Bioeconomy

Abstract: The benefits provided by ecosystem services, such as crop pollination and water purification, are of great importance to any economy, both directly and indirectly. Therefore, nature-inclusive decision-making requires that such benefits are taken into account in the economic decision-making process. However, in most assessments, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which shows the total value of output/income generated in a country, is used as the main economic development indicator, not capturing fully the contributions of nature to economic activity and human well-being. The concept of Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) (see Ouyang et al. 2013 and 2020), which summarizes the value that ecosystem services provide to the economy in monetary terms is a way to overcome these short-comings in policy assessments. This technical report introduces and showcases the new GEP module in the macroeconomic model MAGNET. MAGNET is a GTAP-based global CGE model used to assess policy impacts on the economy. MAGNET’s endogenous land supply and forestry representation makes this model particularly suitable for this task. Built upon the Integrated Natural Capital Accounting (INCA) database on monetary value of ecosystem services, the new GEP module allows for comparison of the impact of different policies on both GDP and GEP in the European Union. The report provides an example of a practical application of the GEP module. In particular, we apply a forward-looking policy scenario that assumes a significant change in consumption patterns. The results of preliminary simulations show that such an impact can significantly differ both between GDP and GEP and across particular ecosystem services.

Abstract: The innovation in the bioeconomy sectors is a key enabler for transitioning towards a carbon-neutral economy and complying with the objectives of the EU’s Bioeconomy Strategy. Consequently, the EU-Bioeconomy Monitoring System places significant emphasis on indicators of research and innovation activities in the bioeconomy sectors, and some placeholders within this field were foreseen in its current structure. In order to retrieve relevant data on bioeconomy innovation and make methodological choices, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) contracted recognized experts in the field. The experts assessed the feasibility of implementing the planned indicators and proposed complementary ones. This report presents the results of the experts' analysis of the evaluation of the indicators foreseen in the EU-Bioeconomy Monitoring System, and offers an operational description of the methodologies to retrieve, transform, and display data for research and innovation in the bioeconomy sectors. The final list of proposed indicators is as follows: — Private Sector investment in research and development — EU Public Sector investment in research and development — Public Sector investment in research and development (member states) — Number of students/graduates in fields relevant to the bioeconomy — Number of research outputs in the field of bioeconomy — Total number of patents for the bioeconomy — EC-Sponsored Pilot Plants opened in a given year (number/investment) The report concludes that some indicators, such as private sector investment in research and development, number of students/graduates in bioeconomy-related fields, and research outputs in the bioeconomy field, are almost readily implementable. However, other indicators, such as public sector investment in research and development, market volume in bioeconomy relevant areas, and total number of patents for the bioeconomy, may require a moderate or resource-intensive investment for implementation.

Abstract: In this document, we focus on innovation in biotechnologies (biotech), as captured by patented invention worldwide. To this aim, we focus on international patents filed at multiple offices, at least one of which belonging to the IP5 consortium (see methodological box for more details). Moreover, we rely on expert knowledge collected by the OECD to select the inventions connected to biotech. The analysis aims to produce a bird’s eye view on the evolution of patenting in this technological area over time and its relevance across the geographical and technological dimensions. The key points emerging from this analysis are: • Biotech patents represent around 5% of all the IP5 patents in the period 2001-2019 • The US are by far the country with the highest share of biotech patents, the EU is lagging behind (with an increasing gap with the US) , while China seem to have started catching Up with the EU; • The majority of the biotech patents are withe (industrials) and red (medical) biotechnologies. • Japanese, Chinese, and EU applicants show relatively high specialization in white biotech patents, while UK and US applicants are relatively specialized in horizontal and red biotech patents; • Germany and France have the highest number of biotech patent applicants in the EU, accounting for slightly over 50% of all EU biotech patents; • The single biotechnology most patented is C12Q 1/66, "Measuring or testing processes involving luciferase", which alone represents 6.4% of all the biotech patents analysed; • Preliminary analysis suggests that the competition among regions in biotech patents revolves around the number of patents in each of the main biotechnological domains, rather than the different types of biotechnologies patented.

Abstract: Quantitative bioeconomy simulation models aid our understanding of the complex market driven dynamics accompanying the transition to a net-zero economy. This research addresses knowledge gaps in EU bioeconomy modelling capacity, particularly representations of contemporary bio-based industrial markets. Encompassing a comprehensive selection of biomass types and bioeconomy activities, an integrated model toolbox is constructed consisting of five state-of-the-art bioeconomy simulation models. Focusing on a public-policy driven bio-based industrial transformation, exploratory scenarios examine the synergies and trade-offs for the EU through the prism of its five bioeconomy pillars. Results indicate that the promotion of biomass for industry reduces fossil dependence, although if enacted globally, may result in a substantial increase in biomass demand. In addition, carbon taxes further accelerate market opportunities for bio-based alternatives, although a bio-based industry transformation contingent, at least in part, on woody and agricultural biomass feedstocks, will not achieve important reductions in emissions. Finally, in addition to a strict adherence to the principle of circularity in biomass usage, a socially responsible change in consumption behaviour represents an essential strategy for easing (agricultural) biomass market tensions.

