The rise of the bioeconomy is usually associated with increased sustainability. However, various controversies suggest doubts about this assumed relationship. The objective of this paper is to identify different visions and the current understanding of the relationship between the bioeconomy and sustainability in the scientific literature by means of a systematic review. After a search in several databases, 87 scientific journal articles were selected for review. Results show that visions about the relationship between bioeconomy and sustainability differ substantially. Four different visions were identified, including: (1) the assumption that sustainability is an inherent characteristic of the bioeconomy; (2) the expectation of benefits under certain conditions; (3) tentative criticism under consideration of potential pitfalls; and (4) the assumption of a negative impact of the bioeconomy on sustainability. There is considerable attention for sustainability in the scientific bioeconomy debate, and the results show that the bioeconomy cannot be considered as self-evidently sustainable. In further research and policy development, good consideration should therefore be given to the question of how the bioeconomy could contribute to a more sustainable future. Furthermore, it is stressed that the bioeconomy should be approached in a more interdisciplinary or trans-disciplinary way. The consideration of sustainability may serve as a basis for such an approach.

/pdf/visions-of-sustainability-in-bioeconomy-research-2eoband3ox.pdf

Visions of Sustainability in Bioeconomy Research

The present work reviews and critically discusses the aspects that influence yeast flocculation, namely the chemical characteristics of the medium (pH and the presence of bivalent ions), fermentation conditions (oxygen, sugars, growth temperature and ethanol concentration) and the expression of specific genes such as FLO1, Lg-FLO1, FLO5, FLO8, FLO9 and FLO10. In addition, the metabolic control of loss and onset of flocculation is reviewed and updated. Flocculation has been traditionally used in brewing production as an easy and off-cost cell-broth separation process. The advantages of using flocculent yeast strains in the production of other alcoholic beverages (wine, cachaca and sparkling wine), in the production of renewal fuels (bio-ethanol), in modern biotechnology (production of heterologous proteins) and in environmental applications (bioremediation of heavy metals) are highlighted. Finally, the possibility of aggregation of yeast cells in flocs, as an example of social behaviour (a communitarian strategy for long-time survival or a means of protection against negative environmental conditions), is discussed.

https://sfamjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04897.x

Flocculation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: a review.

As the global resource base is in need to move from fossil towards bio-based raw materials, different supply chains as well as existing technology platforms become increasingly interconnected. The therefore needed creation and exchange of new knowledge across scientific disciplines require R&D and target technology development and innovation, linking the knowledge-based bioeconomy to technology and innovation management research. In order to get an overview of the current research landscape dealing with the bioeconomy, a publication analysis is conducted. As the number of empirical studies, particularly in management research, is low, our study reveals that the evolution of the bioeconomy is still on a strategic level. Existing studies focus on knowledge networks, open innovation and technologies applicable across value chains to enable a holistic view on organizing future resource allocation and biomass flows. Scientific research in several dimensions is needed to elaborate the bioeconomy concept to make its implementation manageable. Industrial relevance Value chains, particularly of the agri-food, industrial products and energy sector, will increasingly converge due to the shift to bio-based raw materials leading to a mutual dependence and triggering new material flows and food processing technologies. This paper suggests that essential innovation management related research frames might contribute to a sustainable evolution of the bioeconomy by addressing the major challenges.

The emerging research landscape on bioeconomy: What has been done so far and what is essential from a technology and innovation management perspective?

Citizens and urban policy makers are experimenting with collaborative ways to tackle wicked urban issues, such as today’s sustainability challenges. In this article, we consider one particular way of collaboration in an experimental setting: Urban Living Labs (ULLs). ULLs are understood as spatially embedded sites for the co-creation of knowledge and solutions by conducting local experiments. As such, ULLs are supposed to offer an arena for reflexive, adaptive, and multi-actor learning environments, where new practices of self-organization and novel (infra-) structures can be tested within their real-world context. Yet, it remains understudied how the co-creation of knowledge and practices actually takes place within ULLs, and how co-creation unfolds their impacts. Hence, this paper focuses on co-creation dynamics in urban living labs, its associated learning and knowledge generation, and how these possibly contribute to urban sustainability transitions. We analyzed empirical data from a series of in-depth interviews and were actively involved with ULLs in the Rotterdam-The Hague region in the Netherlands. Our findings show five distinct types of co-creation elements that relate to specific dynamics of participation, facilitation, and organization. We conclude with a discussion on the ambivalent role of contextualized knowledge and the implications for sustainability transitions.

/pdf/co-creation-dynamics-in-urban-living-labs-1g6ulvptaz.pdf

Co-creation dynamics in Urban Living Labs

Freshman Engineering Program. This minor providesengineering undergraduate students with formal training and acredential in complementary performance skills necessary for suc-cess in today’s workplace. This interdisciplinary program is de-signed to improve the ability of engineering graduates to work onteams, to be effective communicators, to be socially adept, and tobe prepared for leadership roles.Five courses compose the minor. Three of these courses arenew and custom-prepared for engineering students, while theother two may be selected from a limited list of courses that providein-depth training on supervision, cultural diversity, and interper-sonal interaction. This multi-disciplinary program takes a novelapproach in the subject matter presentation and in the method ofcoaching students to use these skills. In the custom courses, stu-dents receive instruction and are placed in mini-practicums. Tocomplete the minor, students participate in a full practicum in asocial service setting.This paper discusses assessment; course development; programbasis and development; strategies for implementation of this newprogram; integration between engineering, counseling psycholo-gy, and human services; and student, faculty, and industry re-sponse to the program. The collaboration makes this programtransportable to other institutions as it is dependent on having in-stitution expertise in the disciplines of counseling and human ser-vices rather than having engineering educators with expertise inthese fields. Our experience with establishing this collaborationwill also be discussed.

