The Bioeconomy and Food Systems Transformation - Scientific Group of the UN Food ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
food systems summit brief
The Scien�fic Group for the
UN Food Systems Summit
h�ps://sc-fss2021.org/
Food Systems Summit Brief
prepared by Research Partners of the Scientific Group for the Food Systems Summit
February 17, 2021
The Bioeconomy and Food Systems Transformation
by Eduardo Trigo, Hugo Chavarria, Carl Pray, Stuart J. Smyth, Agus�n Torroba, Justus Wesseler,
David Zilberman, Juan F. Mar�nez
I. Bioeconomy Concepts and Contributions change, since material replacement and energy-based
production processes are essential components of
The most widely recognized definition of bioeconomy actions needed for adaptation and mitigation and is seen
was proposed in the Global Bioeconomy Summit 2018 as an important complement to the decarbonization of
framework: “bioeconomy is the production, utilization the economy. Interest in the bioeconomy concept as
and conservation of biological resources, including relat- a development approach also emerges from societies’
ed knowledge, science, technology, and innovation, to concern for meeting the increased demand for food pro-
provide information, products, processes and services duced more sustainably.
across all economic sectors aiming toward a sustainable In addition, there are increasing changes towards
economy”. Bioeconomy policy frameworks and devel- sustainable consumer lifestyles, where consumers are
opment approaches make use of materials and energy better informed and inclined to buy environmentally
found in biodiversity, biomass, and genetic resources. friendly products. These changes create opportunities
The knowledge generated about biological principles and for the utilization of biomass (agricultural residuals, food
processes can be replicated in new product designs. waste) to increase recycling and to shorten supply chains,
The bioeconomy concept as a development but also as an alternative feedstock for the production of
approach is driven by advances in science and technol- numerous materials from fuels/energy to chemicals,
ogy (S&T) and the need to address new problems and bioplastics, pharmaceuticals, among others. Future bio-
concerns. Recently, this approach has been advanced economy innovations are expected to generate greater
by progress in research and development in biologi- positive impacts on sustainability, like synthetic biology,
cal sciences and by complementarity and convergence novel nitrogen-fixing crops, nanofertilizers, and more.
with the S&T of materials (especially nanotechnology) The bioeconomy concept as a development
and information (e.g. artificial intelligence (AI), digita- approach has similarities and differences with concepts
lization, information and communication technologies of the circular and green economies, which are included
(ICT), Internet of Things (IoT)). The bioeconomy concept as approaches to sustainable development (D’Amato et
has been favored by concerns associated with climate al. 2017; Kardung et al. 2021). All are multidimensional
1
food systems summit brief
concepts, having as goals: the reduction of greenhouse 50% to the total value added of bioeconomy in the EU.
gas (GHG) emissions, energy and material use efficien- Finally, links between the bioeconomy and the
cy, responsible consumption, the importance of social 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development are demon-
inclusion and the relevance of innovation. However, strated by using the Sustainable Development Goals
the bioeconomy is distinguishable by its focus on inno- (SDGs) as indicators for bioeconomy monitoring and
vation and transformation of production structures, evaluation (Calicioglu & Bogdanski, 2021). In an analysis
because its material and energy base are biological of national bioeconomy strategies (Linser & Lier, 2020),
resources, including the use of knowledge for process- topics related to the SDGs were indirectly related to
ing and the creation of value-added chains (Figure 1). objectives, planned actions and proposed measure-
The bioeconomy makes important contribu- ments for policy instruments aimed at promoting the
tions to sustainable economic growth from environ- bioeconomy. Fourteen relevant SDGs for the bioecono-
mental and social points of view, especially in rural my were identified. The bio-based economy can play a
areas. For example, the European Union (EU) bio- fundamental role in the decarbonization of the planet
economy (post-Brexit composition) employed ~17.5 (SDG 13: Climate Action) and production of agricultural
million people, generating €614 billion of value-added bio-inputs, healthy food and sustainable intensification
production in 2017 (Ronzon et al. 2020). Also, in 2017, of agricultural production (SDG 2: Zero Hunger, SDG 3:
Latin American countries like Argentina, generated 2.47 Good Health and Well-being and SDG 15: Life on Land).
