Bas Paris

The bioeconomy is a key pillar of the European Green Deal, yet its implementation remains constrained by entrenched linear value chains, fragmented logistics systems, and regulatory uncertainty. This paper examines how practitioners across Europe envision circular bioeconomy transitions, drawing on evidence from 43 harmonised multi-actor workshops conducted in 14 countries with 1,078 participants from primary production, processing industries, technology provision, public authorities, and civil society. Using a structured participatory canvas and comparative thematic analysis, we analyse how stakeholders redesign existing value chains, which innovation pathways they prioritise, and which barriers they encounter in practice. Across agriculture, forestry, aquatic systems and bio-based industries, stakeholders consistently shift the focus from expanding biomass production toward improving the use of existing residues and side-streams. Dominant innovation pathways include residue valorisation, nutrient and water recycling, integrated bioenergy systems, and emerging biomaterials. At the same time, four interlinked barrier domains recur across countries and sectors: high and uncertain costs, immature or inaccessible technologies, weak feedstock logistics and pre-treatment infrastructure, and misaligned or unclear regulatory frameworks—most notably around waste and by-product classification. By providing one of the most extensive cross-country, practitioner-led analyses of circular bioeconomy value chains to date, the study offers granular evidence on how regulatory ambiguity, infrastructure gaps and investment risk constrain implementation on the ground. The findings point to a policy agenda focused on regulatory clarification rather than deregulation, coordinated investment in residue aggregation and pre-treatment infrastructure, and applied context-sensitive research to support scalable circular bio-based solutions.

This study presents a review of the current state of the European Bioeconomy, presenting key concepts, bioeconomy figures, relevant policies and biomass flows and discusses the transition to a circular bioeconomy. This review illustrates that the EU bioeconomy is currently interpreted in a broad and inclusive way covering all sectors and systems that rely on biological resources including large thematic sectors including the food and agriculture, forestry, bioenergy, biomaterials and aquatic sectors. Based on this definition, our analysis illustrates that the EU bioeconomy remains largely based on linear production systems and is currently dominated by the food and agriculture sectors but also, that important initiatives towards circularity exist throughout the biobased economy, especially in the biobased industry sectors. Based on this the article argues that framing and developing the bioeconomy through a narrower conceptual framework based on circular principles is appropriate and supports the attainment of the EU’s medium- and long-term sustainability goals. We discuss the importance of sustainable feedstocks, small scale biobased solutions, biobased industries and biorefineries in such a circular bioeconomy framework.

As the European Union advances its bioeconomy strategy, the agricultural sector emerges as a key domain requiring targeted upskilling in digital and entrepreneurial competencies. This study examines how agricultural professionals perceive the importance of these competencies and identifies related training needs, drawing on the European Commission’s Digital Competence Framework (DigComp) and Entrepreneurship Competence Framework (EntreComp). Using a quantitative survey methodology, data were collected from 140 respondents, including farmers, agronomists, consultants, entrepreneurs, and policymakers, in four European countries: Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Sweden. Descriptive and non-parametric analyses (Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests) revealed strong recognition of digital competencies across all groups, with significant variation by country, while perceptions of entrepreneurial competencies differed mainly by professional role. Moreover, a significant lack of formal bioeconomy-related education was identified. The findings underscore the need for targeted, competence-based education and policy interventions to equip professionals with the skills required for a sustainable and innovation-driven agricultural sector.

This paper provides policy recommendations for accelerating the adoption of Fossil-Energy-Free Technologies and Strategies (FEFTS) in the EU agricultural sector. Faster adoption of these technologies and strategies is crucial to achieving the medium- and long-term sustainability targets laid out in EU policy. The prepared policy recommendations originate out of the key outputs and findings of the Horizon 2020 project “AgroFossilFree”, including an assessment and evaluation of the current energy use status in EU agriculture, survey results on farmers’ needs, ideas and interests on the adoption of FEFTS, FEFTS categories identified through an online inventory of FEFTS called the AgEnergy platform, and key innovative processes through national and transnational workshops that combine expertise from hundreds of keys stakeholders (researchers, innovation brokers, policymakers, farmers, and industry representatives). The policy recommendations are synthesized and presented in the form of 19 policy briefs split into three main categories: those that are related to energy issues in farming and can be applied to any farm and FEFTS type; those that are specific to certain agricultural production systems; and those that are necessary for FEFTS integration in agriculture in general.

This study conducts a review of the current practices of bioeconomy education and training in the EU; as well as the associated methodologies; techniques and approaches. In recent years; considerable efforts have been made towards developing appropriate bioeconomy education and training programs in order to support a transition towards a circular bioeconomy. This review separates bioeconomy education approaches along: higher education and academic approaches, vocational education and training (VET) and practical approaches, short-term training and education approaches, and other approaches. A range of training methodologies and techniques and pedagogical approaches are identified. The main commonalities found amongst these approaches are that they are generally problem based and interdisciplinary, and combine academic and experiential. Higher education approaches are generally based on traditional lecture/campus-based formats with some experiential approaches integrated. In contrast, VET approaches often combine academic and practical learning methods while focusing on developing practical skills. A range of short-term courses and other approaches to bioeconomy education are also reviewed.

This study conducts a review of energy use in the EU greenhouse agriculture sector. The studies presented illustrate that energy use in greenhouses is varied and generally dependent on fossil sources. High energy systems, which are more dominant in northern Europe, are generally heavily climate controlled and energy use is dominated by heating and cooling processes, while low energy systems, which are dominant in southern Europe, show a mixture of energy uses including heating, cooling, irrigation, lighting, fertilisers, and pesticides. Our review also provides a discussion of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy sources adoption for greenhouse production. Finally, our review indicates that accurate and reliable studies on energy use in greenhouse production are scarce and fragmented and that a range of differing methodologies are currently used to estimate on-farm energy use. The development of a comprehensive methodology and categorisation for measuring energy use in greenhouse agricultural production would, in our view, catalyse further studies in this sector, considerably improve our understanding of energy use in greenhouses and support the green transition. Based on this, this paper proposes a basic framework for measuring energy use in greenhouse agriculture.

This study conducts a review bringing together data from a large number of studies investigating energy use in EU livestock systems. Such a study has not been conducted previously, and improvements in our understanding of energy use concentrations in livestock systems will aid in developing interventions to achieve the EU’s 2030 and 2050 sustainability targets. The results from the Life Cycle Assessments included in this review indicate that energy use is concentrated in feed, housing, and manure management. In most systems, animal feed is the dominant energy use category. Regarding specific livestock categories, the studies covered indicate that energy use requirements range from 2.1 to 5.3 MJ/kg per ECM for cow milk, 59.2 MJ/kg for a suckler cow–calf, and 43.73 MJ/kg for a dairy bull, 15.9 MJ/kg to 22.7 MJ/kg for pork production, 9.6 MJ/kg to 19.1 MJ/kg for broiler production, 20.5–23.5 MJ/kg for chicken egg production. Our review indicates dominance of and dependence on fossil fuel and discusses the situation and research around transitioning towards renewable energy sources and improving energy efficiency. Our analysis indicates that existing energy use data in livestock systems are fragmented and characterized by multiple methodologies and considerable data gaps. In our view, there is a need for the development of a standardized methodology for measuring energy use in livestock systems, which we consider a necessary step to develop interventions that reduce fossil energy use in livestock systems and its contribution to climatic change.