better contribute to tackling climate 
change. In addition, communication improvements 
are seen in both the minimization of waste and the 
maximization of value from unavoidable waste, in­
cluding collection services, recycling and labelling, 
and separation technology.
One of the first implementation actions involed de­
veloping standards for biobased and biodegradable 
plastics and other biomaterials. 
In order to establish the right regulatory landscape, 
the Strategy calls for the identification of potentially 
unfavorable aspects of the existing regulatory frame­
work, barriers to introducing new products, as well 
as investigating intellectual property practices, and 
policy, regulation and industry guidance on waste. 
In addition, the strategy looks to identify actions 
and processes that enable rapid development and 
deployment of new technologies. On a global scale, 
the government calls for trade promotion, export 
finance, and future trade policy activities. 
With regard to good governance, the strategy makes 
no mention of goal conflict resolution in the bioecon­
omy. International collaboration is especially seen 
as understanding resource flows and creating inter­
national supply chains to allow biobased products 
and services to grow. It is also noted that linking 
bioeconomies can help establish effective operating 
standards in an international marketplace. 
The strategy looks to capitalize on regional expertise 
by identifying where the key UK bioeconomy assets 
can be found, including actual and potential inter­
relationships. As previously set out in the Industrial 
Strategy, Government will agree on Local Industrial 
Strategies that build on local strengths.

151
Do dedicated regional bioeconomy policy strategies exist?
9
In 2013, Scotland published a National Plan for In­
dustrial Biotechnology363 which set out targets of a 
GBP 900 million turnover and over 200 companies 
active in industrial biotechnology by 2025. In 2015, 
the Biorefinery Roadmap364 set out a plan to build 
a globally competitive biobased industry over a ten-
year period. Scotland was one of the first in Europe 
to present its own strategy for a circular economy 
in 2016.365 The strategy allocated EUR 70 million 
between national and European funds to reducing 
food and building waste.
REFERENCES
348 	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (2011). The Natural 
Choice: securing the value of nature. Available at https://assets.publishing.
service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/
file/228842/8082.pdf [31.08.20]
349	Department of Energy and Climate Change. (2011). Anaerobic Digestion 
Strategy and Action Plan. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.
uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69400/
anaerobic-digestion-strat-action-plan.pdf [24.08.20]
350	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (2007). UK 
Biomass Strategy. Available at  http://www.globalbioenergy.org/uploads/
media/0705_Defra_-_UK_Biomass_Strategy_01.pdf [24.08.20]
351	 Department of Energy and Climate Change. (2012). UK Bioenergy Strategy. 
Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/48337/5142-bioenergy-strategy-.pdf 
[24.08.20]
352	Technology Strategy Board. (2012). Innovate UK. High-value manufacturing 
strategy 2012-15. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/362294/
High_Value_Manufacturing_Strategy_2012-15.pdf [26.08.20]
353	HM Government. (2013). UK strategy for agricultural technologies. Available 
at  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/227259/9643-BIS-UK_Agri_Tech_Strategy_
Accessible.pdf [24.08.20]
354	Forestry Commission. (2013). Science and Innovation Strategy for Forestry 
in Great Britain. Available at https://consult.forestryengland.uk/corporate-
and-forestry-support/sis/supporting_documents/FCSISconsultation2013.
pdf [31.08.20]
355 HM Government. (2010). UK Marine Science Strategy. Available at https://
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/183310/mscc-strategy.pdf [26.08.20]
356 HM Government. (2015). Building a high value bioeconomy: opportunities 
from waste. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/408940/BIS-
15-146_Bioeconomy_report_-_opportunities_from_waste.pdf [26.08.20]
357  Synthetic Biology Leadership Council. (2016). Biodesign for the Bioeconomy: 
UK Synthetic Biology Strategic Plan 2016. Available at https://connect.
innovateuk.org/documents/2826135/31405930/BioDesign+for+the+Bioe
conomy+2016+DIGITAL+updated+21_03_2016.pdf/d0409f15-bad3-4f55-
be03-430bc7ab4e7e [26.08.20]
358 	UK Synthetic Biology Roadmap Coordination Group. (2012). A Synthetic 
Biology Roadmap for the UK. Available at https://connect.innovateuk.org/
documents/2826135/3815409/Synthetic+Biology+Roadmap+-+Report.
pdf/fa8a1e8e-cbf4-4464-87ce-b3b033f04eaa [26.08.20]
359  HM Government. (2017). The Clean Growth Strategy: Leading the way to a 
low carbon future. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/700496/
clean-growth-strategy-correction-april-2018.pdf [26.08.20]
360 HM Government. (2018). Growing the Bioeconomy: Improving lives and 
strengthening our economy: A national bioeconomy strategy to 2030. 
Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/file/761856/181205_BEIS_Growing_
the_Bioeconomy__Web_SP_.pdf [02.01.2020]
361	 Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (2018). Our Green 
Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment. Available at https://
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/693158/25-year-environment-plan.pdf [26.08.20]
362 	Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Our Waste, Our 
Resources: A Strategy for England. Available at https://assets.publishing.
service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/
file/765914/resources-waste-strategy-dec-2018.pdf [26.08.20]
363	Scottish Industrial Biotechnology Development Group (SIBDG). (2013). 
National Plan for Industrial Biotechnology: Driving Progress to 2025. 
Available at https://www.sdi.co.uk/media/1673/national-plan-for-ib-2019-
pdf.pdf [31.08.2020]
364	Scottish Industrial Biotechnology Development Group (SIBDG). (2015). 
Biorefinery Roadmap for Scotland: Building a Sustainable Future. Available 
at https://www.sdi.co.uk/media/2092/biorefinery-roadmap-for-scotland-
building-a-sustainable-future.pdf [31.08.2020]
365 	Environment and Forestry Directorate and Economic Development 
Directorate. (2016). Making Things Last: a circular economy strategy for 
Scotland. Available at https://www.gov.scot/publications/making-things-
last-circular-economy-strategy-scotland/ [31.08.2020]