million direct bioeconomy jobs (Coremberg, 2019). Additionally, the closure of production cycles through
Nordic countries have experienced bioeconomy-related residual biomass use improves the sustainable produc-
employment growth of 5-15% (Refsgaard et al. 2021). It tion indicators (SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and
is estimated this development model has an economic Production and SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Commu-
potential of USD 7.7 trillion by 2030 (WBCSD, 2020). nities). Another contribution of this new paradigm is
Previous projections are supported by trends in bioeco- the design of biomaterials and production of different
nomy markets. While commodities like vegetable oil, types of bioenergy (SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and
sugar and cereals have growth rates of less than 4.45%, Infrastructure, and SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Ener-
sectors with higher value-added, such as biofuels, gy), which help generate new jobs (SDG 8: Decent Work
bioplastics, and biofertilizers grew by 25, 20 and 14%, and Economic Growth)
respectively (Betancur et al. 2018). Using new S&T to The bioeconomy approach as a development
add value to biological resources leads to more profit- model that allows achieving the SDGs related to food
able and sustainable markets. Cingiz et al. (2021) show security and nutrition; health and well-being; and clean
the linkages between the different sectors of the bio- water and sanitation, among others, is analyzed in Table
economy and estimate that those contribute 30% and
Figure 1: Sectors and networks of the bioeconomy
2
food systems summit brief
Table 1: Potential contributions of the bioeconomy to the SDGs
Source: Chavarría et al. (2020).
II. Bioeconomy Contributions to Food Systems by creating new rural jobs. Action Track 5 promotes
resilience in the face of vulnerabilities, impacts and
Transformation stresses in FS. Resilience can be strengthened by a
The transformation towards more sustainable and growing bioeconomy, based on the diversification of
equitable food systems (FS) seeks to provide healthy, agricultural commodity production; increased use of
nutritious food, while creating livelihood opportuni- bio-based inputs in agriculture; and the diversification
ties and reducing negative impacts. To achieve this of rural incomes into rural production of bioenergy
goal, the UN Food Systems Summit has established bio-based industry and environmental services. The
five Action Tracks, relating to the bioeconomy: Action current contingencies caused by COVID-19 and recent
Track 1 seeks to ensure the availability of safe, nutri- natural disasters highlight the importance of innova-
tious food for everyone. This requires increasing crop tions to prepare FS for future pressures.
and livestock yields through sustainable intensification
a. Advantages of Disruptive Scientific and
activities in multifunctional landscapes, the diversi-
Technological Developments
fication of production, and good soil management.
Action Track 2 is the shift to healthy and sustainable Advances in biology, ICT, and engineering are repo-
consumption patterns. In this case, the bioeconomy sitioning the role played by biological resources and
can strengthen local value chains, promoting the improving our ability to understand and take full
reuse and recycling of food resources. Action Track 3 advantage of the opportunities offered. In recent
aims to optimize natural resources in food production, decades, biology advances have accelerated with
processing and distribution as pollution, soil degra- new research tools such as CRISPR-Cas9, building
dation and loss of biodiversity are reduced. For this, on new knowledge of plant, animal and microbial
the bioeconomy strategies focus on value chains with genomes and big data. Knowledge increases are used
integrated cycles, which increase efficiency and recy- to increase the efficiency of crops, animals, biofuel,
cling through products and co-products in different bioplastics and bioenergy production. They highlight
biological systems. Action Track 4 includes strategies the full potential of the intrinsic value of natural and
for integrating chains and adding value to products biological processes. The impact of these transforma-
at the local level, contributing to poverty reduction tive trends is augmented by the interaction among
3
food systems summit brief
them, what is beginning to be referred to as “techno- area. They are transformed into products for energy
logical convergence”. By interacting with each other, sector materials, multi-stage chemical sector, and the
different disciplines — biology, biotechnology, chem- construction sector, through large-scale industrial and
istry, nanotechnology, data science, ICT, engineering, logistical infrastructures. In contrast, biological carbon
etc. — are driving progress of each specific field, – biomass – comes from a highly decentralized context
blurring the traditional boundaries between economic because the diverse nature of agriculture and forestry
sectors, changing the competitive advantages of coun- and “does not travel well”. Due to its large volumes,
tries and their businesses. limited shelf-life, and low energy and carbon density,
ICT and digitaliza�on are important determin- it is not economical to transport biomass long distanc-
ers of economic organiza�on and compe��veness. es before processing. Integrated biomass processing
Widespread connec�vity, satellite technologies, data facilities need to be organized in a decentralized way,
science and ar�ficial intelligence mechanisms, robot- close to raw material sources.
