Alternative Seafood - Exploring Pathways for Norway in the Protein Transition

Our global food system is facing major challenges. The growing global population and demand for animal proteins are driving resource pressures, environmental impacts, and hazardous health effects for humans and animals. If we are to feed the world without further destabilizing our planet, major transformations in our food systems are called for. This requires shifts towards sustainable and healthy diets, coupled with transitions to sustainable and equitable production systems. Meat and livestock production is gaining increased attention for being an environmental and health hazard. Seafood on the other hand has a reputation for being a healthy and sustainable alternative. However, seafood supply chains and fish farming systems are currently far from innocent. Industrial wild capture, fish farming and feed production are harming marine and terrestrial ecosystems alike, and the health and wellbeing of animals and humans. Along with the transition to renewable energy and a circular economy, a sustainable civilization calls for transitions toward alternative proteins and regenerative food systems – including a shift in seafood production. New technologies are opening possibilities for a phase-shift in how we produce food. Innovation in plant-based proteins, microbial fermentation and cellular agriculture are providing alternative ways of making the seafood and animal products we know and love – without any animals involved. These alternative proteins are accelerated by the convergence of biotechnology, information technologies, nanotechnologies, 3D-printing, sensors and the like. The fourth industrial revolution has reached the agro-food industry, with sustainable innovations disrupting the incumbent system, and opening up an ocean of opportunity. Megatrends such as the sustainability imperative and flexitarian movement are creating ripe conditions for change. In this research, we explore how Norway can contribute to the protein transition by leading the way in alternative seafood. Despite scarce activity in the space, Norway has an abundance of resources that could be leveraged for alternative proteins, ranging from natural resources to financial and cultural capital. We investigate opportunities, barriers, and strategies to drive forward value chains for this emerging industry, while ensuring a sustainable and just transition. The intended outcomes are foundations for a shared vision and strategy – a roadmap for building an innovation system that can enable new value chains and the protein transition in Norway. We apply pragmatic tools and theoretical frameworks to address this complex challenge - such as systems innovation, value chains, and sustainability transitions. Keywords: alternative proteins, alternative seafood, aquaculture, food systems, bioeconomy, sustainability transitions, socio-technical systems, multi-level perspective, value chains, technological innovation systems, innovation ecosystems, strategy, Norwa

Precursors to a 'Good’ Bioeconomy in 2125 : Making Sense of Bioeconomy & Justice Horizons. First Foresight Report of the BioEcoJust Project

The Bioeconomy today is a field full of promise, brimming with potentially transformative solutions, and developments still only in their infancy. The aim of this report has been to convey the findings of the BioEcoJust foresight research to date, and especially to highlight the core critical thinking involved in approaching the future of the bioeconomy for the next 100 years. The BioEconomy and Justice (BioEcoJust) is funded by the Academy of Finland BioFuture 2025 programme and aims to develop a future-oriented ethical and justice framework useful in assessing long-term bioeconomy developments. The consortium has two research teams, representing Practical Philosophy (Aalto University) and Futures Studies (University of Turku)

Case studies of regional bioeconomy strategies across Europe

This report provides a summary of issues raised in four regional case studies of the bioeconomy: Scotland, South-West Netherlands, Saxony-Anhalt and Veneto. It examines the ways in which the bioeconomy has been defined in regional strategies and the ways in which those regional strategies have been initiated and implemented in the four regions

Bioeconomy: Shaping the Transition to a Sustainable, Biobased Economy

Sustainability; Biomass Management; Resource Management; Agriculture; Macroeconomic

What makes a European forest-based bioeconomy competitive?

Peer reviewe

What are the implications of the bioeconomy for forest-related jobs?

Peer reviewe

Bioeconomy Transitions through the Lens of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems: A Framework for Place-Based Responsibility in the Global Resource System

Bioeconomy strategies in high income societies focus at replacing finite, fossil resources by renewable, biological resources to reconcile macro-economic concerns with climate constraints. However, the current bioeconomy is associated with critical levels of environmental degradation. As a potential increase in biological resource use may further threaten the capacity of ecosystems to fulfil human needs, it remains unclear whether bioeconomy transitions in high income countries are sustainable. In order to fill a gap in bioeconomy sustainability assessments, we apply an ontological lens of coupled social-ecological systems to explore critical mechanisms in relation to bioeconomy activities in the global resource system. This contributes to a social-ecological systems (SES)-based understanding of sustainability from a high income country perspective: the capacity of humans to satisfy their needs with strategies that reduce current levels of pressures and impacts on ecosystems. Building on this notion of agency, we develop a framework prototype that captures the systemic relation between individual human needs and collective social outcomes on the one hand (microlevel) and social-ecological impacts in the global resource system on the other hand (macro-level). The BIO-SES framework emphasizes the role of responsible consumption (for physical health), responsible production (to reduce stressors on the environment), and the role of autonomy and selforganisation (to protect the reproduction capacity of social-ecological systems). In particular, the BIO-SES framework can support (1) individual and collective agency in high income country contexts to reduce global resource use and related ecosystem impacts with a bioeconomy strategy, (2) aligning social outcomes, monitoring efforts and governance structures with place-based efforts to achieve the SDGs, as well as (3), advancing the evidence base and social-ecological theory on responsible bioeconomy transitions in the limited biosphere

