Contesting the framing of bioeconomy policy in Germany: the NGO perspective

References

• Aasetre, J. (2006). Perceptions of communication in Norwegian forest management. Forest Policy and Economics, 8(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2004.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bioökonomierat (BÖR). (2016). Empfehlungen des Bioökonomierates: Weiterentwicklung der ‘Forschungsstrategie BioÖkonomie 2030’. Retrieved July 31, 2019, from https://biooekonomierat.de/fileadmin/Publikationen/empfehlungen/181116_Ratsempfelungen_fu__r_die_Weiterentwicklung_der_Forschungsstrategie_final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bioökonomierat (BÖR). (2018). Thesen zur Gestaltung der Bioökonomiepolitik. Retrieved July 31, 2020, from https://biooekonomierat.de/fileadmin/Publikationen/empfehlungen/BO___Thesenpapier_final_2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bioökonomierat (BÖR). (2019). Der Bioökonomierat: Ausblick in eine nachhaltige Zukunft. Retrieved July 31, 2020, from https://biooekonomierat.de/fileadmin/Publikationen/empfehlungen/Empfehlung_Ausblick_final_2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Birch, K., Levidow, L., & Papaioannou, T. (2010). Sustainable capital? The neoliberalization of nature and knowledge in the European ‘knowledge-based bio-economy’. Sustainability, 2(9), 2898–2918. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2092898
   Google Scholar
• Birner, R. (2018). Bioeconomy concepts. In I. Lewandowski (Ed.), Bioeconomy (pp. 17–38). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Boyer, M. (2019). Alternativen zum Extraktivismus oder alternative Extraktivismen? ‘Grüne’ Strategien und der Streit um die Kontrolle natürlicher Ressourcen. In M. Ramírez & S. Schmalz (Eds.), Extraktivismus. Lateinamerika nach dem Ende des Rohstofbooms (pp. 177–192). oekom verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bugge, M., Hansen, T., & Klitkou, A. (2016). What is the bioeconomy? A review of the literature. Sustainability, 8(691), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070691
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundesgesetzblatt. (2021). Gesetz über die unternehmerischen Sorgfaltspflichten in Lieferketten. In: Bundesgesetzblatt (Teil I, Nr. 46, p. 2959–2969). Bundesanzeiger Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). (2010). Nationale Forschungsstrategie Bioökonomie: Unser Weg zu einer bio-basierten Wirtschaft.
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). (2014). Bioökonomie in Deutschland: Chancen für eine biobasierte und nachhaltige Zukunft.
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). (2020). Neuer Bioökonomierat tritt zur konstituierenden Sitzung zusammen, press release 198/2020. Retrieved March 21, 2021, from https://www.bmbf.de/de/neuer-biooekonomierat-tritt-zur-konstituierenden-sitzung-zusammen-13305.html
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung/Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (BMEL/BMBF). (2020). Nationale bioökonomiestrategie.
   Google Scholar
• Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (BMEL). (2014). Nationale politikstrategie Bioökonomie: Nachwachsende Ressourcen und biotechnische Verfahren als Basis für Ernährung, Industrie und Energie.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1997). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In J. Bohman & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2324.003.0006
   Google Scholar
• Corry, O., & Reiner, D. (2020). Protests and policies: How radical social movement activists engage with climate policy dilemmas. Sociology, 55(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520943107
   Google Scholar
• Delvenne, P., & Hendrickx, K. (2013). The multifaceted struggle for power in the bioeconomy: Introduction to the special issue. Technology in Society, 35(2), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Denkhaus Bremen. (2018). Bioökonomie: Die neue Nebelwand aus der PR-Abteilung. Retrieved July 31, 2020, from https://denkhausbremen.de/biooekonomie-die-neue-nebelwand-aus-der-prabteilung/
   Google Scholar
• Denkhaus Bremen, ARA, Attac, Bergwaldprojekt, Brot für die Welt, BUND, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, Deutscher Naturschutzring, FDCL, FÖP, Forum Umwelt und Entwicklung, Gesellschaft für ökologische Forschung e.V., Greenpeace, Grüne Liga, Inkota Netzwerk, Pro Regenwald, & Robin Wood and WWF. (2019). Erklärung deutscher Umwelt- und Entwicklungsorganisationen zur Bioökonomie-Politik der Bundesregierung. Retrieved January 15, 2021, from https://denkhausbremen.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/NGO-Erkl%C3%A4rung-Bio%C3%B6konomie.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Dieken, S., & Venghaus, S. (2020). Potential pathways to the German bioeconomy: A media discourse analysis of public perceptions. Sustainability, 12(19), 7987. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197987
   Google Scholar
• Edelman, M. (1993). Contestable categories and public opinion. Political Communication, 10(3), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1993.9962981
   Google Scholar
• Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escobar, A. (2015). Degrowth, postdevelopment, and transitions: A preliminary conversation. Sustainability Science, 10(3), 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0297-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission (EC). (2018). A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: Strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment. Updated Bioeconomy Strategy.