ics, autonomous systems, electronic and biological It is these biobased value chain characteris-
sensors, virtual and augmented reality, the IoT and tics that allow for significant transformations of rural
blockchain apps are increasing the efficiency of ag- landscapes and how they integrate into the econo-
riculture, food and biomass supply chains, reducing my. Biobased value chains bring new activities into
waste and resource use while increasing the quality of rural landscapes, diversifying income sources and
food and biomass. It is also becoming possible to pre- the nature of existing employment opportunities.
dict climate phenomena and generate risk manage- Greater economic density generates opportunities
ment programs to be�er deal with the consequences for Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) territo-
and monitor climate impacts, which can reduce farm ries that are highly impacted by situations of unem-
management costs. ployment, informality (76% of those employed),
Through the use of S&T, the bioeconomy poverty (45%; several times more than urban rates)
makes it possible to improve produc�vity and sustain- and exclusion. The use of biomass for new industries
able use of biological resources by developing more increases economic opportunities for both agri-
produc�ve, disease-resistant and environmentally cultural and non-agricultural sectors (which in LAC
friendly varie�es of plants and animals. S&T increases generate 58% of the income of rural territories) (ILO,
biomass produc�vity, develops new bioproducts with 2020).
high value-added, such as nutraceu�cals, bioenergy Outmigration to urban centers, aging popula-
and other biological materials used by the cosme�c, tions and lack of youth interest to remain in farming
pharmaceu�cal, chemical and other industries. Fur- vis-a-vis the promise of a more “attractive” future in
thermore, it generates a range of new services and non-agricultural jobs is a common concern in rural
a�aches greater value to biodiversity, for example, in- communities around the world. According to a 2018
tegrated pest management based on biological pes�- OECD study that included 24 developing countries,
cides and fer�lizers. It contributes to increase the effi- only 45% of rural youth are satisfied with their
ciency of conver�ng biological resource for food, feed, employment. Among the reasons for seeking a new
and other uses by improving biorefinery processes. job, rural youth mentioned: a better income (36.7%),
Technological convergence is a trend contrib- greater stability in contracts (20%), better working
u�ng to the renewed, modernized vision of agriculture conditions (17%) and an opportunity to increase
and food systems, value-added chains and interna�on- skills (13%).
al trade, especially because of young people’s techno- A second strategic component of the bio-
logical skills ― which exceed those of previous gener- economy concept as a development approach and
a�ons ― and the need to halt the migra�on of young its impacts on transforming rural environments is
people from rural territories to urbanized areas. These the implications of improved energy availability to
new technological scenarios are already beginning to attract other economic activities beyond biobased
be reflected in agriculture, agribusiness and the rural value chain activities. Previously, rural electrification
milieu, and are increasingly perceived as offering the stimulated local development processes and bioener-
basis for the development of “sustainable intensifica- gy options could lower costs through the decentraliza-
�on”. tion of costly energy grids, improving environmental
performance through more integral use of residual
Supports SGDs: 3,8,9,11,12,15
biomass and waste. This is important for regions like
b. Transforming Rural Environments, Generating LAC, where forest biomass is equivalent to half of its
Income and Employment Opportunities land area (and 25% of the worlds’ forests). Cingiz et al.
