Positioning the biofuel policy in the bioeconomy of the BioEast macro-region

References

• European Union. Circular economy action plan - for a cleaner and more competitive Europe. 2020. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/new_circular_economy_action_plan.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. The European Green Deal. 2019. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/european-green-deal-communication_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Meckling J, Sterner T, Wagner G. Policy sequencing toward decarbonization. Nat Energy. 2017; 2(12):918–922.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhtyar B, Fudholi A, Hassan K, et al. Review of CO2 price in Europe using feed-in tariff rates. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017; 69:685–691.
   Google Scholar
• Lu YH, Khan ZA, Alvarez-Alvarado MS, et al. A critical review of sustainable energy policies for the promotion of renewable energy sources. Sustainability. 2020;12(12):5078.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. Clean energy for all Europeans. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019. ISBN 978-92-79-99835-5.
   Google Scholar
• UN. SDG7 Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. 2020. Available from: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal7.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 on the governance of the energy union and climate action. 2019. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018R1999&from=EN.
   Google Scholar
• Darda S, Papalas T, Zabaniotou A. Biofuels journey in Europe: currently the way to low carbon economy sustainability is still a challenge. J Clear Prod. 2019; 208:575–588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018. Available from: https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/T41_CostReductionBiofuels-11_02_19-final.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Stattman SL, Gupta A, Partzsch L, et al. Toward sustainable biofuels in the European Union? Lessons from a decade of hybrid biofuel governance. Sustainability. 2018; 10(11):4111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naik SN, Goud VV, Rout PK, et al. Production of first and second generation biofuels: a comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain Energy Rev. 2010;14(2):578–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alalwan HA, Alminshid AH, Aljaafari HA. Promising evolution of biofuel generations. Subject review. Renew Energy Focus. 2019;28:127–139.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. State of the art on alternative fuels transport systems in the European Union; 2020. p. 305. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2832/937310
   Google Scholar
• Banja M, Sikkema R, Jégard M, et al. Biomass for energy in the EU–the support framework. Energy Policy. 2019;131:215–228.
   Google Scholar
• Correa DF, Beyer HL, Fargione JE, et al. Towards the implementation of sustainable biofuel production systems. Renew Sustain Rev. 2019; 107:250–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission, Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. 2018. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2018.328.01.0082.01.ENG.
   Google Scholar
• Pilli R, Fiorese G, Jonsson R, et al. Some aspects of the forest based bioeconomy in the BIOEAST region. Research Brief. European Commission Joint Research Centre; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Juhász A, Vásáry V. BIOEAST: Central-Eastern European initiative for knowledge-based agriculture, aquaculture and forestry in the bioeconomy. Rural Areas Dev. 2017;14:75–92.
   Google Scholar
• Lovrić M, Lovrić N, Mavsar R. Synthesis on forest bioeconomy research and innovation in Europe. EFI; 2017. p. 64
   Google Scholar
• Devaney L, Henchion M. Bioeconomy Research & Innovation Policy Landscape in Europe: A Review. 2017. Available from: https://www.bioeconomy-library.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/CASA-Report_D3-3_Bioeconomy_RI_Landscape.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bell J, Paula L, Dodd T, et al. EU ambition to build the world's leading bioeconomy-Uncertain times demand innovative and sustainable solutions. N Biotechnol. 2018;40(Pt A):25–30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gawel E, Pannicke N, Hagemann N. A path transition towards a bioeconomy—the crucial role of sustainability. Sustainability. 2019; 11(11):3005.
   Google Scholar
• ACEA – European Automobile Manufacturers Association. Interactive map: Correlation between uptake of electric cars and GDP in the EU. 2018. Available from: https://www.acea.be/statistics/article/interactive-map-correlation-between-uptake-of-electric-cars-and-gdp-in-EU. (accessed on 28 April 2019).
   Google Scholar
• Kolb O, Siegemund S. Study on the Implementation of Article 7(3) of the “Directive on the Deployment of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure” –Fuel Price Comparison. European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport. 2017. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press. 2008. p. 293.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson EJ, Shu SB, Dellaert BG, et al. Beyond nudges: tools of a choice architecture. Mark Lett. 2012; 23(2):487–504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckley JJ. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Set Syst. 1985; 17(3):233–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces. 1994;24(6):19–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franek J, Kresta A. Judgment scales and consistency measure in AHP. Procedia Econ Finance. 2014; 12:164–173.