   Google Scholar
• Gill, S. (2002). Constitutionalizing inequality and the clash of globalizations. International Studies Review, 4(2), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/1521-9488.00254
   Google Scholar
• Gills, B., & Hosseini, H. (2021, March 11–12). Beyond the pluriverse: Consolidating radical alternatives. In Conference of the Westermarck Society 2021. University of Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Gills, B., & Morgan, J. (2021). Economics and climate emergency. Globalizations, 18(7), 1071–1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2020.1841527
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giurca, A. (2020). Unpacking the network discourse: Actors and storylines in Germany’s wood-based bioeconomy. Forest Policy and Economics, 110, 101754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.05.009
   Google Scholar
• Giurca, A., & Metz, T. (2018). A social network analysis of Germany’s wood-based bioeconomy: Social capital and shared beliefs. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 26, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goerner, S. J., Lietaer, B., & Ulanowicz, R. E. (2009). Quantifying economic sustainability: Implications for free-enterprise theory, policy and practice. Ecological Economics, 69(1), 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.07.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottwald, F.-T., & Krätzer, A. (2014). Irrweg Bioökonomie: Kritik an einem totalitären Ansatz. Suhrkamp Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1968). Technik und Wissenschaft als ‘Ideologie’. Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hodge, D., Brukas, V., & Giurca, A. (2017). Forests in a bioeconomy: Bridge, boundary or divide? Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 32(7), 582–587. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2017.1315833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmgren, S., D’Amato, D., & Giurca, A. (2020). Bioeconomy imaginaries: A review of forest-related social science literature. Ambio, 49(12), 1860–1877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01398-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphreys, D. (2009). Discourse as ideology: Neoliberalism and the limits of international forest policy. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(5–6), 319–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2008.08.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinschmit, D. (2012). Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with media constraints. Forest Policy and Economics, 16, 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2010.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinschmit, D., Arts, B., Giurca, A., Mustalahti, I., Sergent, A., & Pülzl, H. (2017). Environmental concerns in political bioeconomy discourses. International Forestry Review, 19(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554817822407420
   Google Scholar
• Korhonen, J., Giurca, A., Brockhaus, M., & Toppinen, A. (2018). Actors and politics in Finland’s forest-based bioeconomy network. Sustainability, 10(10), 3785–3807. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kothari, A., Salleh, A., Escobar, A., Demaria, F., & Acosta, A. (Eds.). (2019). Pluriverse: A post-development dictionary. Tulika Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kröger, M., & Raitio, K. (2017). Finnish forest policy in the era of bioeconomy: A pathway to sustainability? Forest Policy and Economics, 77, 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levidow, L., Nieddu, M., Vivian, F.-D., & Béfort, N. (2019). Transitions towards a European bioeconomy: Life sciences versus agroecology trajectories. In G. Allaire & B. Daviron (Eds.), Ecology, capitalism and the new agricultural economy: The second great transformation (pp. 181–203). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ludvig, A., Zivojinovic, I., & Hujala, T. (2019). Social innovation as a prospect for the forest bioeconomy: Selected examples from Europe. Forests, 10(10), 878. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10100878
   Google Scholar
• Lühmann, M. (2020). Whose European bioeconomy? Relations of forces in the shaping of an updated EU bioeconomy strategy. Environmental Development, 35, Article 100547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100547
   Google Scholar
• Martin, A., Armijos, T., Coolsaet, B., Dawson, N., Edwards, G. A. S., Few, R., Gross-Camp, N., Rodríguez, I., Schroeder, H., Tebboth, M. L. G., & White, C. S. (2020). Environmental justice and transformations to sustainability. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 62(6), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2020.1820294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masiero, M., Secco, L., Pettenella, D., Da Re, R., Giurca, A., Wallin, I., Salvalaggio, A., Stetter, T., Giertliová, B., Návratilová, L., Výbošťok, J., Pülzl, H., Ranacher, L., Stelzer, C., Carreira, A., Malkamäki, A., Sopanen, J., Holmgren, S., Mark-Herbert, C., & Bernö, H. (2020). Bioeconomy perception by future stakeholders: Hearing from European forestry students. Ambio, 49(12), 1925–1942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01376-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. Beltz Pädagogik.