Transition to a bioeconomy: Perspectives from social sciences

More than 50 countries and international organisations worldwide are currently working on strategies and policies to promote a transition to a bioeconomy. This economic system centres on a sustainable use of bio- and renewable resources to guarantee sustainability. Although many contributions have been made to the field of bioeconomy, most focus on a science perspective (e.g. chemistry, engineering, technology, biomedicine or biology). Despite the significant importance of social and economic issues for a bioeconomy transition, studies from a social science perspective are largely lacking. This paper presents a systematic review of academic contributions to the field of bioeconomy from a social science standpoint. The results reveal the need for an in-depth analysis of the challenges and opportunities that the bioeconomy faces in social and economic terms

The bioeconomy : a knowledge-based innovation paradigm to foster sustainability transformations

Notwithstanding 40 years of global climate policies, carbon dioxide emissions are still increasing and global surface temperature is still rising until today with all its consequences to ecosystems and the fate of humanity on Earth. Current attempts to stop and reverse unsustainable developments that lead to the climate crisis and to other ecological and social disasters have proven rather ineffective. While there certainly are many reasons for this on the operative level, the dissertation is motivated by the assumption that countermeasures generally suffer from a lack of systemic framing of the wicked sustainability issues. What if solution approaches despite being brought forward to the best of decision makers knowledge and belief (only) are subject to a perceptual mistake in the way sustainable solutions are currently framed? I propose a change in perspective as decision making basis for improved sustainability governance. It is a call for getting to the systemic root causes of sustainability problems. To achieve a change in (unsustainable) outcomes, I argue, the logic on which they are produced must change. I conceptualize this change as a paradigmatic shift in knowledge-based innovation systems that becomes necessary to equip them with the requirements to foster sustainability transformations. To this end, I adduce the sustainable knowledge-based bioeconomy as an example of a new innovation paradigm. The knowledge base of innovation systems dedicated to sustainability is explored theoretically and empirically on a policy, an educational, and on a business level. The dissertation is composed of four studies published between 2017 and 2020. After an introduction to the topic and the presentation of the theoretical background, the first paper explores the paradigmatic changes necessary to align innovation systems to the normative implications of sustainability transformations. The types of knowledge required for transformations in the case of the shift towards a sustainable bioeconomy are dealt with in the second publication. The elaboration and refinement of the notion of dedicated knowledge provides a knowledge-theoretical basis for better informing policy makers aiming at the installation of a sustainable knowledge-based bioeconomy. In th ethird study, I analyze to what extent elements of transformative knowledge one integral part of dedicated knowledge are considered in the design of European academic bioeconomy curricula. The last paper spotlights the role of firms in contributing to a system-wide adoption of the dedication to sustainability. It closes an important gap between the macro-level of transformation theories and the powerful private actors contributing to its overall outcome from the micro-level. The final Chapter synthesizes and discusses the results of the dissertations publications by sketching the knowledge-based change of innovation paradigms that contribute to a transformation to sustainability. The results reveal that a reflection of dedicated transformation processes from a paradigmatic perspective offers theoretical insights that can and should inform public, academic, as well as corporate sustainability endeavors. The consideration of innovation paradigms prompts research to explicitly spell out the normative dimension of innovation processes in innovation systems. This is a decisive step to understanding and possibly informing actions aiming at deliberate change. As an example, I have framed the sustainable bioeconomy as a new paradigm that determines the rate and the direction of innovation in a dedicated innovation system. Once the sustainable bioeconomy paradigm is effective, I argue, it will spontaneously trigger a change in resources used without having it imposed from authorities. To get there, however, policies must take due consideration of the specific characteristics of the relevant knowledge flows, academia must be better trained to afford the required shift in perspectives and trigger transformation processes, and companies must reconsider the values they propose and deliver to their customers. The assemblage of publications spells out the theoretical underpinnings of the knowledge-based bioeconomy and its potential to serve as a new paradigm to spur sustainability transformations. More concretely, the dissertation reveals to what extent the role of knowledge and knowledge itself needs to be reconsidered and in which ways it must be expanded for achieving a systemic change towards more sustainable consumption and production patterns.Trotz der 40 Jahre globaler Klimapolitik steigen die Kohlendioxid-Emissionen bis heute. Und die Erderwärmung nimmt weiter zu. Mit allen Konsequenzen für Ökosysteme und für unser Leben auf der Erde. Offensichtlich sind die jetzigen Anstrengungen, die nicht-nachhaltigen Entwicklungen zu stoppen oder rückgängig zu machen, um die Klimakrise und andere ökologische und soziale Katastrophen zu verhindern, nicht wirksam genug. Natürlich gibt es dafür eine Vielzahl an Gründen. Die vorliegende Dissertation gründet auf der Annahme, dass es den Maßnahmen grundsätzlich an einer systemischen Problembetrachtung fehlt. Liegt den gut gemeinten politischen Initiativen möglicherweise ein fundamentaler Fehler in der Art und Weise wie wir nachhaltige Lösungen angehen zugrunde? Ich möchte hier zu einem Perspektivwechsel anregen mit dem Ziel, Entscheidungsträgern eine Grundlage für eine erfolgreiche Nachhaltigkeitspolitik zu bieten. Es ist ein Aufruf, den systemischen Problemen wirklich auf den Grund zu gehen. Um (nicht-nachhaltige) Ergebnisse zu verändern, muss sich die Logik, nach welcher sie entstehen, ändern. Aus verschiedenen Blickwinkeln untersucht die Arbeit einen Paradigmenwechsel in wissensbasierten Innovationssystemen, der für ihren Beitrag zur Nachhaltigkeitstransformation notwendig ist. Dazu betrachte ich die nachhaltige wissensbasierte Bioökonomie als ein Beispiel für ein neues Innovationsparadigma. Um die Voraussetzungen für die Durchsetzung eines solchen alternativen Paradigmas besser zu verstehen, wird die Bedeutung von Wissen und der Umgang damit gründlich untersucht. Denn Wissen gilt als ein wichtiger Ansatzpunkt, wenn es darum geht, einen Systemwandel zu erreichen. Aus diesem Grund beleuchte ich das so genannte dedizierte Wissen theoretisch und empirisch. Die Dissertation setzt sich zusammen aus vier Studien, die zwischen 2017 und 2020 veröffentlicht wurden und werden. Nach einer thematischen und theoretischen Einführung untersucht der erste Artikel die paradigmatischen Änderungen, die notwendig sind, um Innovationssysteme an den normativen Zielen einer Nachhaltigkeitstransformation auszurichten. Die für die Transformation notwendigen Wissensarten und zwar speziell für die nachhaltige Bioökonomie werden in der zweiten Publikation genauer untersucht. Die Erkenntnisse über das dedizierte Wissen liefert eine wissenstheoretische Grundlage für effektivere Bioökonomiepolitik. Ein spezielles Anwendungsgebiet für die Generierung und Verbreitung von dediziertem Wissen im Rahmen der Transformation zur Bioökonomie erforscht die dritte Studie. Hier werden europäische Bioökonomie-Studiengänge auf ihre Eignung zur Vermittlung von transformativem Wissens integraler Bestandteil dezidierten Wissens untersucht. Im letzten Artikel wird die Rolle von Unternehmen und ihr Beitrag zu systemweiten Veränderungen hin zu einer Dedikation zur Nachhaltigkeit beleuchtet. Die Publikation schließt die Lücke zwischen den Transformationstheorien auf dem Makrolevel und den einflussreichen Privatakteuren, die von der Mikroebene aus die Ergebnisse des Innovationssystems entscheidend mitbestimmen. Das Schlusskapitel fasst die Ergebnisse zusammen und diskutiert sie vor dem Hintergrund der wissensbasierten Veränderungen von Innovationsparadigmen. Die Betrachtung dedizierter Transformationsprozesse aus paradigmatischer Perspektive liefert theoretische Erkenntnisse, die für öffentliche, akademische wie auch privatwirtschaftliche Nachhaltigkeitsanstrengungen von höchster Relevanz sind. Überlegungen zu Innovationsparadigmen verlangen es von Forschern, die normative Dimension von Innovationsprozessen in Innovationssystemen explizit zu machen. Dieser Schritt ist entscheidend, um den gewünschten Wandel zu verstehen und möglicherweise mitzugestalten. Als Beispiel dient die nachhaltige Bioökonomie als neues Paradigma, das die Geschwindigkeit und die Richtung von Innovationen in einem dedizierten Innovationssystem bestimmt. Es ist zu erwarten, dass ein Paradigma der nachhaltigen Bioökonomie aus sich selbst heraus eine Rohstoffwende einleiten wird, ohne dass diese vom Gesetzgeber vorgeschrieben wird. Um dorthin zu gelangen, muss jedoch viel geschehen: Politik muss die spezifischen Eigenschaften der relevanten Wissensflüsse berücksichtigen, UniversitätsabsolventInnen müssen dazu ausgebildet werden, einen Perspektivwechsel vollziehen zu können, um die Nachhaltigkeitstransformation zu initiieren und Unternehmen müssen überdenken, welche Art von Werten sie der Gesellschaft feilbieten wollen. Die Gesamtheit der vorgestellten Studien klärt detailliert die theoretischen Grundlagen der wissensbasierten Bioökonomie und deren Potenzial, als neues Innovationsparadigma die Nachhaltigkeitstransformation zu befördern. Gleichzeitig verdeutlicht die Dissertation, welch große Bedeutung eine Neubewertung des Wissens und seiner Rolle in Innovationssystemen hat, um einen systemischen Wandel zu nachhaltigeren Produktions- und Konsummustern zu erreichen