Alexandra Purkus

Herausforderungen einer nachhaltigen Bioökonomiepolitik

Um den Pfadubergang zu einer Biookonomie zu ermoglichen und gleichzeitig deren Nachhaltigkeit zu sichern, spielt der politische Steuerungsrahmen eine zentrale Rolle. Der Beitrag diskutiert zentrale Herausforderungen der Politikgestaltung.

A Governance Framework for a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Insights from the Case of the German Wood-based Bioeconomy

Increasing the sustainability of economic processes and products requires a path transition from the present, predominantly fossil resource-based “throughput economy” towards a renewable resource-based circular flow economy. The bioeconomy concept can contribute to such a transition. However, an adequate governance framework is necessary not only to overcome the current carbon lock-in and create fair competitive framework conditions for bioeconomy processes and products (enabling function), but also to ensure the sustainability of an increased use of bio-based resources (limiting function). At the same time, achieving a path transition is challenging due to, inter alia, interacting market failures which distort allocation decisions, and uncertainties about the economic, environmental and socio-economic impacts of different bio-based production pathways. Moreover, transitioning to a new “upper state” sustainability equilibrium requires a corresponding politico-economic equilibrium in markets for regulation that allows for the provision of necessary transition policies. In this chapter, we discuss the challenges of establishing an effective governance framework for the bioeconomy. Furthermore, focusing on the case of the German wood-based bioeconomy, we analyse how the enabling and limiting governance functions have been implemented in practice. Based on this, we identify scope for improvements. In particular, the case study highlights the important role that policies have to play in establishing fair competitive framework conditions for bioeconomy applications, fostering innovation and safeguarding sustainability. While existing measures remain fragmented and insufficient to initiate a path transition, gradually developing them further may contribute to a dynamic that stimulates demand for more far-reaching transition policies on political markets.

The Case of German Bioenergy Policy

This chapter provides an overview of relevant political framework conditions for German bioenergy policy. European and national policy levels are focused on, because it is here that major incentives for bioenergy use originate. It is shown that bioenergy policy affects a wide range of policy aims from diverse policy areas, and that the political prioritisation of aims has changed over time. Furthermore, there is a complex mix of policy instruments that influence bioenergy allocation decisions. Instruments identified as the most relevant for bioenergy allocation include command-and-control instruments and market-based incentive instruments, which can be further divided into indirect instruments which increase the costs of fossil fuel substitutes and direct instruments which set positive incentives for bioenergy use. Direct, sectoral instruments such as the Renewable Energy Sources Act in the electricity sector, the Renewable Energy Heat Act and the Market Incentive Programme in the heating sector, and the biofuels quota in the transport sector are the most relevant policy drivers for bioenergy expansion in Germany. Moreover, the chapter assesses the German bioenergy policy mix in relation to the market and government failures discussed in Chap. 2, and reviews major strands of critique in the public debate. The chapter concludes with a review of recommendations for reforming the German bioenergy policy mix, to allow for a comparison to the NIE-based policy advice developed in this book.

Towards a Rational Bioenergy Policy Concept

This chapter derives recommendations for bioenergy policy, applying the theory-based analytical framework developed in Chap. 3 to the German case study. The focus is on recommendations for a rational bioenergy policy concept, which encompasses the definition of a system of consistent policy aims; the choice of allocative principles which determine what allocation mechanism is used primarily to implement aims; and the identification of suitable instrument types. Given the conflicting nature of policy aims, the establishment of a complete and coherent system of policy aims is found to be of particular importance. Also, requirements concerning the operationalisation of aims are discussed. In contrast to neoclassical recommendations, a theoretical case is established for a bioenergy mix combining governance structures comparatively close to markets, which leave technology choices to market actors, with more hierarchical interventions. Based on the analysis of what allocative principles are recommendable for different allocative challenges, perspectives for the further development of the German policy mix are discussed. Moreover, to demonstrate the applicability of the study’s analytical framework to more specific questions of instrument choice and design, recommendations for the bioelectricity sector are developed in greater detail. Three design elements are identified as particularly important: the choice between price, quantity and hybrid instruments; the design of a mechanism for technology differentiation; and the design of an adjustment mechanism. Based on a comparative analysis of institutional alternatives, recommendations are derived.

