Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Bioeconomy and Forest-Based Bioeconomy
1.2. Low Carbon Transitions
1.3. Needs for Social Acceptance—Research Aim with Focus on Consumers
2. Approach—A Theoretical Framework
- Tangible elements of socio-technical system investment costs [28];
- System-bound habits where people adapt their lifestyle to an artefact, such as having a car (ibid.);
- Sunk investments that have been made in the current technology and socio-technical system, making it unfavourable to invest in new technology (ibid.);
- Companies also tend to stick to established technologies because of advantages created through economies of scale and because of knowledge about the current technology (ibid.).
2.1. Social Acceptance
2.2. Dynamics of the Multi-Level Perspective
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Definitions
3.2. The Questionnaire
3.3. Data Collection
3.4. Data Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Understandings of Bio-Based Forest Products and Wooden Multi-Story Buildings
4.2. Sustainability Aspects of Wooden Multi-Story Buildings
5. Discussion
5.1. Conditions for a Sustainability Transitions
5.2. Methodological Reflections
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
UNDERSTANDING URBAN CITIZENS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE BIOECONOMY | Strongly disagree | Disagree | Mildly disagree | Mildly agree | Agree | Strongly agree | |
This questionnaire is by a European-wide research network on Bioeconomy: PerForm–Perceiving the Forest-based Sector in the Bioeconomy (www.perform-bioeconomy.info (accessed on 6 July 2021)). The project is funded by the European Forest Institute (www.efi.int (accessed on 6 July 2021)) and facilitated through network member organisations in Austria/BOKU, Finland/Univ. Helsinki, France/IRSTEA, Germany/Univ. Freiburg, Italy/Univ. Padova, Russia/Univ. Saint Petersburg, Slovakia/Tech. Univ. Zvolen and Sweden/SLU. | |||||||
My opinion of multi-storey building with a mostly wooden frame in [COUNTRY] [Choose what best corresponds your opinion] | |||||||
1 | I am familiar with wooden multi-storey buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
2 | Are faster and cheaper to build than steel or concrete ones | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
3 | Do not last as long as steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
4 | Need more repairs and maintenance than steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
5 | Need less insulation than steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
6 | Are healthier to live in than steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
7 | Have a higher risk of fire than steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
8 | Are less harmful to climate than steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
9 | Do contribute to global deforestation and biodiversity loss | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
10 | Do generate income and well-being to more people than steel or concrete buildings | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
My opinion of storing carbon in forests in [COUNTRY] | |||||||
11 | I am familiar with how forests store carbon | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
12 | Managed forests have great potential to reduce carbon emissions | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
13 | How forests are being managed can threaten carbon stocks in forests | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
14 | Land/forest owners need support to maintain and manage forests | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
15 | Land/forest owners must be compensated monetarily for storing carbon in forests | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
My opinion of forest-based bioeconomy in [COUNTRY] | |||||||
16 | I know the meaning of forest-based bioeconomy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
17 | Forest-based bioeconomy decreases our dependency on oil and fossil fuels | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
18 | Forest-based bioeconomy increases our economic self-sufficiency | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
19 | Forest-based bioeconomy generates new jobs and well-being in rural areas | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
20 | Forest-based bioeconomy mainly benefits large companies and their shareholders | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
21 | Forest-based bioeconomy products should be of domestic origin to be more sustainable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
22 | Agriculture-based bioeconomy is more important for society than forest-based bioeconomy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
23 | The risks of forest-based bioeconomy are greater than its benefits | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
24 | The risks of forest-based bioeconomy must be understood before we fully embark on it | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
25 | All different views must be seriously considered when forest-based bioeconomy develops | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
26 | Use of fossil fuels and non-renewable materials must be reduced as soon as possible | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
27 | Environmental regulation limits overall economic development and growth | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
28 | Humans will be able to solve environmental problems when technology develops | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
29 | Despite our special abilities, humans are still subject to laws of nature | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
30 | Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
31 | The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
32 | I trust information on forest-based bioeconomy from government officials | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
33 | I trust information on forest-based bioeconomy from researchers and experts | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
34 | I trust information on forest-based bioeconomy from environmental and civic organizations | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
Respondent background information | |||||||
35 | Age | ||||||
36 | Gender | Female | Male | Other | |||
37 | Do you own more than one hectare of land or forest? | No | Yes | ||||
38 | Which of the following best suits your current area of residence? | Urban | Suburb | Rural | |||
Data collected through this survey will be treated confidentially and anonymously for the purposes of the PerForm project, in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Regulation (EU) 2016/679. By filling the questionnaire you give PerForm network staff the permission to process data you provide for the purposes of the PerForm project. | |||||||
To be completed by the surveyor | |||||||
Who collected: | Where collected: | When collected: |
References
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers. In Global Warming of 1.5 °C; An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; p. 32. [Google Scholar]
- UN. United Nations Treaty Collection. Available online: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-d&chapter=27&clang=_en (accessed on 2 December 2019).