   Google Scholar
• Mirowski, P. (2009). Postface: Defining neoliberalism. In P. Mirowski & D. Plehwe (Eds.), The road from Mont Pèlerin: The making of the neoliberal: Thought collective, with a new preface (pp. 417–455). Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mustalahti, I. (2018). The responsive bioeconomy: The need for inclusion of citizens and environmental capability in the forest based bioeconomy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 3781–3790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pestre, D. (2000). The production of knowledge between academies and markets: A historical reading of the book the new production of knowledge. Science, Technology and Society, 5(2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/097172180000500202
   Google Scholar
• Pülzl, H., Kleinschmit, D., & Arts, B. (2014). Bioeconomy – an emerging meta-discourse affecting forest discourses? Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 29(4), 386–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2014.920044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramcilovic-Suominen, S. (2022). Envisioning just transformations in and beyond the EU bioeconomy: Inspirations from decolonial environmental justice and degrowth. Sustainability Science, 1, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11625-022-01091-5/TABLES/1
   Google Scholar
• Ramiclovic-Suominen, S., & Pülzl, H. (2018). Sustainable development – a ‘selling point’ of the emerging EU bioeconomy policy framework? Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 4170–4180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.157
   Google Scholar
• Rashbrooke, M. (2018). Government for the public good. Bridget Williams Books.
   Google Scholar
• Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st century economist. Chelsea Green Publishing. https://books.google.com/books/about/Doughnut_Economics.html?id=7A4lDgAAQBAJ
   Google Scholar
• Ribot, J. (2003). Democratic decentralisation of natural resources: Institutional choice and discretionary power transfers in Sub-Saharan Africa. Public Administration and Development, 23(1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanden, J., Schomerus, T., & Schulze, F. (2012). Entwicklung eines Regelungskonzepts für ein Ressourcenschutzgesetz des Bundes. In: Umweltbundesamt (Ed.): Berichte, 1/2012. Erich Schmidt Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schöneberg, J. (2019). Imagining postcolonial-development studies: Reflections on positionalities and research practices. In I. Baud, E. Basile, T. Kontinen, & S. V. Itter (Eds.), Building development studies for the new millennium. Part of the EADI global development series book series.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, D. V., Watts, M. D., Domke, D., & Fan, D. P. (2002). News framing and cueing of issue regimes: Explaining Clinton’s public approval in spite of scandal. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 339–370. https://doi.org/10.1086/341396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance and participant mobilization. In B. Klandermans (Ed.), From structure to action: Comparing social movement research across cultures (pp. 197–217). JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, D. D., & Benford, R. D. (1992). Master frames and cycles of protest. In A. D. Morris & C. M. Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 133–155). Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sommer, M., Rucht, D., Haunss, S., & Zajak, S. (2019). Fridays for future: Profil, Entstehung und Perspektiven der Protestbewegung in Deutschland (IPB Working Paper Series 2/2019). IPB.
   Google Scholar
• Staffas, L., Gustavsson, M., & McCormick, K. (2013). Strategies and policies for the bioeconomy and bio-based economy: An analysis of official national approaches. Sustainability, 5(6), 2751–2769. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5062751
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein, M., Giurca, A., & Kleinschmit, D. (2018). ‘Wir sind die Bioökonomie’ – Perspektiven von Akteuren aus dem deutschen Forst- und Holzsektor. Allgemeine Forst- und Jagdzeitung, 198(1/2), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.23765/afjz0002019
   Google Scholar
• Temper, L., Walter, M., Rodríguez, I., Kothari, A., & Turhan, E. (2018). A perspective on radical transformations to sustainability: Resistances, movements and alternatives. Sustainability Science, 13(3), 747–764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0543-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Töller, A. E., Vogelpohl, T., Beer, K., & Böcher, M. (2021). Is bioeconomy policy a policy field? A conceptual framework and findings on the European Union and Germany. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 23(2), 152–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2021.1893163
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vivien, F.-D., Nieddu, M., Befort, N., Debref, R., & Giampietro, M. (2019). The hijacking of the bioeconomy. Ecological Economics, 159, 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelpohl, T., Beer, K., Ewert, B., Perbandt, D., Töller, A., & Böcher, M. (2021). Patterns of European bioeconomy policy. Insights from a cross-case study of three policy areas. Environmental Politics, 23(2), 152–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1917827
   Google Scholar
• Zeug, W., Bezama, A., Moesenfechtel, U., Jähkel, A., & Thrän, D. (2019). Stakeholders’ interests and perceptions of bioeconomy monitoring using a sustainable development goal framework. Sustainability, 11(1511), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061511
   Google Scholar