152
Summary

153
The Evolving Definition 
of the Bioeconomy
While the term “bioeconomy” has become more 
mainstream in policy strategies globally, no single 
common definition prevails. With dedicated bio­
economy strategies spanning almost a decade of 
development, country definitions and understand­
ing of the bioeconomy have become more compre­
hensive and complex. Concrete definitions of the 
bioeconomy are provided by all national and regional 
dedicated strategies analyzed; however, their scope 
and emphasis still vary. 
Bioeconomy strategies and definitions tend to vary 
with the countries’ technological capacity, natural re­
source base, and economic comparative advantage. 
However, in general, most definitions focus on the 
production and utilization of biological resources to 
generate high-value biobased products. More than 
half recognize that the bioeconomy encompasses 
all economic sectors, place bio- and high-tech in­
novation in the foreground (e.g. life sciences, bio­
technology, and other converging technologies), and 
include bioeconomy services in addition to products. 
A smaller portion consider products, services, and 
processes as part of the bioeconomy (EU, Costa 
Rica, Germany, South Africa, UK, USA) and an even 
smaller portion (EU, Germany, Ireland) highlight the 
inclusion of all systems that rely on biological re­
sources, their functions, and principles. 
While many countries define the bioeconomy as 
encompassing all economic sectors, differences 
persist. Whereas the health sector is included in 
country definitions such as Finland, Japan, Malaysia, 
Thailand, South Africa, UK, and USA, the EU excludes 
health biotechnology and biological medicines. Un­
der the proposed National Academies of Sciences, 
Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) bioeconomy 
definition for the U.S., forestry is not included since 
the use of biotechnology and fermentation process­
es is not thought to be significant enough. 
Governments, such as the UK, view harnessing the 
power of bioscience as forming the basis of the 
bioeconomy. Others, such as Japan, place a strong 
emphasis on the application of biotechnology and 
other high-tech aspects of the bioeconomy (e.g. the 
fusion of biotechnology with digital technologies 
such as big data and AI). The USA increasingly em­
phasizes the “security” benefits of the bioeconomy 
(e.g. protecting against biological threats, develop­
ing biotechnology for military use, and safeguarding 
biological infrastructure and data).
Countries such as Costa Rica and South Africa seek 
to benefit from their breadth of biological resources 
and biodiversity by promoting bioprospecting in a 
sustainable manner. In light of deteriorating natural 
resources, Thailand, Italy, and the Nordic Countries 
focus on preventing biodiversity loss and protecting 
ecosystems. 
The provision of services based on biological re­
sources, processes, and principles is increasingly 
viewed as an essential component of the bioecono­
my, with strategies from Costa Rica, the EU, Finland, 
Germany, Latvia, Nordics, Spain, Thailand and the 
UK incorporating them into their definitions. The 
bioeconomy services identified range from construc­
tion, catering or accommodation (Latvia) to ecosys­
tem services (Costa Rica and Thailand) or shelter 
and recreation (Norway).
The evolution of more comprehensive definitions 
is most apparent in the newer (post-2018) or up­
dated strategies (e.g. Costa Rica, EU, Germany, Italy, 
and Japan). Costa Rica’s bioeconomy definition re­
fers to the Communiqué of the Global Bioeconomy 
Summit 2018 and the inclusion of a whole range 
of biological resources and knowledge to provide 
products and services in all sectors. In Germany, the 
bioeconomy is clearly recognized as a cross-sectoral 
concept and refers not only to biological resources, 
but also to biological processes and principles. It 
further considers systemic relationships by address­
ing the interactions between biological systems and 
their environment. Furthermore, all new strategies 
(Austria, Costa Rica, EU, Germany, Ireland, Italy, 
Japan, Nordics, UK) increasingly draw attention to 
side- and waste streams for conversion into value-
added products. Lastly, an important element in the 
evolution of the concept of the bioeconomy is its 
increasing proximity to converging technologies, 
such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, information 
technologies, and digitalization (e.g. the concept of 
“advanced bioeconomy” in Costa Rica’s strategy).

154
Bioeconomy Strategy Goals 
Then and Now
In 2015, the source of political motivation for pro­
moting bioeconomy development varied according to 
a country’s resource endowment, specialization, and 
economic development track. Oil importing countries 
with large biomass resources often strived for higher 
energy independence and sought to increase the 
added value of their biological resources. Industrial­
izing countries with a significant share of rural popu­
lation and primary industry jobs also considered 
bioeconomy development as a means of fostering 
rural development and social inclusion. Industrial­
ized countries with fewer biological resources and a 
smaller share of primary industry jobs focused more 
on the opportunities to be gained from the indus­
trialization of biology and on creating added value 
from biosciences. More recent strategies consider 
a wider range of goals. Due to a recognition of the 
increasing complexity of the bioeconomy and the 
integration of topics, such as sustainability, climate, 
and circular economy, there is no longer a clear hi­
erarchy of goals, but rather a more diverse set of 
equal goals. 
A range of bioeconomy strategies (Austria, Italy, Ja­
pan, Spain, Thailand) seek to address global soci­
etal challenges. The bioeconomy is recognized as a 
strategy for coping with climate change, particularly 
for shifting to a low-carbon economy and reducing 
GHGs, promoting the decarbonization of produc­
tion and consumption processes, contributing to the 
Paris Agreement or to better managing the carbon-
cycle. In the EU, the Green New Deal focuses on 
climate adaptation and briefly touches on the role 
of the bioeconomy in reducing GHG emissions, e.g. 
nature-based solutions. 
The relationship between the Sustainable Develop­
ment Goals (SDGs) and the bioeconomy has solidi­
fied since their adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sus­
tainable Development in 2015. Almost all strategies 
highlight the bioeconomy’s contribution to the SDGs, 
either its link to promoting a sustainable economy or 
as part of their overall sustainability policy. Interest­
ingly, only Germany’s strategy acknowledges that not 
all SDGs can be achieved simultaneously, and that 
it is necessary to weigh opportunities, challenges, 
and trade-offs. 
Emphasis is increasingly placed on a transforma­
tion of both economy and society. The EU calls for 
a “green transformation”, an economically sensible 
and ecologically sustainable reorientation of the 
economy and society and a systemic change in the 
production and consumption of resources. Austria 
strives for a sustainable social transformation in 
which the general public is able to form qualified 
judgements about bioeconomy-related topics. Japan 
and Spain highlight the importance of the bioecon­
omy’s social dimension and underline the need for 
public engagement, particularly with regard to the 
acceptance of new technologies. Austria, Germany, 
and the Nordics emphasize the need for changes in 
behavior and values, both for producers and con­
sumers, and the Austrian government is committed 
to reducing per capita consumption. 
Of almost equal importance to all countries analyzed 
in this report is the pursuance of an economic agen­
da aimed at growth and job creation, especially in 
rural areas. The bioeconomy is increasingly viewed 
as a strategy for reindustrialization. For example, in 
the EU, Germany, Italy, and UK, the bioeconomy is 
highlighted for its ability to transform former coal or 
structurally weak areas, contribute to the renewal 
of industry, or modernize the primary production 
sectors. Italy focuses strongly on the conversion of 
abandoned land and industrial sites such as former 
chemical complexes. Latvia’s strategy can be seen 
as a response to decreasing employment due to 
structural changes in the agricultural sector. In ad­
dition, bioeconomy strategies continue to include 
comprehensive research and innovation agendas 
focused on new knowledge, technologies and skills, 
often to secure international competitiveness or 
simply boost economic growth. 
Strategies that have been updated, such as the EU, 
Germany, Italy, and Japan, reveal a desire to maxi­
mize impact by better aligning with other policy pri­
orities and to further expand the biobased economy. 
One of the central aims of the updated EU strategy 
is to adapt to a policy context that has significantly 
changed, especially with regard to the EU Circular 
Economy and the Paris Climate Agreement and the 
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. More 
recent strategies such as those of Ireland and the 
UK respond to the uncertainties brought about by 
Brexit. In Japan, the bioeconomy strategy positions