Enabling Engineering Performance Skills: A Program to Teach Communication, Leadership, and Teamwork*

Since their official launch in 2006, over one hundred Living Labs have been established and networked to tackle Europe’s declining economic competitiveness and societal challenges. The innovative potential of Living Labs is based on new social configurations for organising innovation. Applying a framework that focuses on barriers presented by such social configurations, by motivational factors and by cognitive/background asymmetries, our paper analyses the contributions and impediments to innovation, and the dilemmas that may arise when innovating in Living Labs. The first contribution of the paper is to demonstrate the framework’s analytical power to uncover and articulate contributions and challenges inherent to the social dimension of innovation. The second contribution of this explorative study is to pinpoint and examine a number of contributions of and challenges for Living Labs. On the basis of a literature re- view, we untangle and describe the three main facets of the concept: in vivo experimentation on social systems, innovation and product development approaches involving users, or innovation systems. We conclude by gathering crucial questions facing contemporary Living Labs.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2533251_code2327182.pdf?abstractid=2533251&mirid=1

Unpacking European Living Labs: Analysing Innovation’s Social Dimensions

Since their official launch in 2006, over one hundred Living Labs have been established and networked to tackle Europe’s declining economic competitiveness and societal challenges. The innovative potential of Living Labs is based on new social configurations for organising innovation. Applying a framework that supports the description of such social configurations and that focuses on barriers manifested by motivational and cognitive asymmetries between actors, we analyse the contributions and impediments to innovation and identify the problems that characterise innovation in Living Labs. We demonstrate the framework’s analytical power to uncover and articulate contributions and challenges inherent to the ‘social dimension’ of innovation. At the same time, we pinpoint and examine some contributions of and challenges for Living Labs. On the basis of a literature review, we untangle and describe the three main facets of the Living Lab concept: as a setting for in vivo experimentation on social systems, for innovation and product development approaches involving users, and for innovation systems. We conclude by gathering some crucial questions facing contemporary Living Labs.

Industrial (“white”) biotechnology promises to contribute to a more sustainable future. Compared to current production processes, cases have been identified where industrial biotechnology can decrease the amount of energy and raw materials used to make products and also reduce the amount of emissions and waste produced during production. However, switching from products based on chemical production processes and fossil fuels towards “biobased” products is at present not necessarily economically viable. This is especially true for bulk products, for example ethanol production from biomass. Therefore, scientists are also turning to genetic modification as a means to develop organisms that can produce at lower costs. These include not only micro-organisms, but also organisms used in agriculture for food and feed.The use of genetic modification for “deliberate release” purposes, in particular, has met great opposition in Europe. Many industrial biotechnology applications may, due to their scale, entail deliberate releases of GM organisms. Thus, the biobased economy brings back a familiar question; is it ethically justifiable, and acceptable to citizens, to expose the environment and society to the risks associated with GM, in order to protect that same environment and to sustain our affluent way of life? For a successful innovation towards a biobased economy, its proponents, especially producers, need to take into account (take responsibility for) such issues when developing new products and processes. These issues, and how scientists can interact with citizens about them in a timely way, are further explored in projects at Delft University and Leiden University, also in collaboration with Utrecht University.

Including public perspectives in industrial biotechnology and the biobased economy.

The single greatest challenge confronting university physics teachers today may no longer be the quality of courses and programmes offered, but under-enrollment - the lack of enthusiasm for the study of physics among the younger generation. Unless physics educators find ways to broaden the curriculum and increase the variety and number of career paths available to physics graduates, there may in time be too few university students in physics to worry about educating them altogether.

Who will study physics, and why?

We critically assess expectations in radical system innovation from the point of view of their “moderateness”, i.e. whether alternative scenarios have been properly considered, and whether counterarguments have been addressed. We use the case of the planning of the Dutch Electronic Health Record (EHR) to illustrate the role of immoderate expectations and their underlying assumptions. By discussing these assumptions in the light of contested issues in international literature, we uncover the uncritical reception of innovations like the EHR, and their potential consequences. We show that certain relevant aspects of academic critique are barely voiced in the political debate. Our analysis can be connected to expectations in innovation in general, in particular those involving ICT, such as expecting to deal with “ideal users”, to be able to take information out of its original context, to achieve cost-efficiency by automation, and to overcome human errors by technology. Based on our observations, we plead for a more realistic view of innovation, in which immoderate expectations can to a certain extent be “unpacked” without falling back to essentialist claims.

Frans A. J. Birrer

Papers

Unpacking European Living Labs: Analysing Innovation’s Social Dimensions

Unpacking European Living Labs: Analysing Innovation’s Social Dimensions

Including public perspectives in industrial biotechnology and the biobased economy.

Who will study physics, and why?

The Role of Expectations in System Innovation: The Electronic Health Record, Immoderate Goal or Achievable Necessity?