Backhouse, M. 2018. Umwelt – Die neue Einhegung der Natur. In: Vogelpohl, Anne; Michel, Boris; Lebuhn, Henrik; Hoerning, Johanna; Belina, Bernd (Hg.): Raumproduktionen II. Theoretische Kontroversen und politische Auseinandersetzungen. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot. S. 60-80.
Hermans, F. 2018. Book Review: Innovation regional development and the life sciences; beyond clusters by Kean Birch. Research Policy 47(1): 305.
Hermans, F. 2018. The potential contribution of transition theory to the analysis of bioclusters and their role in the transition to a bioeconomy. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining (online first): http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bbb.1861/full
Petit-Boix A, Devkota J, Phillips R, Vargas-Parra MV, Josa A, Gabarrell X, Rieradevall J, Apul D. 2018. Life cycle and hydrologic modeling of rainwater harvesting in urban neighborhoods: Implications of urban form and water demand patterns in the US and Spain. Journal of Cleaner Production 621, 434-443. » Read more
Backhouse, Maria; Kalmring, Stefan; Nowak, Andreas. 2017. In Hörweite von Stuart Hall. Gesellschaftskritik ohne Gewähr. Argument Sonderband 317. Hamburg.
Backhouse, Maria; Lorenzen, Kristina; Lühmann, Malte; Puder, Janina; Rodríguez, Fabricio; Tittor, Anne. 2017. Bioeconomy Strategies in Comparison Commonalities, Contradictions and Blind Spots. Working Paper 1, Bioeconomy & Inequalities.
This Working Paper undertakes a comparative analysis of the bioeconomy strategies of the EU, OECD, US and Malaysia as well as official papers of the National Scientific Council of Argentina, the Ministry of Science of Brazil and the agriculture and energy strategies of Indonesia. The key questions of interest relate to the definition, problems and goals of the bioeconomy. A comparative view suggests divergent understandings of this concept. While bioeconomy and biotechnology are used almost synonymously in the OECD and US strategies, Germany and the EU define the bioeconomy as a biomass-based economy. All other definitions can be situated between these two groups. All strategies share the common feature of justifying the bioeconomy by referring to crisis -scenarios and global challenges, with climate change and population growth at the forefront. The argument is usually connected to food security, energy and water supply, and the finite nature of fossil resources. These problems are generally cited to justify the necessity for a transition towards the bioeconomy. Additionally, all papers share an optimistic position with regards to the use of biotechnological innovations to overcome socio-ecological crises. The advancement of bioenergy is an essential part of all bioeconomy strategies, although different levels of emphasis apply. Public support for the biotechnological optimization of plants and microorganisms as sources of energy is regarded as key, as well as the expansion of biorefineries and the development of next generation biofuels. To conclude, this working paper discusses contradictions in the bioeconomy strategies such as the limited participation and consideration of civil society actors as well as the omission of organic farming, while outlining possibilities for further research.
Basukala, A. K., Oldenburg, C., Schellberg, J., Sultanov, M., & Dubovyk, O. 2017. Towards improved land use mapping of irrigated croplands: performance assessment of different image classification algorithms and approaches. European Journal of Remote Sensing, 50(1):187-201. doi: 10.1080/22797254.2017.1308235.
Chomba, M.J., Hill, T., Nkhata, B.A. and Förster, J.J. 2017. Paradigms for water allocation in river basins: a society-science-practice perspective from Southern Africa. Water Policy · April 2017 DOI: 10.2166/wp.2017.130
Dadi, D., Stellmacher, T., Senbeta, F., Van Passel, S. and H. Azadi. 2017. Environmental and health impacts of effluents from textile industries in Ethiopia: the case of Gelan and Dukem, Oromia Regional State. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. Springer International Publishing. 189: 11. DOI 10.1007/s10661-016-5694-4
Escobar, N., Manrique-de-Lara-Penate, C., Sanjuán, N., Clemente, G., Rozakis, S. 2017. An agro-industrial model for the optimization of biodiesel production in Spain to meet the European GHG reduction targets. Energy, 120: 619-631. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.11.111
Escobar, N., Ramírez-Sanz, C., Chueca, P., Moltó, E., Sanjuán, N. 2017. Multiyear Life Cycle Assessment of switchgrass (Panicum Virgatum L.) production in the Mediterranean region of Spain. Biomass and Bioenergy, 107: 74-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.09.008
Haas, Tobias. 2017. Bioenergy in the Reorganization of Europe’s Electricity Supply. The Strategic Practices of the Biomass Association AEBIOM. Working Paper 2, Bioeconomy & Inequalities.
Since the 2000s, the share of renewable energy has been increasing steadily. The transition to renewable energy is proceeding faster in the electricity system than in heating and cooling or in the transportation system. In this working paper, we analyze from a (neo-)Gramscian perspective (1) the role of bioenergy within the struggles over the reorganization of energy supply, (2) how the central association of bio-energy providers (AEBIOM) acts in the contested designing of the new renewable energy directive and (3) which conflicts and potentials arise with the extension of bioenergy use.
Hermans, Frans; Wilde Kerstin; Ayrapetyan, David. 2017. Analysing bioclusters from a transition perspective: towards a research agenda. Annual Conference of the European Forum for Studies of Policies for Research and Innovation (EU-SPRI), 7-9 of June 2017, Vienna, Austria
