Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Report (19)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (9)
- Contribution to Periodical (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Renewable energy targets in the European Union (EU) have raised the demand for timber and are expected to increase dependence on imports. However, EU timber consumption levels are already disproportionally high compared to the rest of the world. The question is, how much timber is available for the EU to sustainably harvest and import, in particular considering sustainable forest management practices, a safe operating space for land-system change, and the global distribution of "common good" resources. This article approaches this question from a supply angle to develop a reference value range for the current as well as future sustainable supply of timber at the EU-27 and global levels. For current supply estimates, national-level data on forest area available for wood supply, productivity in that area, as well as the rate available for harvest were collected and aggregated into three potential supply scenarios. For future supply estimates, a safe operating space scenario halting land use change, a sensitivity analysis, and a literature review were performed. To provide both a comparison of global versus EU sustainable supply capacities and to develop a benchmark toward evaluating and comparing levels of consumption to sustainable supply capacities, per capita calculations were made. Results revealed that the per capita sustainable supply potential of EU forests is estimated to be around three times higher than the global average in 2050. Whether a global or EU reference value is more appropriate for EU policy orientation, considering both strengthened economic and cultural ties to the forest in forest-rich countries as well as the need to prevent problem shifting associated with exporting land demands abroad, is discussed. Further research is needed to strengthen and harmonize data, improve methods for modeling future scenarios and incorporate interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder perspectives toward the development of robust and politically relevant reference values for sustainable consumption levels.
A future-oriented and sustainable "Leasing Society" is based on a combination of new and innovative serviceoriented business models, changed product and material ownership structures, increased and improved eco-design efforts, and reverse logistic structures. Together these elements have the potential to change the relationship between producers and consumers, and thereby create a new incentive structure in the economy regarding the use and re-use of resources. While the consumer in a leasing society buys a service (instead of a product), the producer in a leasing society retains the ownership of the product (instead of selling it) and sells the service of using the product. This creates producer incentives to re-use, remanufacture, and recycle products and materials and could become a cornerstone of the circular economy, depending on how the leasing society is implemented. While a predominantly positive picture of the success of a leasing society model and related business cases emerges from the bigger part of the available literature, this paper argues that the resource efficiency of respective business cases is highly dependent on the specific business case design. This paper develops a more cautious and differentiated definition of the leasing society by discussing relevant mechanisms and success factors of leasing society business cases. The leasing society is discussed from a micro business-oriented and a macro environment-oriented perspective complemented by a discussion of conditions for successful business models that reduce environmental impacts and resource footprints.
This report examines the role of waste management in the context of a circular economy transition. Key challenges relate to moving beyond the perception of "waste as a problem" to "waste as a resource". To this end high levels of cooperation are needed between the waste industry and enterprises engaged in circular economy business models. Collecting high quality waste streams for re-use, remanufacturing and recycling also requires citizen engagement and integrated infrastructure development from the municipal to the EU level. Ultimately, both waste prevention as well as a widespread growth in circular economy activities will require a coherent and holistic approach that takes recovery options into account at every stage of the product life cycle. Co-benefits will include reducing environmental burden as well as creating both high-skilled and low-skilled jobs for an inclusive, green economy. In concrete terms, this report examines five waste streams identified in the EU's Circular Economy Action Plan: municipal waste, packaging waste, food waste, bio-waste and critical raw materials. It looks at the current state of policy development, presents trends and data comparing Member State performance, reviews the state of technological development, and assesses employment opportunities relevant to each waste stream in the overarching context of assessing progress toward the circular economy transition in the EU. Case studies of specific options for collecting and treating waste based on experiences in Denmark, Italy and Slovenia complement the more macro-level analysis of trends. Finally, key policy options are identified, in particular focused on ways to prevent waste, align circular economy and waste management objectives and improve the quality and reliability of indicators toward more robust monitoring.