155
itself in response to global changes in international 
power structures, with the world’s center of eco­
nomic power shifting from the existing industrialized 
countries of Europe, Japan and the US to develop­
ing countries in Asia and Africa. It views the global 
trends of rapid population and economic growth in 
Asia and Africa as not only contributing to social chal­
lenges such as environmental degradation, but also 
increasing demand for goods, such as better tasting 
and healthier food varieties, and medicines. 
Costa Rica, Italy, and Japan’s strategies/action 
plans were released in the aftermath of the global 
Covid-19 pandemic and accordingly recognize the 
potential of the bioeconomy to produce more effi­
ciently, reinvent economies, maintain value chains, 
and sustain jobs and livelihoods, while ensuring the 
sustainable use and rehabilitation of nature. The 
Italian action plan points to the resiliency of the bio­
economy and consequently sees it as an area for ac­
celerating the post-Covid-19 departure. However, the 
topic of the bioeconomy contributing to increased 
resilience plays a less significant role in strategies, 
with the exception of the Nordic countries. Japan’s 
updated strategy published in 2020,366 highlights 
the bioeconomy’s role in the post-Covid-19 era in 
developing measures against future public health 
crisis (e.g. diagnostic and therapeutic methods, vac­
cines, devices, and systems for emerging infectious 
diseases) and in building an efficient supply chain 
that combines globalization and self-sustainability, 
as well as centralization and decentralization (e.g. 
strengthening of domestic production in the short 
term and building a strategy and efficient global sup­
ply chain in the long term). Further consequences 
of Covid-19 have not been dealt with in this report; 
however, dynamic developments in this area are 
expected in the future.  
While Japan, Malaysia, South Africa, and the USA con­
sider innovations in the bioeconomy as important for 
improving human health (e.g. early disease detec­
tion and cheaper, accessible medicines), no strategy 
takes up the concept of “One Health” or an integrated 
approach to mitigating health threats at the animal-
human-plant-environment interfaces.367 Discussion 
in the academic world regarding systemic solutions 
that deliver co-benefits across health, environment, 
and the bioeconomy, do not appear to have entered 
the bioeconomy policy realm as quickly. 
While there appears to be a shift from a sectoral to 
a systemic focus in bioeconomy strategies, it does 
not appear that these changes are accompanied by 
an increasing recognition of interlinkages between 
environment, economy and society, an emphasis 
on transforming both the economy and society, a 
more concrete role for transitions thinking, including 
adequate room for policy innovation and experimen­
tation, as well as long-term targets and multidimen­
sional goals.368 
Role of the Circular Economy 
A decisive trend in newer dedicated bioeconomy 
strategies is the heightened role of the circular econ­
omy. The relationship between these two concepts, 
however, remains rather vague. 
On the one hand, the EU and Italy view the bioecon­
omy as a subsector of the circular economy. The 
strategy in Italy refers to a transition towards a “cir­
cular bioeconomy” where the production and use of 
renewable bioresources and their conversion into 
value-added products is part of a circular system 
that will make businesses more economically viable 
and sustainable in the long term. Similarly, France, 
Latvia and Norway view the bioeconomy as an es­
sential part of the circular economy and the UK as 
an opportunity for developing a more circular econ­
omy. The potential contribution of the bioeconomy 
to the circular economy, however, is not thoroughly 
explored.
On the other hand, the view that the bioeconomy is 
circular by nature has gained traction. Strategies in 
Austria, Costa Rica, Germany, Japan, Malaysia, and 
the Nordics view circular concepts as essential ele­
ments of the bioeconomy, for example, by expanding 
traditional value chains and linking value chains to 
create new and efficient value creation networks, fol­
lowing the guiding principle of cascading use. Simi­
larly, the bioeconomy in Ireland promotes circularity 
through innovations that reuse and recycle materials 
and maximize resource efficiency. 
These distinctions, however, are not always clear. 
In Costa Rica, the concept of a circular bioeconomy 
goes beyond seeking efficiency in the use of fossil 
resources, but rather aims to replace them. Thai­

156
land’s BCG Model attempts to integrate the bio­
economy, circular, and green economy. In general, 
few attempts are made in bioeconomy strategies to 
create synergies between the two concepts or de­
velop links between them (e.g. in the area of waste 
management or chemical use). 
Core Elements of Bioeconomy 
Policy Strategies
Dedicated bioeconomy strategies typically provide a 
vision statement with a number of goals, objectives, 
and qualitative targets. Less frequently, quantitative 
targets are provided which focus on increasing eco­
nomic output, employment or exports (Finland, Italy, 
Latvia, Malaysia, UK). Principles and guidelines that 
align with the SDGs are laid out in the strategies of 
Austria, Germany, Ireland, Japan, and the Nordics. 
The extent to which policy goals are translated into 
concrete measures continues to be limited, with 
vaguely defined measures and budget appropria­
tions (with the exception of Germany, Spain, and 
Thailand where separate press conferences were 
held and financial support indicated). However, with­
out clear targets, milestones, timelines, an inventory 
of resources and constraints, and indication of re­
sponsible bodies, the implementation of strategies 
is impeded. 
The trend towards developing a corresponding action 
plan is on the rise. Less than half of the countries 
have published action plans (EU, France, Ireland, 
Italy, Norway, Spain) thus far and Costa Rica, Ger­
many, Japan, and the UK are in the process of creat­
ing them. Action plans vary significantly from more 
concrete policy measures with appropriate indica­
tors and some milestones (EU), to regular progress 
reports with identified leads, co-leads and key con­
sultative stakeholders (Ireland), to a more general 
guiding document for how main policy actors should 
best collaborate (Norway). The action plans are for­
mulated in different ways, some have outsourced 
their development to public research and innovation 
corporations (Norway), consortia representing the 
government, industry and research community (UK), 
other multi-stakeholder bodies (Costa Rica) or more 
high-level interministerial working groups such as in 
Italy and Ireland. 
In most countries, significant efforts have been 
made to involve stakeholders in the strategy de­
velopment process. Typical engagement elements 
include a consultation process, calls for evidence to 
collect input from stakeholders, stakeholder working 
groups to set up draft documents, public consulta­
tion, inter-agency efforts, and conferences. While 
countries are increasingly applying a participatory, 
multi-stakeholder process to consider input from a 
broad knowledge base and to foster a society “buy-
in,” the extent to which these strategies mobilize 
actors to engage and align with the shared vision 
requires further investigation. 
It is worth noting that some countries and regions 
e.g. (including the EU, Germany, Italy, and Japan) 
have already updated their dedicated bioeconomy 
policy strategy based on a comprehensive strategy 
review process, while others have not. South Africa 
and the USA, as examples, demonstrate the poten­
tial implications of this. In the USA, the vision of the 
bioeconomy has changed significantly over the years; 
however, no single agency has a clear lead in advanc­
ing U.S. bioeconomy goals. Instead, individual agen­
cies advance different interpretations of the bioecon­
omy. In the USA and South Africa, the focus today is 
more on regulating modern biotechnologies than on 
the further development of policy strategies.
Prioritization and Specialization 
in Policy Strategies
Almost all countries look to make advancements in 
sustainable and innovative primary industries (ag­
riculture, forestry, fisheries) through improved cul­
tivation, harvesting and processing technologies, 
precision farming, utilization of digitalization, organic 
farming, urban and vertical farming and so on. The 
forestry sector of the bioeconomy is prioritized in the 
strategies of Austria, Finland, Ireland, and Japan. Aus­
tria and Finland’s strategy not only focus on paper and 
pulp production and bioenergy, but also see opportu­
nities for great growth potential in new and advanced 
materials based on cellulose, lignin, wood fiber, wood 
wool, and fiber plants. Austria, Costa Rica, Japan, and 
the Nordics focus on wooden construction. 
Recent key discoveries on microbiomes are seen 
as offering solutions in the EU and Italy for primary