   Google Scholar
• Meixner O. Fuzzy AHP group decision analysis and its application for the evaluation of energy sources. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 2009. 29: 2–16.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Aly S, Vrana I. Evaluating the knowledge, relevance and experience of expert decision makers utilizing the Fuzzy-AHP. Agricult Econ. 2008; 54(11):529–535.
   Google Scholar
• Chen MF, Tzeng GW, Ding CG. Combining fuzzy AHP with MDS in identifying the preference similarity of alternatives. Appl Soft Comput. 2008;8(1):110–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eurostat 2018. Share for renewables in RES-T. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/energy/data/shares.
   Google Scholar
• EEA (European Environment Agency). Environment image & Corine land cover. 250 m. 2018. Available from: http://dataservice.eea.eu.int/dataservice/.
   Google Scholar
• ACEA -Report Vehicles in use Europe 2019. Available from: https://www.acea.be/publications/article/report-vehicles-in-use-europe-2019.
   Google Scholar
• D'Adamo I, Falcone PM, Gastaldi M, et al. RES-T trajectories and an integrated SWOT-AHP analysis for biomethane. Policy implications to support a green revolution in European transport. Energy Policy. 2020; 138:111220.
   Google Scholar
• Schillo RS, Isabelle DA, Shakiba A. Linking advanced biofuels policies with stakeholder interests: a method building on quality function deployment. Energy Policy. 2017; 100:126–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chanthawong A, Dhakal S. Stakeholders' perceptions on challenges and opportunities for biodiesel and bioethanol policy development in Thailand. Energy Policy. 2016; 91:189–206.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL, Özdemir MS. How many judges should there be in a group? Ann Data Sci. 2014; 1(3-4):359–368.
   Google Scholar
• Gilliland MW. Energy analysis and public Policy: The energy unit measures environmental consequences, economic costs, material needs, and resource availability. Science. 1975;189(4208):1051–1056.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond SD, Carlson K, Keeney RL. Generating objectives: Can decision makers articulate what they want? Manage Sci. 2008; 54(1):56–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulisic B, Dimitriou I, Mola-Yudego B. From preferences to concerted policy on mandated share for renewable energy in transport. Energy Policy. 2021; 155:112355.
   Google Scholar
• Walker WE, Rahman SA, Cave J. Adaptive policies, policy analysis, and policy-making. Eur J Oper Res. 2001; 128(2):282–289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty TL, Vargas LG. Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process. In International series in operations research & management science. Springer Science & Business Media; New York. 2012. p. 346.
   Google Scholar
• Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M. Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2004; 8(4):365–381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar A, Sah B, Singh AR, et al. A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017; 69:596–609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang JJ, Jing YY, Zhang CF, et al. Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energydecision-making. Renew Sustain Energ Rev. 2009; 13(9):2263–2278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefley F, Sarkis J. Short-termism and the appraisal of AMT Capital projects in the US and UK. Int J Prod Res. 1997; 35(2):341–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Information Control. 1965; 8:338–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya T, Kahraman C. Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: the case of Istanbul. Energy. 2010; 35(6):2517–2527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahraman C, Kaya İ. A fuzzy multicriteria methodology for selection among energy alternatives. Expert Syst Appl. 2010; 37(9):6270–6281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EurObserver. Biofuels barometer 2020. 2020. Available from: https://www.eurobserv-er.org/pdf/biofuels-barometer-2020/.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan L, Convery F, Ferreira S. Stimulating the use of biofuels in the European union: implications for climate change policy. Energy Policy. 2006; 34(17):3184–3194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mola-Yudego B, Arevalo J, Díaz-Yáñez O, et al. Reviewing wood biomass potentials for energy in Europe: the role of forests and fast growing plantations. Biofuels. 2017; 8(4):401–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paist A, Kask U, Kask L, et al. Potential of biomass fuels to substitute for oil shale in energy balance in estonian energy sector. Oil Shale. 2005; 22(4):369–380.
   Google Scholar
• Klevas V, Streimikiene D, Grikstaite R. Sustainable energy in Baltic states. Energy Policy. 2007; 35(1):76–90.
   Google Scholar
• IRENA. Advanced biofuels. What holds them back? International Renewable Energy Agency; 2019. Abu Dhabi.
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe L. International policy co-ordination and public management reform. Int Rev Admin Sci. 1994;60(2):271–290.
   Google Scholar