One key bioeconomy issue is the implications of mov- (2021) show the linkages with up- and downstream
ing from fossil to biobased value chains. Fossil raw sectors makes up between 30% to 50% of the val-
materials are relatively homogenous, extracted in high ue-added of the bioeconomy in the EU.
volumes from selected productive deposits of limited Affordable, stable energy supply is a critical
4
food systems summit brief
restriction to economic development and the bio- enhance the productivity of feedstock plants, the effi-
economy is increasingly offering it through options ciency of refining and the use of residue, the cost of
that are not competitive with food production. In biofuels, and their environmental impacts will decline,
an increasingly interconnected world, emerging bio- while their value-added is enhanced.
economy networks are viable strategies for reversing
Supports SDGs: 7,9,13
rural outmigration. In 2018, bioenergy generated
3.18 million jobs – equivalent to 30% of all jobs in the d. Improved Nutrition and Health
renewable energy sector. Moreover, the employment
generated by the biofuels sector worldwide is highly Growing consumer interests for products with nat-
concentrated: LAC accounts for 50% of liquid biofuel ural ingredients, promotes new value chains associ-
jobs worldwide, while North America accounts for ated with tropical biodiversity. Agroforestry systems
16%. with native fruit trees and traditional forest foods
can provide the necessary macro- and micro-nutri-
Supports SGDs: 3,7,8,9,11,15 ents needed to improve nutrition and food security.
Micro-algae possess a high nutritional value, contain-
c. Improving Food Chain Resource Use
ing protein, polyunsaturated fatty acids, bioactive
The diversification in biomass use to produce biofuels carbohydrates, and antioxidants, including pigments
contributes to GHG reduction, generates added value such as carotenes, chlorophylls phycobiliproteins.
and employment, and contributes to a safer, more Innovations in plant breeding technologies,
efficient agri-food systems. Biomass fractionating like those used to create genetically modified (GM)
results in a series of biomaterials of different added crops, have increased yields, contributing to higher
value. Biomaterials are liquid, solid and gaseous bio- household incomes, reducing poverty and enhanc-
fuels, which under the term „bioenergy“ represent ing household food security. Biofortified GM crops
10% of the world‘s primary energy supply (IEA, 2019). have been improving the nutritional quality of food,
A wide range of products linked to animal and human including increasing proteins (canola, corn, potato,
food (flour protein, expeller, bagasse, distillers dried/ rice, wheat); improving oils and fatty acids (canola,
wet grains, etc.) and other high value-added products corn, rice, soy); increasing vitamin contents (potato,
linked to the pharmaceutical, alcohol chemical and rice, strawberry, tomato); and increasing mineral avail-
oleo chemical industries are also produced. ability (lettuce, rice, soy, corn, wheat). Nutritionally
Biomass fractionation leads to an industry enhanced foods are preventing and/or treating lead-
categorized as „multi-product“, in which the produc- ing causes of death such as cancer, diabetes, cardio-
tion of co-products facilitates a better distribution vascular disease and hypertension.
in raw material production costs, making the system In many instances, improving macro-nutrients
more efficient. Safer agri-food systems are generated, (proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, fiber) and micro-nu-
as biofuels serve as a buffer of raw materials that can trients (vitamins, minerals, functional metabolites)
be use as food in case of crisis or crop losses. The have significant childhood health improvements, such
production of biofuels has generated more stable as reducing blindness due to the lack of vitamin avail-
demands for raw materials, generating additional ability. Improved food nutrient content, especially
sales channels. According to Torroba (2020), 16% of the increase in mineral availability, contributes to
corn production worldwide, 20% of sugar production, improved immunity systems and reduces stunting.
19% of soybean oil and 16% of palm oil were destined In many developing countries, plant-based nutrient
toward biofuels. When the prices of related commod- intake accounts for 100% of an individual’s nutrient
ities are not attractive, the redirection of raw material diet, further highlighting the importance of nutrition-
derived from crops, can be particularly beneficial to ally enhanced crop derived foods. Health benefits are
farmers. It generates more stable demand for raw extended to adulthood through reductions in cancer
materials, creating positive impacts on prices, benefit- causing mycotoxins, such as is found in GM corn.
ing neglected LAC groups: family farmers, of whom 60 One quality of life health improvement that
million work in the sector. has resulted from the small land-holder adoption of
Biofuel productivity has improved, reflecting GM crops is the reduction in drudgery (Gouse et al.
learning-by-doing and ongoing technological updat- 2016). The majority of weed control in developing
ing. Processing costs of US corn ethanol declined countries is done by hand labor. Hand weeding is labor
by 45% between 1983-2010, while production vol- commonly assigned to women. Gouse et al. found
umes increased seventeen-fold; learning-by-doing and hand weeding was reduced by three weeks over the
economies of scale played important roles in reducing course of a year with GM corn adoption. This allowed
these costs. Similarly, the cost of producing sugarcane women to have larger vegetable gardens.