157
production and food systems to restore and better 
manage soils. In Austria, Finland, South Africa, and 
Spain, the bioeconomy is tied to the protection of 
water resources, whether by improving technologies 
for water efficiency and water recycling in Finland or 
by sensibly utilizing unused nutrients in sludge from 
biogas or sewage plants in Austria. 
Many dedicated bioeconomy strategies (Austria, 
Costa Rica, EU, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, 
Latvia, Nordics, Norway, Spain, Thailand, and the 
UK) have at their heart biorefinery development 
using by-products and residues from primary in­
dustries and the food industry to develop novel, 
high-value biomaterials and bioproducts, and add 
value to waste. The EU plans to develop a roadmap 
for the deployment of 300 biorefineries on a small 
and decentralized scale with a focus on sustainable 
chemicals. Italy sees biorefinery development as an 
opportunity for the reindustrialization and decontam­
ination of former oil refineries and chemical plants in 
rural and marginal areas. Other countries, such as 
Costa Rica, Latvia, Ireland, France, Nordics, similarly 
see biorefinery development as essential for rural 
areas to maintain a degree of self-sufficiency. 
The EU, Germany, Ireland, and Latvia and point to 
the potential of “new products” with completely new 
functions and the potential to create new markets. 
High-performance biobased materials (e.g. light­
weight, durable, and safe) are a central focus area 
for exploration in Japan’s strategy. Austria, Japan, 
Malaysia, and the UK prioritize biobased plastics 
and the EU, Japan, and Malaysia call for plastic-free 
seas and oceans by emphasizing marine biodegrad­
able plastics. France highlights protein production 
as a source of new and alternative food resources, 
while Austria and Costa Rica emphasize insects 
as a sustainable source of protein for animal feed. 
Bioeconomy development is strongly related to the 
medical sector in Japan, Malaysia, and Thailand, e.g. 
through precision medicine, vaccine and biopharma­
ceuticals, biosimilars, medical devices, regenerative 
therapy, and herbal extraction for medicine. Japan 
places special emphasis on digital health through 
Big Data collection and AI for evidence-based indi­
vidualized and stratified medical care, remote diag­
nosis, and nursing care. Ireland and Norway have 
growing biopharmaceutical sectors, and in Ireland 
biobased nutraceuticals are actively encouraged. 
Bioprospecting plays a major role in the strategies 
of Costa Rica and South Africa, including exploring 
opportunities in indigenous knowledge systems 
(IKS), to develop the largely informal markets for 
natural and plant medicines. Functional food mar­
kets are explored in Ireland, Japan, and Thailand. 
Malaysia and the Nordics promote innovations in 
food production systems, and developing new and 
healthy food and pharmaceutical products.
Across dedicated bioeconomy strategies, countries 
place a decidedly different emphasis on the role of 
technology. Whereas the EU, Finland, and the USA 
have a strong focus on the application of biotechnol­
ogy in general, Japan, South Africa and the UK also 
focus on industrial biotech; Costa Rica, Germany, 
Thailand, UK, and the USA on synthetic biology; and 
the EU, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, Nordics, Spain on ma­
rine biotech. 
All strategy papers mention the importance of con­
verging technologies and digitalization. The EU, 
Spain, and the UK specifically look to fusing biosci­
ence with robotics and AI, and Austria to biodigi­
talization to encourage the development of new, in­
novative and sustainable products and applications. 
Japan looks to capitalize on innovative solutions 
brought about through biofoundries. 
The strategies of EU, Finland, Ireland, and Italy see 
great potential in developing new urban bioecon­
omy hubs/cities specifically with regard to urban 
biowaste and the redevelopment of urban brown­
fields (derelict and contaminated sites), but also with 
regard to experimental smart green urban infrastruc­
tures (e.g. urban farms, community gardens). Costa 
Rica’s strategy also intends to further develop the 
concept of the bioprincipled city by experimenting 
with sustainable management and valuation of solid 
waste residues, interurban biological corridors, as 
well as urban design approaches inspired by biologi­
cal principles, processes, and systems. In general, 
the concept of the bioprincipled city has received 
little attention in dedicated bioeconomy strategies 
since 2015; however, similar concepts are emerg­
ing around the world under the term nature-based 
solutions. In addition, to date, no urban bioeconomy 
strategy has been adopted.

158
Proposed Policy Measures
The following section delves into the role of govern­
ments in steering the transition to a bioeconomy by 
analyzing the political commitment and measures 
proposed in dedicated bioeconomy strategies and 
action plans over the past decade. These policy 
measures were often loosely defined and not supple­
mented with budgetary allocations. Countries with 
an action plan (e.g. Spain, France, Norway, Italy, Ire­
land, and the EU) provided more concrete indications 
of what measures would be taken to support the 
strategy’s implementation. Generally, the proposed 
measures focus on both the demand and supply 
side. Public investment in bioeconomy development 
typically includes research and innovation funding; 
infrastructure development; capacity building and 
education; commercialization support; demand-side 
instruments; bioeconomy-friendly framework condi­
tions; and measures for good governance. In the 
following section, the report summarizes trends, 
differences, and specific features of policy measures 
defined in dedicated bioeconomy policy strategies 
and their action plans. 
A. Research and Innovation 
Promotion 
Public research and development funding continues 
to be widely considered a key measure for enhancing 
the innovation ecosystem for the bioeconomy. Policy 
strategies specifically highlight the importance of 
promoting links between fundamental and applied 
research, and supporting multidisciplinary research 
alliances (e.g. through R&D grants, competitions, 
and public funds). Countries also underline the need 
for increased private R&D, e.g. in the form of indus­
try-led consortia. The establishment of research 
networks and centers of excellence, which aim to 
ensure continuous stakeholder cooperation and dia­
logue, is also frequently mentioned. In general, many 
strategies look to strengthen the international net­
working and cooperation of research institutions.
The development of bioeconomy hubs, networks, 
and clusters is also considered important for bring­
ing together stakeholders, ensuring learning from 
best practices, and encouraging regional innovation 
ecosystems. Cluster development appears to be the 
most commonly used term for increasing coopera­
tion across sectors, industries, and thematic areas. 
A popular concept in Asia (Thailand, Malaysia, Japan) 
has developed following the Singaporean example of 
the so-called “Biopolis” in which major research 
institutes come together to create a center of excel­
lence in bioeconomy experimentation. 
In general, it appears that technological innovation is 
promoted over other types of innovation such as orga­
nizational or social. Exceptions can be found in Aus­
tria, Costa Rica, Germany, Japan, and the EU where 
the focus is also on promoting open innovations.
Only Germany touches on the need to provide space 
for experimentation, e.g. providing funding for “open 
research” where science can pursue unfamiliar 
paths. Furthermore, the involvement of society and 
other research activities aimed at shaping social 
change are also considered important. A central 
focus of the Japanese strategy is to strengthen the 
relationship between science and society by pro­
moting ELSI-related research in collaboration with 
the fields of humanities/social sciences and natural 
sciences, as well as public dialogue. In Germany, 
publicly-funded citizen science projects are promot­
ed in cooperation with educational institutions such 
as museums or botanical gardens.
Costa Rica’s strategy pursues a broad concept of in­
novation which spans technological, social, and eco­
nomic innovations. South Africa fosters innovation 
based on traditional knowledge (e.g. bioprospecting 
using Indigenous Knowledge Systems). “Safe inno­
vation” is a new topic in the strategies of Germany 
and Japan particularly referring to the harmonization 
of digital data, efficient data management systems, 
the further development of interface concepts, and 
the development and use of standards.
Bioeconomy monitoring approaches have been de­
veloped in Austria, EU, Germany, Italy and the USA, 
however differ scope and depth. The EU strategy 
seeks to better tract economic, environmental and 
social progress and highlight trade-offs and syner­
gies through an EU-wide monitoring system. The 
BioMonitor project, a consortium of universities, sta­
tistical and standardization institutes, consultancies 
and data modelling experts has already begun set­
ting up the assessment framework to track progress