Implications of Economic Theory for Bioenergy Policy Design

The chapter “Implications of Economic Theory for Bioenergy Policy Design” develops the analytical framework which is used in Chap. 5 to derive recommendations for German bioenergy policy. First, neoclassical theory implications for bioenergy policy, as well as their limits, are discussed. To move towards more realistic theory-based policy recommendations, the analysis draws on the theory of second-best, information economics, the theory of economic order, and new institutional economics, and gives an outlook on ecological economics implications. For each of these theories, relevant findings are applied to bioenergy policy, leading to the derivation of theoretical guidelines for bioenergy policy design. It is demonstrated that a combination of theoretical approaches is necessary to generate recommendations which adequately reflect the complexity of the bioenergy policy problem. However, among the theories considered, new institutional economics approaches are found to be particularly fruitful. Here, the matrix of institutions which jointly influence allocation decisions by bioenergy actors is at the centre of the policy analysis. Among new institutional economics approaches, transaction cost and contract economics, the principal-agent approach, the theory of institutional change, and the public choice approach provide valuable insights for generating policy design recommendations in the presence of uncertainty, transaction costs, path dependencies and political feasibility constraints. Because of the advantages that an institutional perspective offers for the analysis of bioenergy policy, new institutional economics is chosen as the overall framework into which insights from other theories are integrated.

Allocative Challenges of Bioenergy Use

The chapter “Allocative Challenges of Bioenergy Use” conducts an economic analysis of the problems that arise when allocation decisions are coordinated by market forces alone, and the challenges that apply to regulative interventions in the market mechanism. As central normative criteria, the requirements of efficiency and sustainability are discussed. It is shown that when allocative problems such as the steering of biomass flows and technology choices, the setting of innovation incentives, and the steering of location and sourcing decisions are solved by the market mechanism alone, the outcome will not be efficient. Several market failures are identified which distort allocation decisions, namely environmental externalities, security of supply externalities, knowledge and learning externalities, the occurrence of market power in the energy sector, and dynamic market failures that inhibit market adjustment processes. Moreover, interactions between market actors are subject to information problems and transaction costs, and even if the market outcome was efficient, it need not be sustainable. Regulative interventions, on the other hand, are complicated by conflicting aims, information problems and transaction costs, the multi-level governance nature of the regulative problem, and conflicts between political and economic rationality considerations. For assessing policy interventions, requirements for a rational bioenergy policy are defined, which take the constraints imposed by imperfect information and political feasibility into account. However, the analysis demonstrates that the multiplicity of relevant, interacting market failures and sources of potential government failures makes compliance not only with sustainability and efficiency criteria, but also with rational bioenergy policy requirements, a challenging task.

Debating Climate Change: Pathways through Argument to Agreement

decision-making. Chapter 7 shows how uneven distribution of power and wealth can lead to unequal access to water and sanitation. On an international scale, water resources have the potential to initiate or exacerbate armed conflict. By reconceptualising water as mutually beneficial, international water users can collaborate instead of facing a tragedy of the commons scenario. However, the authors point out that official international agreement is still weak and authority remains strictly horizontal. The book covers a wide and already thoroughly documented topic area. By explaining how current water resource development best practice came to be accepted, and by including the important underlying development themes of urban–rural and gender roles, the authors have produced a coherent and thoroughly relevant finished product. They do, however, take a determinedly neutral stance throughout. An important message to take away from this book is that there is no one size fits all consensuses on water resource management best practice. Economic, environmental and sociopolitical context is essential for choosing the right techniques in any locality. However, growing climate change uncertainty means that there must be a rise in adaptive strategy in the future.