Session 2: Innovation in bio-economy sectors for a circular economy

Mary Maxon, Executive Director for BioFutures at Schmidt Futures, started her scene-setting presentation by highlighting that that the bioeconomy can help to meet 11 of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Over 60 countries have adopted bio-economy strategies, and these vary along several dimensions, including the role of biotechnology. She also stressed that the bioeconomy can lead to the creation of new industrial value chains because, for instance, the waste produced by one company could become an input for another firm. Key elements of policy frameworks to promote the bio-economy should include: the adoption of credible indicators to guide decisions and investments, the development of effective bioeconomy knowledge management platforms, public procurement of bio-based products, and adoption of incentives that recognise innovative industrial value chain links. Finally, she described the US White House Bio-economy Executive Order, which is an whole-of-government initiative and provides $2 billion funding to bio-economy related initiatives.

Ole Jørgen Marvik, Special Advisor for Life Sciences at Innovation Norway and Delegate to the OECD Working Party on Biotechnology, Nanotechnology and Converging Technologies (WPBNCT), highlighted that the bio-economy alone cannot address all sustainability challenges. A holistic approach that includes improved recycling and efficient energy production is needed. Then, he underlined that considerations for domestically available bioeconomy resources and their potential use by domestic firms define the scope of bio-economy strategies.

Finally, he agreed on the importance of carefully considering the innovative industrial links that the bio-economy can generate, and presented the example of Norway where CO2 captured from metallurgical industry flue gas may be used to produce aviation fuel or protein for the aquaculture industry.

Giulia Gregori, Head of Strategic Planning and Institutional Communication at Novamont, also stressed that the circular bio-economy often involves partnerships between sectors that are not linked in a linear economy. For this reason, strategies and policies to support the bioeconomy need to be truly cross-sectoral. She presented the three main pillars of Novamont business model: repurposing existing industrial sites to avoid land use, use of by-products and crops that can grow in marginal lands, and focus on products that are complex to recycle or face a high risk of dispersion in the environment. She concluded by highlighting the importance of explaining the benefits of improvements in waste collection systems to consumers when new practises are introduced.

Gernot Klepper, Chairman at the International Sustainability & Carbon Certification Association, agreed that government support is needed for the bio-economy to grow, and stressed the role of certification to ensure government budget is wellspent and sustainability trade-offs are addressed. He presented the case of used cooking oil that became more expensive than fresh palm oil because of market distortions introduced by incentives. He also argued that certification systems need to be international because most of the value chains today are global, and require sound monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems. He underscored the speed of innovation in the bio-economy sector: for instance, the greenhouse-gas savings from the use of biofuels compared to fossil fuels increased from 50% to 70% in the 10 years.

Marta Gomez San Juan, Senior Expert on Circular Bioeconomy at the FAO Office for Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment, presented the numerous challenges that food and agricultural systems currently face. The food sector currently uses 74% of global biomass and is responsible for onethird of global emissions. At the same time, 30% of soils are already degraded, one-third of agricultural land is used to produce food that is lost or wasted, and around one-third of the world’s population does not have access to healthy diets. A key issue is that economies fail in capturing the maximum value from biological resources, and valuable resources are considered as “waste”. A combination of innovation and traditional and indigenous knowledge is needed to improve food and agricultural systems. She highlighted that FAO members have made the bio-economy a strategic priority for the next 10 years, and that the bio-economy is a genuine game changer because of its cross-sectoral nature.

In the open discussion, Mary Maxon highlighted that the US Sustainable Aviation Fuel Challenge is a mission-oriented policy approach where biobased solutions could play a role. Giulia Gregori underlined that there is the need to update government policies to reflect that bio-based products are beyond the research stage and are currently being commercialised. Gernot Klepper stressed that sustainability certification systems are influenced by government regulations, thus it is important to develop regulations through a multi-stakeholder approach. Ole Jørgen Marvik underscored that governments have introduced measures to support biofuels but not biomaterials and biochemicals. Marta Gomez San Juan remarked the importance of developing a global framework for the bio-economy but also of considering local opportunities and trade-offs.

Key takeaways and knowledge gaps

• Bio-based products can support the transition to a circular low-carbon economy. Over 60 countries have adopted bio-economy strategies, which differ in scope and definitions.

• A suite of policy instruments is needed to support the development of this industry, including public procurement, incentives, and regulations.

• The bio-economy can generate innovative value chains and create links between usually unrelated sectors. This cross-sectoral nature requires to break silo-thinking in policy making.

• Further research is needed on how to design standards and certifications, ensure feedstock security, and address possible sustainability trade-offs.