159
towards a sustainable bioeconomy and document 
its impact on biodiversity, ecosystems, and climate 
change. Italy plans to adjust its indicators based on 
this new EU monitoring system. 
The promotion of public-private partnerships re­
mains highly relevant in almost all the countries ana­
lyzed to ensure jointly funded innovation projects 
and to spread risks. The EU has taken the lead with 
the EUR 3.7 billion Bio-Based Industries Joint Un­
dertaking (BBI JU) public-private partnership to kick-
start demonstration and deployment of biorefineries 
and new value chains. The Nordic countries intend 
to set up a digital Nordic/Baltic Bioeconomy Portal 
to facilitate public-private partnerships and cluster-
to-cluster collaboration. Furthermore, public-private 
partnerships should ensure open access to test and 
demonstration centers. 
The goal of enhancing technology transfer remains 
of central importance to all bioeconomy strategies. 
In addition to fostering multi-user pilot and dem­
onstration facilities, establishing biorefinery demo 
plants is considered most relevant in almost all 
strategies. 
B. Infrastructure Investments
With regard to bridging the gap between demon­
stration and industrialization, we see large-scale 
biorefinery development in Finland, France, Ire­
land, Italy, and Norway. Italy’s action plan centers 
on investments in flagship projects aimed at the 
development of infrastructures in urban biowaste 
and national multi-input and multi- product biore­
fineries. In Germany at state level, EUR 550 million 
in foreign investments from UPM is supporting the 
development of an industrial-scale biorefinery, with 
the state of Saxony-Anhalt investing EUR 100 million 
in the chemical park’s infrastructure. Thailand has 
invested THB 3.4 billion to develop a pilot biorefinery 
in the EECi Biopolis complex. 
C. Industry and Commercialization  
Dedicated bioeconomy strategies provide a wide 
array of measures to support industry. From direct 
financial assistance via grants, loans, cooperative 
agreements, and tech transfer activities (USA), sub­
sidies and tax incentives for making biobased prod­
ucts economically competitive (Malaysia, Nordics) to 
market access platforms and help reducing adminis­
trative burdens (Latvia, Nordics, Malaysia). In gener­
al, measures that level the playing field for biobased 
businesses (e.g. through subsidies, lump sums, tax 
exemptions) are rather weak and the role of SMEs in 
the bioeconomy is not widely discussed. 
Startup support is more widely seen as a tool to pro­
mote bioeconomy innovation (Costa Rica, Germany, 
Italy, Japan, Nordics), e.g. through open-access in­
frastructures (Italy), improving bankability and in­
vestment-readiness (Italy), special competitions and 
fairs to support favorable business environments 
(Costa Rica), and startup ecosystems and global 
investment (Japan). 
Over the past decade there has been an increasing 
recognition that funding of high-risk investments is 
still not well supported. Consequently, newer bio­
economy strategies focus on leveraging greater in­
vestment and risk finance in the bioeconomy. We 
see this both for demonstration and large-scale 
deployment activities as well as R&D and startup 
promotion. Venture capital and investment funds 
for biobased startups are promoted in France, Nor­
dics, South Africa, USA (California), and the UK. The 
Nordics strategy suggests “green” venture capital in 
line with Nordic Green Bonds. 
The push to mobilize private capital for bioeconomy 
development is seen not only in the increasing role 
of public-private partnerships but also in thematic 
investment platforms. The EU launched a EUR 100 
million European Circular Bioeconomy Fund (ECBF) 
with a target fund volume of EUR 250 million to help 
de-risk private investments for bioeconomy projects 
(pilot, demonstration, and industrial scale). Under 
the Eleventh Malaysia Plan (11MP) 2016–2020, 
Malaysia launched a RM 100 million Biotechnol­
ogy Commercialisation Fund (BCF 2.0) to facilitate 
the commercialization of biobased products and 
services and also to assist the expansion of exist­
ing biobased businesses. The Japanese strategy 
supports the establishment of a green finance sys­
tem for ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) 
investment in the biotechnology field.

160
On a more global scale, strategies (Austria, Finland, 
Latvia, Norway, and UK) call for export promotion 
policies (e.g. export credit guarantees, trade promo­
tion and marketing efforts).
D. Bioeconomy-Friendly Framework 
Conditions
While bioeconomy-friendly framework conditions 
are often held up as effective means to promote 
the bioeconomy, they are generally weakly speci­
fied measures that are kept rather general. On the 
one hand, strategies focus on establishing the right 
regulatory landscape (Ireland, Spain, UK, USA) by 
identifying potentially unfavorable aspects of the ex­
isting regulatory framework, barriers to introducing 
new products, and identifying actions and processes 
that enable rapid development and deployment of 
new technologies.
On the other hand, strategies seek to provide better 
incentives for bioeconomy development. Strategies 
in Costa Rica, Italy, Norway, and the UK focus on 
policy, regulation and industry guidance on waste 
(e.g. European Waste Codes, measures relating to 
single-use plastics, conditions for the collection 
of organic waste), including identifying incomplete 
application of laws and sanctions already in force, 
and the lack of homogeneity in the authorization 
approach. Costa Rica, Japan, South Africa, and the 
UK look to investigating intellectual property (IP) 
practices and the protection of genetic resources 
and knowledge. Other countries (Norway, Nordics, 
Thailand) focus more on environmental taxation 
(e.g. taxes or quota for fossil-based products, car­
bon pricing, green tax measures). 
The Austrian and Nordic strategies identify a num­
ber of framework conditions designed to foster a 
level playing field for biobased products, including 
compensating companies for additional costs for 
biobased products, bans on unsustainable prod­
ucts, regulations and standards for using secondary 
raw materials, and, in the construction sector, to 
promote the trend of living with natural materials, 
policy targets for the use of biomass, etc. 
E. Demand-side Measures 
A more specific route that allows innovative and sus­
tainable products to compete with existing ones has 
been followed by means of public procurement poli­
cies (Austria, EU, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Nor­
dics, Norway, South Africa, Spain, UK and the USA 
and California). In Italy, for example, Green Public 
Procurement legislation requires that all contract­
ing stations apply Minimum Environmental Criteria 
(CAM); however, the action plan seeks to increase 
compliance (e.g. by the municipalities) through clear­
er requirements and additional training. 
Many strategies further promote labeling, certifica­
tion, and standards for biobased products (Austria, 
EU, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Japan, 
Latvia, Nordics, Norway, Thailand). Here, we see 
considerable overlap with other framework condi­
tions that support negative incentives (e.g. Norway, 
Nordics, Thailand). 
A key demand-side measure of increasing impor­
tance in almost all bioeconomy strategies is the 
need to raise public awareness (e.g. through fairs, 
conferences, communication and marketing strate­
gies, dialogue platforms). In Germany, science com­
munication and open dialogue formats have become 
increasingly popular and a number of citizen sci­
ence projects are publicly funded (e.g. Science Year 
2020|21 on the Bioeconomy). Other measures to 
increase public awareness include “Bioeconomy 
Days/Week” to engage industry and wider society 
in Ireland and Italy. The Spanish strategy underlines 
the importance of the bioeconomy’s social dimen­
sion and focus groups are used to better understand 
social perception of the bioeconomy. Other tech­
niques include prompting new consumption con­
cepts, e.g. sharing economy, cradle-to-cradle (Aus­
tria), consumer behavior and preferences (France). 
F. Education and Capacity Building
Support for education and capacity building mea­
sures are deeply rooted in almost all bioeconomy 
strategies. Proposed measures regarding bioecon­
omy-related education range from programs for 
lower level school systems (Malaysia, Nordics, US) 
and general STEM education (Italy, UK) to bachelor,