ethanol in Brazil declined by 70% between 1975-2010 Supporting SDGs: 1,2,15
(Chen et al. 2015). With advances in biotechnology to
5food systems summit brief
e. Improved Environmental Sustainability and One emerging and vital area of innovative
Climate Resilience bioeconomy research is the use of innovative breed-
ing technologies, including gene editing, to improve
Bioeconomy and biotechnology investments have
the abilities of plants to sequester increased amounts
made substantial environmental improvements, offer-
of carbon dioxide, allowing agricultural food pro-
ing potential to be a leading strategy in efforts to
duction to make significant contributions to reduc-
mitigate climate change. It is estimated that biomass
ing the impacts of changing climates. Changes in a
could save 1.3 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent emis-
plants’ ability to photosynthesize can have additional
sions per year by providing 3,000 terawatt-hours of
yield enhancing benefits. Bioeconomy photosynthesis
electricity by 2050 (Zihare et al. 2020). It is necessary
research that results in plants sequestering greater
to establish national instruments of measurement for
volumes of carbon dioxide and higher yields, will
GHG emissions throughout the life cycle of biofuels
ensure that crop production levels do not decline in
according to the different raw materials used to cor-
the face of changing climates.
roborate the environmental advantages. Bio-based
Plant breeding involving biotechnology and
products release fewer GHGs compared to fossil car-
gene editing is also providing additional sustainabil-
bon commodities.
ity benefits by developing new varieties that are
Another sustainable bioeconomy contribution
resistant to diseases that are threatening to destroy
is the reduction and use of food waste. In the agro-in-
species. Fungal diseases and virus have had devas-
dustrial sector in LAC, food waste is around 127 million
tating impacts on the production of coffee, where an
tonnes/year, enough to satisfy the nutritional needs
estimated 60% of all production is threatened (Davis
of 300 million people (Macias, 2020). Thanks to S&T
et al. 2019). Similar circumstances exist regarding the
advances, multiple technologies allow the reduction
production of bananas, oranges and cocoa. The tech-
of waste and its use to produce new bioproducts (for
nology is also being applied to reintroduce species
the food, energy, chemical, pharmaceutical, construc-
into regions where they were previously made extinct
tion industries). Food waste can be considered as a
due to disease, such as the case with the American
cheap feedstock for producing value-added products
chestnut tree.
such as biofertilizers, biofuels, biomethane, biogas,
and value-added chemicals. These new industries Supporting SDGs: 2,3
have the potential to contribute to the mitigation
objectives of climate change and the environmental f. Upscaling Biotechnology Innovations
sustainability of productive commercial activities due Humanity is facing major challenges, including cli-
to the substitution of products of fossil origin with mate change, food security, and rural development.
high carbon footprint. The bioeconomy is poised to play a central role in
The commercialization of herbicide tolerant addressing these challenges. New technologies in
canola, corn and soy in the mid-1990s, revolution- life and information sciences, combined with prac-
ized land management practices, resulted in tens tical knowledge of production practices and ecosys-
of millions of acres transitioning to zero-tillage. The tems, can unleash the bioeconomy’s potential. This
additional commercialization of insect resistant corn, requires significant investment in basic and applied
cotton and soy has resulted in millions of fewer research, training highly skilled professionals, and a
pesticide applications. The reduction in tillage and fluid relationship between academia and industry.
