Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Martine Cinq-Mars, D. Fortin (2007)
Les enjeux de la planification participative : pouvoir à la communauté ou hégémonie des groupes dominants ?
(2002)
THE APPLICATION OF BIOTECHNOLOGY TO INDUSTRIAL SUSTAINABILITY – A PRIMER
Paul Krugman (1994)
Competitiveness: A Dangerous ObsessionForeign Affairs, 73
(2013)
Mémorandum sur la politique européenne de l’eau
K. Deininger, D. Byerlee, J. Lindsay, A. Norton, H. Selod, M. Stickler (2011)
Rising Global Interest in Farmland: Can It Yield Sustainable and Equitable Benefits?
(2012)
Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe; COM (2012) final; European Commission: Brussels
(2011)
Bio-based economy for Europe: state of play and future potential -Part 1. Report on the European Commission's Public on-line consultation
(2016)
European Bioeconomy in Figures, Nova-Institute for Ecology and Innovation
(2003)
Abitare l’avvenire: configurazioni territoriali e dinamiche identitarie nell’età della globalizzazione
P. Hamel (1997)
La critique postmoderne et le courant communicationnel au sein des théories de la planification : une rencontre difficile, 41
(2015)
Politica europea dell’acqua. Possibili scenari a confronto, in Marconi M., Sellari P. (Eds),Verso un nuovo paradigma geopolitico
(1981)
Per una geografia del Potere, UNICOPLI
A. Sheppard, S. Raghu, C. Begley, D. Richardson (2011)
Biosecurity in the new bioeconomyCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3
D. White (2000)
Consumer and Community Participation: A Reassessment of Process, Impact, and Value
Angelo Turco (1988)
Verso una teoria geografica della complessità
Jeffrey Moody, C. McGinty, Jason Quinn (2014)
Global evaluation of biofuel potential from microalgaeProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111
(2013)
Bio-based Industries Consortium, Strategic Innovation and Research Agenda (SIRA)
(2009)
Unintended Environmental Consequences of a Global Biofuels Program, MIT Edition, Report N
K. McCormick, Niina Kautto (2013)
The Bioeconomy in Europe: An OverviewSustainability, 5
R. Baer (2001)
Handbook of Social Studies in Health and MedicineMedical Anthropology Quarterly, 15
A. Arundel, David Sawaya (2009)
The Bioeconomy to 2030 : designing a policy agenda
B. Page, M. Kaika (2003)
The EU water framework directive: Part 2. Policy innovation and the shifting choreography of governanceEuropean Environment, 13
(2010)
The future of industrial biorefineries
S. Bringezu, H. Schütz, Meghan O’brien, L. Kauppi, R. Howarth, J. Mcneely (2009)
Towards Sustainable Production and Use of Resources: Assessing Biofuels
Abstract We propose a brief analysis of the “Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe” by the European Commission. With this aim, we have used a multiscalar and inductive methodology, a critical, paradigmatic and deconstructionist approach. Special attention is given to the language because it influences the individual’s perceptions and the collective imagination that is the base of ideas, decisions and actions. The main results concern the conceptual and ideological matrix, the population-resource relation and the participation process. We argue that the technocentric and anthropocentric approaches as well as the neoliberal vision are all the same in regards to both the old “fossil” economy and the most recent bioenergy sector’s development. The latter could offer important lessons to avoid errors, contradictions and paradoxes. In addition, the asymmetry regarding the distribution of biomass and advanced level of techno-knowledge could lead to new forms of ecological exploitation, economic domination and power relations on the different levels of spatial scale. This could put in to question the territorial sovereignty. Finally, the EU bioeconomy model cannot be considered an economic revolution because it is focused on the supply side in support of market demand and economic growth, without taking into account the production model and scale. So, it simply appears as one of many steps of the “industrial revolution”: from fossil sources to biobased ones. For this reason, it is very important to make the choice process a democratic one, bringing in the Member State Parliaments on the discussion on the UE biobased policy, as well as opening a broad public debate about the prospects and effects of this choice. In regard to this, the paper could be of interest because it aspires to assume and motivate a more systemic prospective in evaluations and policy decisions.
Open Agriculture – de Gruyter
Published: Dec 20, 2016
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.