Next Article in Journal
Developing a Rating System for Building Energy Efficiency Based on In Situ Measurement in China
Next Article in Special Issue
Visions and Expectations for the Norwegian Bioeconomy
Previous Article in Journal
An Analysis of the Contribution of Japanese Business Terms to Corporate Sustainability: Learnings from the “Looking-Glass” of the East
Previous Article in Special Issue
Value Chain Structures that Define European Cellulosic Ethanol Production
Open AccessArticle

Directionality across Diversity: Governing Contending Policy Rationales in the Transition towards the Bioeconomy

Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU), P.O. Box 2815 Tøyen, NO-0608 Oslo, Norway
Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture (TIK), University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1108 Blindern, NO-0317 Oslo, Norway
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Teis Hansen
Sustainability 2017, 9(2), 206;
Received: 30 November 2016 / Revised: 17 January 2017 / Accepted: 25 January 2017 / Published: 3 February 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Innovation and Sustainable Development for the Bioeconomy)
Although the bioeconomy has been embraced by many governments around the world as a way of responding to the grand challenge of climate change, it remains unclear what the bioeconomy is and how it can contribute to achieving these broad policy objectives. The aim of this paper is to improve our understanding of whether, and how, the bioeconomy includes contending rationales for governance and policy-making. In order to do this, we apply a typology of three bioeconomy visions onto the policy discourse on the bioeconomy. These visions are (1) a bio-technology vision; (2) a bio-resource vision; and (3) a bio-ecology vision. Based on a discourse analysis of 41 submissions to a public hearing on the development of a bioeconomy strategy in Norway, the paper explores the actors involved in shaping the new bioeconomy and analyses their positions on this emerging field. The paper finds that it is possible to categorise the consultative inputs into these three visions, and also that the bio-resource vision is predominant, which reflects the structure of the national economy. Moreover, the paper reflects upon how the contending visions observed imply negotiations and power struggles, which may hamper directionality in the current socio-technical transition. View Full-Text
Keywords: governance; bioeconomy; policy; innovation; power; directionality governance; bioeconomy; policy; innovation; power; directionality
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Scordato, L.; Bugge, M.M.; Fevolden, A.M. Directionality across Diversity: Governing Contending Policy Rationales in the Transition towards the Bioeconomy. Sustainability 2017, 9, 206.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop