Constructing sustainable communities: a theoretical exploration of the bio-economy and eco-economy paradigms

Abstract

Understanding how sustainable communities of place and of interest may be constructed will partly depend upon how these communities emerge from the ageing carbonist model of spatial development. This paper argues that this process is well underway by means of the development of two co-evolving ecologically modernising paradigms: the bio-economy and the eco-economy models. It conceptually explores the different trajectories and contestations of these paradigms; arguing more broadly that these are becoming significant drivers for re-structuring corporate and competitive strategies between firms, and market and spatial development between and within places. With a focus specifically upon the changing configuration of European rural regions and their wider regional positioning as valuable repositories for a range of ecological goods and services, the paper argues that the playing out of these contestations, and the abilities of communities and networks to work within and between them, will provide a major driver for constructing sustainable communities.

Keywords:

• bio-economy
• eco-economy
• ecological modernisation
• sustainable communities

Notes

We realise here that many scholars may contest that the bio-economy paradigm does embrace some elements of EM. We argue that it increasingly does, not just as a form of “green washing” but more significantly in attempting to accommodate and recognise aspects of climate change, carbon emissions and resource depletion. In Tables 1 and 2, we indicate that it attempts to do this by progressing a particular brand of bio-science and industrial ecology that tries to ameliorate some of the most wasteful aspects of traditional industrial and agri-food processes whilst at the same time continuing to intensify production and supply. This relies upon an innovative mode that is more restricted to new product development rather than innovations that bring about more systemic change to production–consumption systems (see Marsden under review, 2011).

We do not have space here to apply or to do justice to the growing literature on transitions theory, but it is important to state here that the co-evolution of eco-economical and bio-economic pathways does relate to the contested nature of socio-technical niches and regimes explored by transitions theorists (Geels 2002, Smith et al. 2005). Here, we make some suggestions about how these co-evolutionary pathways may play out with reference to an extensive case study analysis of European rural regions (Milone and Ventura 2010). This analysis also provided the empirical basis for the more conceptual framings of the bio and eco-economies contained in Table 2.