chemical applications has produced a significant envi- Zilberman et al. (2013) suggest that the “educational
ronmental benefit, with 2.4 billion kg fewer carbon industrial complex” has been essential in establishing
dioxide emissions and 775 million kg fewer chemical the biotechnology and information technology sec-
active ingredients being applied (Brookes & Barfoot, tors in the US and throughout the world. In the edu-
2020). It is estimated insect resistant crops reduced cational industrial complex, publicly supported basic
global pesticide use by 37% (Klümper & Qaim, 2014). research within universities and other research insti-
Not only are there fewer GHGs emitted during the tutions leads to discoveries and innovations that are
production of crops, the continuous cropping of fields transferred to, and expanded by, startups and other
with no tillage is increasing the soils sequestration private-sector actors. Their development efforts lead
and storage of CO2. Conventional agricultural practic- to products that are produced and marketed by the
es that require the use of tillage for weed control are private sector and transferred to final users. The
estimated to have a net global warming potential that educational industrial complex has already led to
is 26-31% higher than zero-tillage land (Mangalassery the establishment of supply chains for new products,
et al. 2014). The adoption of GM technology in corn, including biofuels and oils, fine chemicals, phar-
soybean, and cotton reduced agricultural land and maceuticals and foods. University researchers have
input use, saving 0.15 Gt of GHG emissions, equivalent led some of these new ventures, and the exchange
to roughly one-eighth the emissions from automobiles between universities and the private sector in clus-
in the US (Barrows et al. 2014). ters like the Bay Area, St. Louis, Davis, Sao Paolo, San
6food systems summit brief
Diego, Austin, Mendoza, Santiago, etc. the application of these opportunities in production,
The supply chains that emerge from these transportation, and consumption and unnecessarily
industrial clusters provide direct employment in the restrict sustainable growth, jobs and resilience. The
production of technological devices and even greater differences in regulations in different countries often
opportunities in the industries resulting from these reflect different societal norms and values. These insti-
technologies. The resulting bioeconomy industries tutional barriers are difficult to solve by one country
are more likely to be concentrated in rural regions, alone. The UN Food Systems Summit brings togeth-
alleviating rural poverty. For example, biofuel and fine er many countries and many people for discussing
chemical production can transfer rents from owners the removal of institutional barriers. Our overview
of non-renewable resources like fossil fuels to the has shown that a lot can be achieved by building
expanded agri-food sector. Biorefineries operate at research capacity and reducing institutional barriers.
lower temperatures allowing for constructions small- The impacts will be beyond the food systems and
er in size in comparison to refineries converting fossil affect other sectors of our economies as well. An open
fuels. This allows for more diversified as well as spa- discussion will be needed that takes differences in
tially distributed scaling-up (Clomburg et al., 2017). norms and values into account without discriminating
The success of the educational industrial com- one against each other. The UN Food Systems Summit
plex depends on maintaining academic and research provides the opportunity. The results depend on us.
excellence. The pioneering knowledge produced by
EMBRAPA was key to the emergence of Brazil as an
agricultural powerhouse, suggesting that support for
outstanding research institutes linked with industry is
a sound social investment.
The three main obstacles to the development
of the biofuels sector are regulatory uncertainty, high
transaction costs, and financial constraints. Upscaling
and applying new knowledge requires a science-based
regulatory environment that aims to reduce regulato-
ry burdens and accelerate the development and appli-
cation of new, safe technologies. The emergence of
entrepreneurial startups is more likely when venture
investors and capital markets are established to sup-
port new industries and when regulatory procedures
are streamlined to reduce the cost and time needed to
establish the venture.
Supporting SDGs: 7,9,15
III. Move Forward
Food systems, the “activities involved in producing,
processing, transporting and consuming food” (UN,
2021) are an integral part of the bioeconomy concept
as a development approach. New developments in
the biological sciences allow countries to address the
many challenges society is facing. We have summa-
rized the many opportunities the biological sciences
have to offer. The translation of these opportunities
into practice will not be trivial. There are a number
of institutional factors that delay or even prevent full
exploitation of the opportunities the bioeconomy has
on offer.
First, the development of research capacity
at universities and government institutes can turn
these opportunities into technical and social innova-
tions. Second, developing industries based on these
innovations and the supply chains, that generate
employment and economic growth. Third, regulations
of innovations that protect society but do not disrupt
7food systems summit brief
References Cleaner Production, 168: 716–734. https://
Betancur, C., Moñux, D., Canavire, G., Villanueva, doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.053
D., García, J., María, L., Méndez, K., Zúñiga, Davis, A. P., Chadburn, H., Moat, J., O’Sullivan, R.,
A., Olaguer, E. (2018). Estudio sobre la bio- Hargreaves, S., Nic Lughadha, E. (2019). High
economía como fuente de nuevas industrias extinction risk for wild coffee species and
basadas en el capital natural de Colombia implications for coffee sector sustainability.