161
master and apprenticeship programs (Nordics, USA), 
continuing professional development and training 
(EU, France, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, Spain, Thailand, 
UK) and self-learning tools and open access plat­
forms (EU, Spain). Some strategies focus on prepar­
ing for future manufacturing jobs (USA, California), 
environmental education (Costa Rica), industry part­
nerships for early career researchers (UK), advanced 
digital skills and integrating converging technologies 
(EU, Germany, Japan), and bioeconomy specialists 
with interdisciplinary expertise (Germany). 
In Europe, several academic bioeconomy programs 
have emerged over the last decade leading to the 
establishment of the European Bioeconomy Uni­
versity, a new alliance of the six leading European 
universities in bioeconomy research.368 
While still in their infancy, a number of countries 
(Costa Rica, EU, Finland, France, Italy, Ireland, Lat­
via, Malaysia, Nordics, Spain) look to new training 
and education programs that answer the needs of 
the private sector. The EU Bioeconomy Innovation 
Bootcamp supports entrepreneurship skills training 
for researchers, including new business approaches, 
evidence of enhancing biodiversity and ecosystems, 
examples of positive synergies with local commu­
nities, and interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary 
expertise advice. Programs and coaching for regula­
tors and investors to support bioeconomy develop­
ment are notably missing. 
G. Good Governance 
Dedicated bioeconomy policy strategies vary signifi­
cantly in scope and depth, in the different objectives 
they pursue, and the various actors involved in their 
formulation and implementation. Coordination of 
the broad range of bioeconomy actors and their 
different interests poses a considerable challenge 
to bioeconomy development. As a result, the issue 
of good governance has received an increasing level 
of attention at conferences and workshops, in politi­
cal memoranda, and in the publication of scientific 
papers.370 However, principles of good governance 
continue to develop faster implicitly in national and 
international forums rather than explicitly in policy 
strategies. 
Increasingly dedicated policy strategies recognize 
the complexity of the bioeconomy with its many in­
teracting elements and stakeholders. This is most 
apparent with regard to the objective of increased 
policy coherence and effectiveness in dedicated 
bioeconomy policy strategies. Translated into con­
crete measures, strategies have either relied on 
inter-governmental coordination (Germany, Costa 
Rica, USA) not just for the purpose of strategy for­
mulation and implementation, or have prioritized 
policy coordination (e.g. expanding federal-state 
cooperation through the use of networking activi­
ties of regional clusters in Austria and Germany). 
In the UK and Italy, the strategies look to capital­
ize on regional expertise (e.g. with local industrial 
strategies and involving local/regional authorities 
in implementation). 
As indicated above, when it comes to the process of 
strategy formulation, most of the countries have ad­
opted a bottom-up, participatory approach involving 
science, industry and civil society representatives 
as well as the public in general. Multi-stakeholder 
dialogue (e.g. in the form of regional, national or 
international policy forums) is generally rated as very 
important for ensuring mutual learning and inclusive 
participation in the bioeconomy.
In order to foster interregional coordination and 
best practices, the EU strategy will set up an EU 
Bioeconomy policy support facility (with a focus on 
central and eastern Europe) to allow Member States 
to share knowledge and expertise, and receive in­
dependent guidance. It also forms a European Bio­
economy Forum to help increase cooperation and 
facilitate networking/interaction and knowledge 
exchange among Member States. 
International collaboration in the bioeconomy has 
thus far not been adequately incorporated into dedi­
cated bioeconomy strategies. While most strategies 
promote international collaboration with a view to 
strengthening international networking and coopera­
tion between research institutions (e.g. Ireland, Italy, 
and Norway) or to improve international competitive­
ness (e.g. removing unjustified trade barriers and ex­
panding markets in the area of agricultural biotech­
nology in the USA or fostering international supply 
chains in the UK), there is substantially less atten­
tion paid to good governance principles of fairness,