- UNFCCC. UNFCCC eHandbook. Available online: https://unfccc.int/resource/bigpicture/ (accessed on 1 March 2019).
- Roberts, C.; Geels, F.W.; Lockwood, M.; Newell, P.; Schmitz, H.; Turnheim, B.; Jordan, A. The politics of accelerating low-carbon transitions: Towards a new research agenda. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 44, 304–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geels, F.W.; Berkhout, F.; Van Vuuren, D.P. Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2016, 6, 576–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mubareka, S.; Jonsson, R.; Rinaldi, F.; Azevedo, J.C.; de Rigo, D.; Sikkema, R. Forest bio-based economy in Europe. In European Atlas of Forest Tree Species; San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., de Rigo, D., Caudullo, G., Houston Durrant, T., Mauri, A., Eds.; Publication Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Birner, R. Bioeconomy Concepts; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 17–38. [Google Scholar]
- Corona, P. Forestry research to support the transition towards a bio-based economy. Ann. Silvic. Res. 2015, 38, 37–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Priefer, C.; Jörissen, J.; Frör, O. Pathways to Shape the Bioeconomy. Resources 2017, 6, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Staffas, L.; Gustavsson, M.; McCormick, K. Strategies and Policies for the Bioeconomy and Bio-Based Economy: An Analysis of Official National Approaches. Sustainability 2013, 5, 2751–2769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Winkel, G. Towards a Sustainable European Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Assessment and the Way forward. What Science Can Tell Us 8; European Forest Institute: Joensuu, Finland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- International Energy Agency and the United Nations Environment Programme. 2018 Global Status Report: Towards a Zero-Emission, Efficient and Resilient Buildings and Construction Sector; United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Dodoo, A.; Gustavsson, L.; Sathre, R. Effect of thermal mass on life cycle primary energy balances of a concrete- and a wood-frame building. Appl. Energy 2012, 92, 462–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, X.; Nie, Z.; Wang, Z.; Cui, S.; Gao, F.; Zuo, T. Life Cycle Energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emission of Residential Building Designs in Beijing. J. Ind. Ecol. 2012, 16, 576–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nässén, J.; Hedenus, F.; Karlsson, S.; Holmberg, J. Concrete vs. wood in buildings—An energy system approach. Build. Environ. 2012, 51, 361–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perez-Garcia, J.; Lippke, B.; Briggs, D.; Wilson, J.B.; Bowyer, J.; Meil, J. The environmental performance of renewable building materials in the context of residential construction. Wood Fiber Sci. 2005, 37, 3–17. [Google Scholar]
- National Board of Housing Building and Planning. Utsläpp av Växthusgaser Från Bygg-och Fastighetssektorn. Available online: https://www.boverket.se/sv/byggande/hallbart-byggande-och-forvaltning/miljoindikatorer---aktuell-status/vaxthusgaser/ (accessed on 18 March 2021).