N.°1230667, Fase I. BIOINTROPIC, Colombia. Science Advances, 5(1), 3473. DOI: 10.1126/
Barrows, G., Sexton, S., Zilberman, D. (2014). Agricul- sciadv.aav3473.
tural Biotechnology: The Promise and Pros- Gouse, M., Sengupta, D., Zambrano, P., Falck-Zepe-
pects of Genetically Modified Crops. Journal da, J. (2016). Genetically modified maize:
of Economic Perspectives, 28 (1): 99-120. DOI: Less drudgery for her, more maize for him?
10.1257/jep.28.1.99 World Development, 83: 27-38. http://dx.doi.
Brookes, G., & Barfoot, P. (2020). Environmental org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.03.008.
impacts of genetically modified (GM) crop Hassan, S., Williams, G. A., Jaiswal, A. K. (2018).
use 1996–2018: impacts on pesticide use and Emerging technologies for the pretreatment
carbon emissions. GM Crops and Food, 11 (4): of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresource Tech-
215-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698. nology, 262: 310–318. https://doi.org/https://
2020.1773198. doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.04.099
Calicioglu, Ö., & Bogdanski, A. (2021). Linking the IEA. (2019). World Energy Balances 2019 (online).
bioeconomy to the 2030 sustainable devel- Paris, France. Retrieved 21 Jan. 2020.
opment agenda: Can SDG indicators be used ILO. (2020). Sector rural y desarrollo local en América
to monitor progress towards a sustainable Latina y el Caribe. https://www.ilo.org/amer-
bioeconomy? New Biotechnology, 61: 40–49. icas/temas/sector-rural-y-desarrollo-local/
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j. lang--es/index.htm (Assessed February 14).
nbt.2020.10.010 Kardung, M., Cingiz, K., Costenoble, O., Delahaye,
Chavarria, H., Trigo, E., Villarreal, F., Elverdin, P., R., Heijman, W., Lovrić, M., van Leeuwen,
Piñeiro, V. (2020). Bioeconomy: A Sustain- M., M’Barek, R., van Meijl, H., Piotrowski, S.,
able Development Strategy. The G20 Insights Ronzon, T., Sauer, J., Verhoog, D., Verkerk,
Platform, Think 20 Engagement Group. Avail- P.J., Vrachioli, M., Wesseler, J.H.H., Zhu, B.X.
able at https://www.g20-insights.org/poli- (2020). Development of the Circular Bioecon-
cy_briefs/bioeconomy-a-sustainable-develop- omy: Drivers and Indicators. Sustainability, 13
ment-strategy/ (1): 413. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010413
Chen X., Nuñez H.M., Bing X. (2015). Explaining the Klümper, W., & Qaim, M. (2014). A meta- analysis of
reductions in Brazilian sugarcane ethanol pro- the impacts of genetically modified crops.
duction costs: importance of technological PLoS ONE, 9: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1371/
change. GCB Bioenergy, 7: 468-478 https:// journal.pone.0111629.
doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12163 Linser, S., & Lier, M. (2020). The contribution of Sus-
Cingiz, K., Gonzalez-Hermoso, H., Heijman, W., Wes- tainable Development Goals and forest-relat-
seler, J. (2021). A Cross-Country Measure- ed indicators to national bioeconomy prog-
ment of the EU Bioeconomy: An Input-Output ress monitoring. Sustainability, 12 (7): 2898
Approach. Sustainability. Forthcoming https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072898
Clomburg, J., Crumbley, A., Gonzalez, R. (2017). Indus- Macias, M., Girón, C., Nieto M., Chavrier, N., Páez, D.,
trial manufacturing: the future of chemical Ureña, M., Moreno, J., García M., de la ViñHas-
production. Science, 355(6320):aag0804 doi: san, S. S., Williams, G. A., Jaiswal, A. K. (2018).
10.1126/science.aag0804. Emerging technologies for the pretreatment
Coremberg, A. (2019). Medición de la cadena de valor of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresource Tech-
de la bioeconomía en Argentina: hacia una nology, 262: 310–318. https://doi.org/https://
cuenta satélite. Ministerio de Producción y doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.04.099
Trabajo, Bolsa de Cereales, Grupo Bioeco- Mangalassery, S., Sjögersten, S., Sparkes, D. L., Stur-
nomía. Buenos Aires. rock, C. J., Craigon, J., Mooney, S. J. (2014).