Abstract: The deployment of biorefineries as part of the European Union’s Bioeconomy Strategy aims at contributing to the transition to a climate-neutral economy and creating jobs and growth in rural areas. In this study, we examine the impact of biorefinery establishment on the EU labour market, using the quasi-experimental method difference-in-differences (DiD) by accounting for regional characteristics at the NUTS-2 level. The findings demonstrate that introducing biorefineries to a region can create additional employment opportunities, particularly in primary production and logistics activities. However, the results do not show significant differences in regional gross value added compared with regions without biorefineries. To maximise the positive impact of biorefineries, options for a more tailored and equitable approach are suggested, taking into account regional characteristics.

Abstract: A modelling exercise was performed employing a series of bioeconomy narratives or transition pathways, focused mainly on the promotion of biomass in EU industrial activities. The integrated assessment of the BioMonitor model toolbox forges a series of inter-model links based on a common set of drivers. In this paper, featured results, with a specific focus on the EU chemicals industry, are reported from an economy-wide model from the toolbox, called MAGNET.

Abstract: This article mainly focuses on the European Union, in which we provide an overview of strategies followed, but also referencing other regions. This includes describing how the bioeconomy has been defined and the focus of the strategies on specific sectors or policies. In addition to countries and regions, international organisations have also developed policy strategies.

Abstract: The analysis of the regional dimension of the bioeconomy is important due to its policy implications. The EU’s Bioeconomy Strategy recognizes the potential contribution of the bioeconomy for the development of rural and remote areas. More recently, an increasing number of EU regions are launching their own bioeconomy strategies, and a number of EU initiatives seek to promote the deployment of the bioeconomy to boost rural areas and create jobs and growth opportunities (e.g. the Council of the European Union's Conclusions on the opportunities of the bioeconomy, approved on April 25, 2023, or the Regional Innovation Valleys for the Bioeconomy and the Food system). Despite the political momentum, data availability on the socioeconomic contributions of the bioeconomy is still very limited, making it challenging to evaluate the outcomes of the aforementioned policies. This document presents the BioRegEU pilot dataset, which aims to fill this data gap by providing estimates of employment and value added in the bioeconomy sectors at the EU NUTS2 level. Although the analysis of the data offers insights into the territorial distribution of bio-based activities at the EU level, it is still preliminary and requires further refinement. In this sense, the authors of this report invite users and interested parties to provide feedback on the accuracy of the overview drawn by the estimates and identification of potentially significant deviation from reality according to expert knowledge, as well as on potential improvements on data sources of methodologies.

Abstract: The socioeconomic indicators for the Bioeconomy Monitoring System (“BMS-Jobs&Growth”) are prepared by JRC to monitor the socioeconomic aspects of the EU Bioeconomy. It has been widely used since its first release in 2017. This report is intended to serve as technical documentation for the latest release of the dataset (May 2023), which includes estimates of employment and value added in the bioeconomy sectors for 2020. The report summarised the process to generate the data, and describes the methodological changes implemented with regard to the last release. These changes mainly affect the process for filling in missing data, which now uses additional economic information for the estimation of data gaps. The impact of these changes is limited compared to previous versions of the dataset, but it allows for better identification of sectoral trends and the effects of economic shocks, such as the one caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, the report also presents the current version of the online dashboard where the data is displayed.

Abstract: The EU's Green Deal sets out a vision for a clean, competitive, climate neutral circular economy. As a part-solution for decarbonising its industrial base and improving its strategic autonomy, the role of bio-based substitutes is envisaged. Focusing on EU chemicals, the MAGNET simulation model is employed to quantify the impacts from EU bio-based chemical, pharmaceutical and plastic output increases over a thirty-year time horizon to 2050. To support this transformation, a fiscally-neutral tax funded investment scheme is modelled. Results show EU bioeconomy (rural) employment and growth improvements, although bio-feedstock market tensions impact negatively on EU food security, whilst ‘leakage’ effects cause net global increases in greenhouse gases and land use. Further experiments explore (i) sustainable tax schemes on food-based feedstock to mitigate said tensions and (ii) green-investment driven input-saving productivity gains in EU bio-based chemicals. Employing metrics for the five bioeconomy strategy objectives, the former generates environmental, food and (bio-)energy security improvements, relieves land market tensions, but falls short of a win-win/win-neutral outcome. Similarly, for four EU bioeconomy objectives, the latter produces outcomes that are largely on a par, or even better than the baseline. Finally, a stylised combination of both is found to generate the most optimal outcomes.