162
including harmonizing international trade and policy 
frameworks, ensuring knowledge sharing between 
industrialized and developing countries, as well as 
fostering international monitoring activities. There 
is even far less discussion about issues relating to 
the global interconnectedness of the bioeconomy, 
biomass resources, value-added chains, and tech­
nologies with international division of labor.
Exceptions can be found in France, Germany, Japan, 
and the EU. One objective of the Japanese strategy 
is to increase internationalization by internationally 
harmonizing systems and data, coordinating with trade 
policy, and protecting intellectual property and genetic 
resources. France calls for standardization, interna­
tional regulatory harmonization and stabilization of the 
biomass supply as part of its international research 
and demonstration promotion. The EU and German 
strategies recognize the need for regular and strategic 
international cooperation at the multi-partner level 
and the importance of the Global Bioeconomy Summit 
as a platform for exchange with international experts 
beyond research. This was also the impetus for the 
European Commission to establish the International 
Bioeconomy Forum, a mechanism for long-term R&D 
collaboration, in 2017. The German strategy paper also 
advocates that the bioeconomy should receive greater 
attention in future international processes (e.g. G20, 
G7, and annual COP conferences) and that measures 
and strategies should be harmonized internationally, 
i.e. through intensified cooperation with the UN FAO. 
A new dynamic with regard to bilateral collabora­
tion has emerged in the USA, where MoU have been 
signed between the U.S. states of Maine and Michi­
gan and Finland to foster an exchange of informa­
tion and cooperation in developing the bioeconomy. 
While the focus of the MoU in Michigan is predomi­
nantly on R&D, the goal is to build long-term part­
nerships in support of market access and bilateral 
investment opportunities.371 
Some countries have established dedicated bio­
economy advisory councils or stakeholder panels, 
for example in the EU, Finland, France, Germany, 
Italy, Nordics, and Costa Rica has committed to 
forming one. 
Most countries that have an action plan or are in 
the process of creating one strive for some level 
of accountability by establishing implementation 
groups which help promote the evaluation of policy 
programs and provide for adaptation and feedback-
cycles in bioeconomy policy making. For example, 
Ireland (Bioeconomy Implementation Group), Italy 
(National Bioeconomy Coordination Group), Spain 
(Spanish Bioeconomy Observatory), Japan (Bio-
Strategy Task Force and the Bio-Strategy Advisory 
Council), Germany (German Bioeconomy Council), 
and both Costa Rica and France plan to nominate 
a National Bioeconomy Council. Others like Norway 
and South Africa make use of collaboration commit­
tees or interdepartmental stakeholder groups. While 
Finland does not have an action plan, it established 
a Bioeconomy Panel which is tasked with strategy 
formulation, review, and update, and is consulted 
on implementation. In Malaysia, the public agency, 
Bioeconomy Corporation, is responsible for imple­
mentation and monitoring. 
The extent to which policy strategies and their imple­
mentation groups support on-going learning and 
include mechanisms allowing for adaptation of their 
elements is rather unclear. 
The few country strategies that propose metrics 
and indicators for measuring success are mostly 
based on economic performance, e.g. jobs, produc­
tivity, exports, investment (Latvia, Japan, Malaysia, 
South Africa, UK), as opposed to appropriate so­
cial and environmental indicators. For example, the 
Bioeconomy Contribution Index (BCI) in Malaysia 
specifies five indicators: value-added, productivity, 
investment, exports, and employment as identifiers 
of bioeconomy performance. The Japanese strategy 
not only calls for roadmaps for each market segment 
with Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), it tasks the 
Bio-Strategy Task Force with identifying both quali­
tative and quantitative indices by 2021. Proposed 
quantitative indicators include market size, invest­
ments, and jobs in biotechnology, international col­
laboration and corporate awareness. South Africa’s 
strategy proposed 18 key quantitative indicators 
(related to industry, market, knowledge transmission 
and application, as well as knowledge base and hu­
man resources) to track and monitor the strategy. 
These have yet to be implemented. In 2018, the 
National Advisory Council on Innovation (NACI) devel­
oped a set of indicators to better measure and moni­
tor the bioeconomy’s contribution to South Africa’s

163
GDP which include output, employment, exports, 
investment, and innovation. 
Interestingly, regional bioeconomy policy strategies 
are predominantly promoted in Europe (France, Ger­
many, Norway, Spain, and the UK) and Latin America 
(Argentina and the Amazonas region). Particularly 
in Europe, this development can be traced back to 
the policy approaches and funding mechanisms of 
the European Commission, such as the European 
Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) and Smart 
Specialization Strategies (RIS3) which help strength­
en the bioeconomy in regional and local European 
areas. While beyond the scope of this report, many 
of regions have developed modern bioeconomy 
strategies that delve into important elements of the 
bioeconomy such as manufacturing (e.g. Baden-
Wuerttemberg in Germany). The increasing number 
of regional strategies points to a growing trend to­
wards regionalization. 
366 In June 2020 Japan’s Bio-Strategy was updated: Council for Integrated 
Innovation Strategy. (2020). Bio-Strategy 2020. Available at https://www8.
cao.go.jp/cstp/bio/bio2020_honbun.pdf  [27.10.20]
367	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (n.d.). One 
Health. Available at http://www.fao.org/asiapacific/perspectives/one-
health/en/ [26.10.20]
368 European Environmental Agency (EEA). (2019). Sustainability transitions: 
policy and practice. Available at https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/
sustainability-transitions-policy-and-practice [26.10.20]
369	AgroParisTech, University of Bologna, University of Natural Resources and 
Life Sciences (BOKU), University of Hohenheim, Wageningen University 
and Research, University of Eastern Finland. (2019). Available at https://
european-bioeconomy-university.eu/ [07.09.20]
370	 German Bioeconom Council (2018). Bioeconomy Policy (Part III) Update 
Report of National Strategies around the World. Available at https://
gbs2020.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/GBS_2018_Bioeconomy-
Strategies-around-the_World_Part-III.pdf
371	 Finland and Michigan lead the way in the transition towards a cleaner 
economy. (2020). Available at https://finlandabroad.fi/web/usa/current-
affairs/-/asset_publisher/h5w4iTUJhNne/content/finland-and-michigan-
lead-the-way-in-the-transition-towards-a-cleaner-economy/384951 
[26.10.20]
REFERENCES

164
Outlook
This analysis has demonstrated that the trend for de­
veloping dedicated bioeconomy policy strategies has 
prevailed in recent years. In 2010, Germany had adopt­
ed the only dedicated national bioeconomy strategy in 
the world, five years later there were seven strategies 
(EU, Finland, Germany, Japan, Malaysia, South Africa, 
and the USA), and now, in 2020, there are 19 dedi­
cated national and macro-regional bioeconomy policy 
strategies worldwide, including Austria, Costa Rica, EU, 
Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Lat­
via, Malaysia, Nordic Countries, Norway, South Africa, 
Spain, Thailand, UK, USA, and East Africa.372 This trend 
appears to be on the rise. To the authors’ knowledge, 
Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Eswatini, Hun­
gary, Iceland, Lithuania, Mexico, Namibia, Puerto Rico, 
Sweden, and Uruguay are in the process of preparing 
dedicated bioeconomy policy strategies.
Over the past decade, expectations associated 
with the bioeconomy have changed significantly 
and, in many respects, have increased. Today, the 
bioeconomy is seen as an important driver of eco­
nomic growth and job creation. Beyond this, the re­
lationship between the Sustainable Development 
Goals and the bioeconomy has solidified since the 
adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable De­
velopment in 2015, as bioeconomic solutions are 
increasingly valued for their contributions towards 
achieving the SDGs. In addition to this, recent policy 
documents view the bioeconomy as a new strategy 
for reindustrialization and for coping with changing 
global political contexts and challenges, such as 
the Covid-19 pandemic, fostering resilience, combat­
ing zoonotic and epizootic diseases, and biodiversity 
issues. The effects of the coronavirus pandemic on 
the development of bioeconomy strategies will be 
considerable; however, due to time constraints this 
report was not able to fully explore these issues. 
While the term “bioeconomy” has become more 
mainstream in policy strategies globally over the 
past decade, definitions and understanding have be­
come more comprehensive and complex due to the 
integration of topics such as sustainability, climate, 
and circular economy. Definitions increasingly rec­
ognize the bioeconomy as a cross sectoral concept 
and include a whole range of biological resources 
and knowledge to provide products and services. 
There also appears to be a growing interest in the 
potential of the bioeconomy and its interactions with 
conversing technologies, such as digitalization, AI, 
synthetic biology, and cognitive sciences. 
The same applies to political motivation for promot­
ing the bioeconomy. More recent strategies consider 
a wider range of objectives and there is no longer 
a clear hierarchy, but rather a diverse set of equal 
goals. As a consequence of this growing complex­
ity and diversity of goals, newer or more recently 
updated strategies seek to maximize impact by 
better aligning with other policy priorities. Strate­
gies highlight the potential role of the bioeconomy 
for a necessary transition and transformation into 
a more sustainable economy and society. 
These endeavors go hand in hand with the recogni­
tion that, while the bioeconomy can make a signifi­
cant contribution to a wide variety of goals, it must 
also be governed properly.373 This analysis, however, 
has shown that many policy goals have not been 
translated into specifically implemented policy 
measures. While more and more countries are com­
mitting to developing corresponding action plans, 
less than half the countries analyzed have published 
dedicated action plans at this point. Furthermore, 
action plans vary significantly: From more concrete 
policy measures with indicators and milestones to 
progress reports or more general documents on how 
main policy actors should best collaborate. The shift 
from a sectoral to a systemic focus in bioeconomy 
strategies and the emphasis on transforming econo­
my and society does not appear to have manifested 
itself as concrete policy experimentation, multidi­
mensional goals, and long-term targets. 
Today, bioeconomy strategies provide substantial 
support for public research and innovation, infra­
structure investments, industry and commercializa­
tion, and demand-side policies. Notably, support for 
education and training measures is deeply rooted in 
almost all dedicated bioeconomy strategies. How­
ever, without a long-term vision, clear targets and 
milestones, timelines, an inventory of resources and 
constraints, and indication of responsible bodies,