D’Amato, D., Droste, N., Allen, B., Kettunen, M., Läht- To what extent can zero tillage lead to a
inen, K., Korhonen, J., Toppinen, A. (2017). reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from
Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative temperate soils? Scientific Reports, 4: 4586.
analysis of sustainability avenues. Journal of https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04586.
8food systems summit brief
OECD. (2018). The Future of Rural Youth in Developing world. https://www.wbcsd.org/Programs/Cir-
Countries: Tapping the Potential of Local Value cular-Economy/Factor-10/Resources/The-cir-
Chains, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi. cular-bioeconomy-A-business-opportuni-
org/10.1787/9789264298521-en. ty-contributing-to-a-sustainable-world?fb-
Refsgaard, K., Kull, M., Slätmo, E., & Meijer, M. W. clid=IwAR0qdYD0UCczuTvzV3YhSqhxkllAu6ft-
(2021). Bioeconomy – A driver for regional nvbR7kQ1ee758pT4S_cn_iLg7e0
development in the Nordic countries. New Wesseler, J. & Joachim von Braun. (2017). Measur-
Biotechnology, 60: 130–137. https://doi.org/ ing the Bioeconomy: Economics and Policies.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2020.10.001 Annual Review of Resource Economics. Annu.
Ronzon, T., Piotrowski, S., Tamosiunas, S., Dammer, Rev. Resour. Econ., 9: 275-298
L., Carus, M., M’barek, R. (2020). Develop- Wesseler, J., Smart, R., Thomson, J., Zilberman, D.
ments of Economic Growth and Employment (2017). Foregone benefits of important food
in Bioeconomy Sectors across the EU. Sustain- crop improvements in Sub-Saharan Africa.
ability, 12,11:4507. https://doi.org/10.3390/ PLoS ONE, 12(7), e0181353.
su12114507 Zihare, L., Muizniece, I., Spalvins, K., & Blumberga,
Torroba, A. (2020). Atlas de los biocombustibles D. (2018). Analytical framework for commer-
líquidos 2019-2020. San José, Costa Rica. cialization of the innovation: case of ther-
https://repositorio.iica.int/bitstream/han- mal packaging material. Energy Procedia,
dle/11324/13974/BVE20128304e.pdf?se- 147:374–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egy-
quence=1&isAllowed=y pro.2018.07.106
United Nations. (2021). Food Systems Summit 2021. Zilberman, D., Kim, E., Kirschner, S., Kaplan, S., Reeves,
https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-sum- J. (2013). Technology and the future bioeco-
mit/about. (Assessed February 14, 2021). nomy. Agricultural Economics, 44: 95-102.
WBCSD (2020). The circular bioeconomy: A busi- https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12054
ness opportunity contributing to a sustainable
Food Systems Summit Briefs are prepared by researchers of Partners of the Scien�fic Group for the United
Na�ons Food Systems Summit. They are made available under the responsibility of the authors. The views
presented may not be a�ributed to the Scien�fic Group or to the partner organisa�ons with which the
authors are affiliated.
The authors are:
Eduardo Trigo, Adviser of the Bioeconomy and Produc�ve Development Program at the Inter-American
Ins�tute for Coopera�on on Agriculture (IICA).
Hugo Chavarria, Manager of the Bioeconomy and Produc�ve Development Program at IICA.
Carl Pray, Professor in the School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Rutgers the State University
of New Jersey.
Stuart J. Smyth, Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the
University of Saskatchewan.
Agus�n Torroba, Technical Specialist of the Bioeconomy and Produc�ve Development Program at IICA.
Justus Wesseler, Professor and Head of the Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group at
Wageningen University & Research.
David Zilberman, Professor in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of
California at Berkeley.
Juan F. Mar�nez, Consultant of the Bioeconomy and Produc�ve Development Program at IICA.
For further informa�on about the Scien�fic Group,
visit h�ps://sc-fss2021.org or
contact info@sc-fss2021.org
@sc_fss2021
9You can also read
