Cited by 19Bioeconomy and Sustainability DevelopmentSustainable Industrial EcologySustainability and Climate Change Governance

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 36 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Governance Strategies for Sustainable Circular Bioeconomy Development in Europe: Insights and Typologies

Open access

Abstract

This study examines governance strategies that facilitate sustainable regional circular bioeconomy development, culminating in a typology which enables the classification of regional government good practices supporting circular bioeconomy deployment in diverse regions within Europe. Data on regional circular bioeconomy governance models were collected through desk research and a survey, resulting in a compilation of 61 circular bioeconomy governance models. From this compilation, 20 case studies were identified and further explored to develop a typology of regional circular bioeconomy governance strategies in the EU-27. Findings reveal a strong regional commitment to expanding bioeconomies; however, managing conflicting sustainability goals remains a challenge. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of successful governance models and practices, offering valuable insights for policymakers to support the co-development and replication of effective circular bioeconomy strategies across diverse European regions.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper develops a typology of regional circular bioeconomy governance models in Europe from 20 case studies and applies it to 75 good governance practices. It finds strong regional commitment to enabling governance, but much less attention to constraining governance and conflicting sustainability goals.

Key findings

  • From 61 compiled governance models, 20 case studies were selected; most aligned with transformation path TP3 “new and more efficient biomass uses” (65%), followed by TP2 “boosting primary sector productivity” (60%), TP4 “low-bulk and high-value applications” (30%), and TP1 “fossil fuel substitution” (25%).
  • Enabling governance was dominated by bio-based R&D strategies (60%), subsidies for bio-based products (40%), and awareness-raising campaigns (25%). Constraining governance was weaker: 11 of 20 models did not explicitly recognize or address conflicts with SDGs; among the nine that did, land use change and equity were most prevalent, followed by water scarcity and land degradation.
  • Sustainability objectives were unbalanced: all 20 models included economic objectives, 19 environmental, and 18 social. Top-down transition governance was predominant (75%), with bottom-up in 25%.
  • Of 86 initially identified good practices, 75 were shortlisted. Policy instruments were fiscal/financial (24; 32%), networking/collaboration/joint planning (20; 27%), information/advisory (15; 20%), regulatory (7; 9%), voluntary (3; 4%), and other (6; 8%). Most practices were triple-helix (56%) or quadruple-helix (33%); none were penta-helix.

Methods

  • Desk research/literature review and a data collection survey compiled 61 regional circular bioeconomy governance models in the EU-27 and EU-associated countries, with local subject matter experts helping ensure regional coverage; 20 case studies with accurate and complete data were selected for typology analysis.
  • A typology matrix was developed along 10 dimensions, drawing on Dietz et al.’s four bio-based transformation paths and enabling/constraining governance functions, plus helix models, driver measures, territorial aspects, focus, model type, transition process, decision-making, voting, and dispute resolution.
  • For good practices, 86 practices were screened against FAO/ENRD-style criteria, 75 were shortlisted, classified by Elbersen et al. policy instrument types and by the governance typology, and analyzed with descriptive statistics in MS Excel by regional cluster and category.

Limitations

  • No formal limitations section is present. The paper states that several of the initial 61 models were excluded due to incomplete or missing data, and that models lacking support measures or at national level—except for small countries—were eliminated.
  • The paper states that measurement and monitoring of bioeconomy contributions remain lacking, and that harmonization of sustainability measurement for the circular bioeconomy may not be possible.
  • Evident from the text: the typology rests on 20 case studies, and in 13 of 20 cases decision-making or dispute resolution processes were not mentioned; the authors note that if such mechanisms exist, they are not publicly disclosed. The categories “decision making,” “voting mechanisms,” and “dispute resolution” were also excluded from the good-practice analysis.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su16125140

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

65 Own result · 26 Not checked yet · 10 No basis given · 7 Own interpretation · 6 No full text of the sources · 4 Own method · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · 1 Not supported · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 26 references — free account
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 29
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 38
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
58 of 58
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Harmonization of the methodology for the circular bioeconomy for both the public and private sector is possible.

    “In reality, harmonization of sustainability measurement for the circular bioeconomy may not be possible [14], but harmonization of the methodology for both the public and private sector seems possible.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The 20 circular bioeconomy case studies are representative of regional circular bioeconomy governance models across the EU-27.

    “Through an examination of 20 circular bioeconomy case studies, a typology of regional bioeconomy governance models was developed, delineated along 10 dimensions.”
    “The results of the study provide a comprehensive insight into regional circular bioeconomy governance strategies and models within the EU-27.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The 75 shortlisted good governance practices are representative of good governance practices across Europe.

    “The shortlisted good governance practices were widely distributed across Europe and the different regional jurisdictions described in Section 2.”
    “A total of 86 practices were initially identified in the screening of regional circular bioeconomy good governance practices.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The regional clusters used for sourcing good practices are meaningful groupings for analyzing regional circular bioeconomy governance.

    “To ensure a broad coverage of good practices, to promote learnings from different jurisdictions of Europe, and to also allocate the collection between different research collaborators with regional circular bioeconomy expertise, it was decided to distribute European countries into different regional clusters for good practice sourcing.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The data collection template accurately captures the relevant aspects of good governance practices.

    “Adata collection template was subsequently developed to collect bioeconomy good governance practices.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The literature review and consultation within the authors' networks identified all relevant good practices fulfilling the criteria.

    “Secondly, a literature review, including searches of white and grey literature, a review of circular bioeconomy governance research projects, e.g., the EU CORDIS database, and consultation within the authors' own networks were undertaken to identify relevant practices fulfilling the circular bioeconomy good governance practice criteria.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The effectiveness of regional circular bioeconomy governance models relies heavily on decision-making and voting mechanisms.

    “The effectiveness of regional circular bioeconomy governance models relies heavily on decision-making and voting mechanisms.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Driver measures play a crucial role in circular bioeconomy governance.

    “Driver measures play a crucial role, differentiating between regulatory measures and economic measures like price incentives, taxation, or subsidies.”
8 of 8

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, and Haarich, S. (2024, February 10). Bioeconomy Development in EU Regions—Mapping of EU Member States’/Regions’ Research and Innovation Plans & Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) on Bioeconomy—Final Report. Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/84684. · DOI
  2. Lai, M. (2018). Making the most of project and good practice examples. ENRD Workshop on “Project Examples and Good Practices: Approaches to Collection and Dissemination”, European Network for Rural Development.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 19

Metadata

Authors
Skondras, A., Nastis, S. A., Skalidi, I., Theofilou, A., Bakousi, A., Mone, T., Tsifodimou, Z. E., Gaffey, J., Ludgate, R., O’Connor, T., Grozdanic, D., O’Dwyer, B., Pappa, E., Pantazi, K., & Stylianidis, E.
Affiliations
  • Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
  • Munster Technological University (IE)
  • Cantillon Academy, Munster Technological University, V92 CX88 Tralee, Ireland
  • Region of Central Macedonia (GR)
Corresponding author
  • Skondras, Alexandros
  • Stylianidis, Efstratios
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-06-17
Volume
16
Issue
12
Pages
5140
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399738094
Cited by
19
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 2
FWCI
9.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Union’s Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Actions programme (101060504)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Bioeconomy and Sustainability Development
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Sustainable Industrial Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Keywords
circular bioeconomy, regional governance, governance models, sustainable regional development, sustainability conflicts, policy replication, European regions, best practices

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review