165
the implementation of policy strategies will be im­
peded in the future. 
The understanding of the bioeconomy continues to 
be diverse and demonstrates that there is not one 
bioeconomy but many. Bioeconomy strategies and 
definitions vary with the countries’ technological 
capacity, natural resource base and economic com­
parative advantage. There is also a trend towards 
increasing thematic prioritization and specialization 
in the political strategy papers. Existing documents, 
however, often fail to reflect and capitalize on the 
most recent discussions in academia and industry. 
Current topics of interest, including ecosystem ser­
vices, “One Health” approaches, critical raw material 
safety, the use of carbon dioxide and the conver­
sion of carbon-containing feedstocks, as well as 
the role of hydrogen are not touched on in existing 
policy documents or only to a limited extent. Further­
more, the latest trends in biomanufacturing, includ­
ing biofoundries, new and advanced manufacturing 
processes to produce the (bio) fabrics, medicines, 
plastics and fuels that underpin society, are rarely 
addressed. Policy strategies tend to focus instead 
on biorefinery development. With the exception of a 
few countries and regions, the concept of a bioprin­
cipled city has also not been further developed and 
included in policy documents.
Furthermore, coordinating the broad range of bio­
economy actors and their different interests poses 
a considerable challenge to bioeconomy develop­
ment. As a result, good governance and multilateral 
structures for bioeconomy development have never 
been more relevant than they are today. The report 
has shown that more and more multi-stakeholder 
initiatives are promoting bioeconomy development 
and strongly fostering the country’s or region’s vi­
sion of the bioeconomy. Against this background, 
bioeconomy development is being driven by the 
increasing engagement of macro-regional and in­
ternational actors as well as regional activities. The 
trend towards regionalization demands further inter­
regional coordination mechanisms. 
While the bioeconomy is represented more in mul­
tilateral policy processes and meetings today than 
in 2010, there is still a lack of international institu­
tionalization. To avoid the replication of efforts and 
reinforce insights and outcomes, existing macro-
regional and global bioeconomy initiatives need 
to be integrated into one global platform that in 
turn advances regional collaboration. Besides in­
ternational and interregional coordination, a global 
platform could also shed light on the global inter­
connectedness of the bioeconomy, with respect to 
biomass resources, management of value-added 
chains, and technologies with international division 
of labor. Successful sustainable bioeconomies also 
require the measurement of bioeconomic advances 
and such metrics must be better aligned at the in­
ternational level. 
372	 The East African Regional Strategy was not published in time to receive 
an in-depth analysis in this report. East African Science and Technology 
Commission (EASTECO) et al. (2020), The East African Regional 
Bioeconomy. Available at https://bioeconomyconference.easteco.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/10/summary.pdf [26.10.20]
373	 Fritsche, U., Brunori, G., Chiaramonti, D., Galanakis, C.M., Hellweg, S, 
Matthews, R. & Panoutsou, C. (2020). Future transitions for the Bioeconomy 
towards Sustainable Development and a Climate-Neutral Economy: 
Knowledge Synthesis Final Report. Available at https://publications.
jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC121212/fritsche_et_
al_%282020%29_d2_synthesis_report_final_1.pdf [26.10.20]
REFERENCES

Bioeconomy Policies around the Wo
As of December 2020

orld
  dedicated bioeconomy strategy
   bioeconomy-related strategy
   macro-regional dedicated bioeconomy strategy
© International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy 
Raman Maisei/fotolia.com (ﬂags), jktu_21/fotolia.com (world map)

About the International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy (IACGB) 
The IACGB was initially formed to support the Global Bioeconomy Summit 2015 and has been maintained and 
extended since. The IACGB is composed of about forty high-level policy experts and drivers of the bioeconomy 
in all hemispheres. IACGB members act in their personal capacity as experts and do not represent an official 
government or organizational position. The members combine a broad range of expertise and backgrounds and 
they are actively involved in different international bioeconomy-related policy and research fora. While currently 
being an informal mechanism, the IACGB has gained credibility and legitimacy as an expert think tank and are 
actively working to develop further in the coming years. The IACGB is significantly involved in the development of 
the GBS2020 plenary agenda and workshop program to ensure its global spirit and its non-commercial nature. 
The IAC develops and approves policy recommendations on how to promote the development of a sustainable 
bioeconomy globally. These recommendations have been summarized in the Communiqués of GBS2015 and 
GBS2018 and new recommendations will be published during GBS2020. Furthermore, IACGB members act as 
important multipliers and take the GBS messages and the policy recommendations to other global and interna­
tional bioeconomy networks and policy fora. Documents download and further information is available at https://
gbs2020.net 
About this report
Authors of this study are Lily Teitelbaum, Christin Boldt and Christian Patermann.
Lily Teitelbaum and Christin Boldt are staff at the Secretariat of the Global Bioeconomy Summit 2020. 
Christian Patermann is the former European Commission program director for “Biotechnology, Agriculture 
and Food”. He provided first-hand information, advice and guidance regarding the scope and the relevance 
of the material gathered. Furthermore, the study benefited from a critical review by Joachim von Braun and 
Christine Lang, Co-Chairs of the International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy (IACGB). Members of 
the International Advisory Council on Global Bioeconomy (IACGB), specifically Mary Maxon, Ben Durham, 
Fava Fabio, Yoshijuki Fujishima, Morakot Tanticharoen, Julius Ecuru, and Jussi Manninen deserve our special 
thanks for providing valuable information on the policy developments in their regions.  
Imprint
Published by the Secretariat of the Global Bioeconomy Summit 2020.
c/o BIOCOM AG, Lützowstrasse 33–36, 10785 Berlin
Design: Michaela Reblin
Production editor: Benjamin Röbig
Pictures from fotolia.com: Raman Maisei (flags), jktu_21 (world map), losw (5 globes at continental 
overview), Destina (p 6)
Pictures from istockphoto.com: Hankimage9 (Title), Akchamczuk (p 8), luismmolina (p 11), MarioGuti 
(p 12), lukbar (p 18/19), brytta (p 21), gorodenkoff (p 31), volkova (p 45), kontrast-fotodesign (p 49),
Federico Rostagno (p 119), Kanawa_Studio (p 125), franckreporter (p 137), Milena Khosroshvili (p 150) 
Berlin, November 2020
This is a CO2-neutral publication