The contribution of the EU bioeconomy to sustainable development depends on how it is implemented. A high innovation potential is accompanied by considerable risks, in particular regarding the exacerbation of global land use conflicts. This article argues that a systemic monitoring system capable of connecting human-environment interactions and multiple scales of analysis in a dynamic way is needed to ensure that the EU bioeconomy transition meets overarching goals, like the Sustainable Development Goals. The monitoring should be centered around a dashboard of key indicators and targets covering environmental, economic, and social aspects of the bioeconomy. With a focus on the land dimension, this article examines the strengths and weakness of different economic, environmental and integrated models and methods for monitoring and forecasting the development of the EU bioeconomy. The state of research on key indicators and targets, as well as research needs to integrate these aspects into existing modeling approaches, are assessed. The article concludes with key criteria for a systemic bioeconomy monitoring system.
The global demand for timber is increasing, with prognoses for the EU showing particularly high growth to meet renewable energy targets. However, there are limited options to meet rising timber demands within the EU, and global land competition to meet world food, energy and material needs, as well as to conserve high value nature areas, is increasing. This dissertation addresses the knowledge gap between the pressures of increased land use abroad and the underlying drivers of land use change. It argues that there is a high risk of problem shifting if EU policies to increase timber consumption are not accompanied by a monitoring system that accounts for consumption levels and provides a benchmark for sustainability.
The bioeconomy is gaining growing attention as a perceived win-win strategy for environment and economy in the EU. However, the EU already has a disproportionately high global cropland footprint compared to the world average, and uses more cropland than domestically available to supply its demand for agricultural products. There is a risk that uncontrolled growth of the bioeconomy will increase land use pressures abroad. For that reason, a monitoring system is needed to account for the global land use of European consumption. The aim of this paper is to take a closer look at the tools needed to monitor global cropland footprints, as well as the targets needed to benchmark development. This paper reviews recent developments in land footprint accounting approaches and applies the method of global land use accounting to calculate the global cropland footprint of the EU-27 for the years between 2000 and 2011. It finds a slight decrease in per capita cropland footprints over the past decade (of around 1% annually, reaching 0.29 ha/cap in 2011) and advocates promoting a further decrease in per capita cropland requirements (of around 2% annually) to reach global land use targets for keeping consumption within the safe operating space of planetary boundaries by 2030. It argues that strategic land reduction targets may still go hand in hand with the growth of a smart, innovative and sustainable bioeconomy by reinforcing the need for policies that support greater efficiency across the life-cycle and reduce wasteful and excessive consumption practices. Recommendations for further improving land footprint accounting are given.
Im Auftrag des Bundesforschungsministeriums hat das Wuppertal Institut eine Studie zur systemischen Betrachtung und Modellierung der Bioökonomie erstellt. Sie zeigt Wege auf, die komplexen sozio-ökonomischen Zusammenhänge und Umweltauswirkungen der Bioökonomie zu erfassen und soll als Grundlage für den Aufbau eines kontinuierlichen Monitorings dienen. Die Autor(inn)en erfassten Indikatoren und Modellierungsmethoden mit Bezug zur Bioökonomie und weisen auf bestehende Lücken hin: Diese finden sich vor allem bei der Erfassung neuer technologiegetriebener Sektoren, der systemischen Betrachtung eines nachhaltigen Konsums und bei der Modellierung der Zusammenhänge zwischen Innovationen, Wirtschaftswachstum und Ressourcenverbrauch (insbesondere die Landnutzung).
Zur Umsetzung eines systemischen Monitorings empfiehlt die Studie das folgende Vorgehen: Unter Zuhilfenahme des DPSIR-Konzeptes (Analyse von Wirkungsbeziehungen nach Driving forces, Pressures, States, Impacts und Responses) sollten Schlüsselindikatoren und Nachhaltigkeitsziele in einem Indikatoren-"Dashboard" zusammengeführt werden. Benötigt wird zudem ein Werkzeugkasten von Methoden, der vor allem integrierte Analyse- und Bewertungsmodelle sowie ein systemisch konzipiertes Metamodell umfasst.