- Statistics Sweden. Lägenheter i Nybyggda Ordinära FLERBOSTADSHUS Efter Material i Husens Stomme. År 1995–2019. Available online: https://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/sv/ssd/START__BO__BO0201__BO0201M/MaterialiStommeFN/ (accessed on 13 May 2019).
- Mahapatra, K.; Gustavsson, L.; Hemström, K. Multi-storey wood-frame buildings in Germany, Sweden and the UK. Constr. Innov. 2012, 12, 62–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wüstenhagen, R.; Wolsink, M.; Bürer, M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2683–2691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hodge, D.; Brukas, V.; Giurca, A. Forests in a bioeconomy: Bridge, boundary or divide? Scand. J. For. Res. 2017, 32, 582–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roos, A.; Woxblom, L.; McCluskey, D. The influence of architects and structural engineers on timber in construction—perceptions and roles. Silva Fenn. 2010, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hemström, K.; Mahapatra, K.; Gustavsson, L. Perceptions, attitudes and interest of Swedish architects towards the use of wood frames in multi-storey buildings. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 1013–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hemström, K.; Gustavsson, L.; Mahapatra, K. The sociotechnical regime and Swedish contractor perceptions of structural frames. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2017, 35, 184–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Franzini, F.; Toivonen, R.; Toppinen, A. Why Not Wood? Benefits and Barriers of Wood as a Multistory Construction Material: Perceptions of Municipal Civil Servants from Finland. Buildings 2018, 8, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mustalahti, I. The responsive bioeconomy: The need for inclusion of citizens and environmental capability in the forest based bioeconomy. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 3781–3790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geels, F.W. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 2002, 31, 1257–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geels, F.W. From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Res. Policy 2004, 33, 897–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rip, A.; Kemp, R. Technological change. In Human Choice and Climate Change: Vol. II, Resources and Technology; Rayner, S., Malone, E., Eds.; Battelle Press: Columbus, OH, USA, 1998; pp. 327–399. [Google Scholar]
- Geels, F.W.; Sovacool, B.K.; Schwanen, T.; Sorrell, S. The Socio-Technical Dynamics of Low-Carbon Transitions. Joule 2017, 1, 463–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geels, F.W. The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2011, 1, 24–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geels, F.W. Disruption and low-carbon system transformation: Progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions research and the Multi-Level Perspective. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 37, 224–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berkhout, F.; Smith, A.; Stirling, A. Socio-technological Regimes and Transition Contexts. In System Innovation and the Transition to Sustainability Theory, Evidence and Policy; Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., Green, K., Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2004; pp. 48–75. [Google Scholar]
- Verbong, G.; Geels, F. The ongoing energy transition: Lessons from a socio-technical, multi-level analysis of the Dutch electricity system (1960–2004). Energy Policy 2007, 35, 1025–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verbong, G.P.J.; Geels, F.W. Exploring sustainability transitions in the electricity sector with socio-technical pathways. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2010, 77, 1214–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matschoss, K.; Heiskanen, E. Innovation intermediary challenging the energy incumbent: Enactment of local socio-technical transition pathways by destabilisation of regime rules. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2018, 30, 1455–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reichenbach, M.; Puhe, M. Flying high in urban ropeways? A socio-technical analysis of drivers and obstacles for urban ropeway systems in Germany. Transp. Res. Part D 2017, 61, 339–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gibbs, D.; O’Neill, K. Rethinking Sociotechnical Transitions and Green Entrepreneurship: The Potential for Transformative Change in the Green Building Sector. Environ. Plan. A Econ. Space 2014, 46, 1088–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, A. Translating Sustainabilities between Green Niches and Socio-Technical Regimes. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2007, 19, 427–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swedish Forest Industries Federation. Träboom! Available online: https://www.skogsindustrierna.se/aktuellt/nyheter/2017/04/traboom (accessed on 26 April 2020).
- Swedish Forest Industries Federation. Bygg mer i trä. Available online: https://www.skogsindustrierna.se/vara-asikter/aktuella_fragor/oka-trabyggandet/ (accessed on 26 April 2020).
- Bishop, P.; Herron, R. Use and Misuse of the Likert Item Responses and Other Ordinal Measures. Int. J. Exerc. Sci. 2015, 8, 10. [Google Scholar]
- Statistics Sweden. Folkmängd, Topp 50. Available online: https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befolkning/befolkningens-sammansattning/befolkningsstatistik/pong/tabell-och-diagram/topplistor-kommuner/folkmangd-topp-50/ (accessed on 7 January 2020).
- Birath, M.; (IKEA Marketing Department, Uppsala, Sweden). Personal communication, 2018.
- Peltomaa, J. Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mark-Herbert, C.; Kvennefeldt, E.; Roos, A. Communicating Added Value in Wooden Multistorey Construction; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Pearson, P.J.G.; Foxon, T.J. A low carbon industrial revolution? Insights and challenges from past technological and economic transformations. Energy Policy 2012, 50, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Smith, A.; Stirling, A.; Berkhout, F. The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Res. Policy 2005, 34, 1491–1510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arano Gazal, K.; Montague, I.; Wiedenbeck, J. Factors Affecting Social Media Adoption among Wood Products Consumers in the United States. Bioprod. Bus. 2019, 4, 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ockwell, D.; Whitmarsh, L.; O’Neill, S. Reorienting Climate Change Communication for Effective Mitigation. Sci. Commun. 2009, 30, 305–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sengupta, S.; Rubin, A.J. ‘Yellow Vest’ Protests Shake France. Here’s the Lesson for Climate Change. The New York Times, 7 December 2018; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Giddens, A. Politics of Climate Change; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Sustainable Consumption Facts and Trends; World Business Council for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, D.-X.; He, B.-J.; Johnson, C.; Mou, B. Social problems of green buildings: From the humanistic needs to social acceptance. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 1594–1609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bengtson, A. Framing Technological Development in a Concrete Context: The Use of Wood in the Swedish Construction Industry. Ph.D. Thesis, Företagsekonomiska Institutionen, Uppsala, Sweden, 2003. [Google Scholar]
Demographic Category: | Sub-Category | Per Cent |
---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 55.9% |
Male | 43.1% | |
Other | 1.0% | |
Total | 100.0% | |
Age category | 18–39 | 39.7% |
40–64 | 44.6% | |
65+ | 15.7% | |
Total | 100.0% | |
Which of the following best matches your current area of residence? | Urban | 58.8% |
Suburb | 17.2% | |
Rural | 24.0% | |
Total | 100.0% | |
Do you own more than one hectare (10,000 m2) of land or forest? | No | 91.2% |
Yes | 8.8% | |
Total | 100.0% |
Question | Yes (Agree and Strongly Agree) | No (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Mildly Disagree, Mildly Agree) | Total |
---|---|---|---|
I am familiar with how forests store carbon | 63.7% | 36.3% | 100.0% |
I know the meaning of forest-based bioeconomy | 28.9% | 71.1% | 100.0% |
I am familiar with wooden multi-story buildings | 54.9% | 45.1% | 100.0% |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nagy, E.; Berg Rustas, C.; Mark-Herbert, C. Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147628
Nagy E, Berg Rustas C, Mark-Herbert C. Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition. Sustainability. 2021; 13(14):7628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147628
Chicago/Turabian StyleNagy, Emil, Carolina Berg Rustas, and Cecilia Mark-Herbert. 2021. "Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition" Sustainability 13, no. 14: 7628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147628
APA StyleNagy, E., Berg Rustas, C., & Mark-Herbert, C. (2021). Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition. Sustainability, 13(14), 7628. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147628