Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T00:30:12.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part III

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2023

Piergiuseppe Morone
Affiliation:
Unitelma Sapienza
Dalia D'Amato
Affiliation:
Finnish Environment Institute (Suomen Ympäristökeskus - SYKE)
Nicolas Befort
Affiliation:
NEOMA BS
Gülşah Yilan
Affiliation:
Unitelma Sapienza University of Rome
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Circular Bioeconomy
Theories and Tools for Economists and Sustainability Scientists
, pp. 123 - 177
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Antar, M., Lyu, D., Nazari, M., Shah, A., Zhou, X., & Smith, D. L. (2021). Biomass for a Sustainable Bioeconomy: An Overview of World Biomass Production and Utilization. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 139, 110691.Google Scholar
Baumann, H., & Tillman, A.-M. (2004). The Hitch Hiker’s Guide to LCA : An Orientation in Life Cycle Assessment Methodology and Application. Lund: Studentlitteratur, Print.Google Scholar
Benoît, C., Andrews, E., Barthel, L., … Manhart, A. (2009). Guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products social and socio-economic LCA guidelines complementing environmental LCA and life cycle costing, contributing to the full assessment of goods and services within the context of sustainable development.Google Scholar
Bouillass, G., Blanc, I., & Perez-Lopez, P. (2021). Step-by-Step Social Life Cycle Assessment Framework: A Participatory Approach for the Identification and Prioritization of Impact Subcategories Applied to Mobility Scenarios. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 26(12), 24082435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carus, M., & Dammer, L. (2018). The Circular Bioeconomy – Concepts, Opportunities, and Limitations. Industrial Biotechnology, 14(2), 8391.Google Scholar
D’Adamo, I., Falcone, P. M., & Morone, P. (2020). A New Socio-economic Indicator to Measure the Performance of Bioeconomy Sectors in Europe. Ecological Economics, 176, 106724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Adamo, I., Gastaldi, M., Ioppolo, G., & Morone, P. (2022). An Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in Italian Cities: Performance Measurements and Policy Implications. Land Use Policy, 120, 106278.Google Scholar
Dahiya, S., Katakojwala, R., Ramakrishna, S., & Mohan, S. V. (2020). Biobased Products and Life Cycle Assessment in the Context of Circular Economy and Sustainability. Materials Circular Economy, 2(1), 7.Google Scholar
de Besi, M., & McCormick, K. (2015). Towards a Bioeconomy in Europe: National, Regional and Industrial Strategies. Sustainability, 7(8), 1046110478.Google Scholar
de Luca, A. I., Iofrida, N., Leskinen, P., … Gulisano, G. (2017). Life Cycle Tools Combined with Multi-Criteria and Participatory Methods for Agricultural Sustainability: Insights from a Systematic and Critical Review. Science of The Total Environment, 595, 352370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
EC. (2018). A Sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: Strengthening the Connection between Economy, Society and the Environment. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/edace3e3-e189-11e8-b690-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-149755478Google Scholar
Falcone, G., de Luca, A., Stillitano, T., Strano, A., Romeo, G., & Gulisano, G. (2016). Assessment of Environmental and Economic Impacts of Vine-Growing Combining Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Costing and Multicriterial Analysis. Sustainability, 8(8), 793.Google Scholar
Fauzi, R. T., Lavoie, P., Sorelli, L., Heidari, M. D., & Amor, B. (2019). Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability, 11(3), 636.Google Scholar
Finkbeiner, M., Schau, E. M., Lehmann, A., & Traverso, M. (2010). Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. Sustainability, 2(10), 33093322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gnansounou, E., & Pandey, A. (2016). Life-Cycle Assessment of Biorefineries, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Heinonen, T, Pukkala, T, Mehtätalo, L, Asikainen, A, Kangas, J, Peltola, H. (2017) Scenario Analyses for the Effects of Harvesting Intensity on Development of Forest Resources, Timber Supply, Carbon Balance and Biodiversity of Finnish Forestry. Forest Policy and Economics, 80, 8098.Google Scholar
Huang, I. B., Keisler, J., & Linkov, I. (2011). Multi-criteria Decision Analysis in Environmental Sciences: Ten Years of Applications and Trends. Science of The Total Environment 409(19), 35783594.Google Scholar
Hunkeler, D., Lichtenvort, K., & Rebitzer, G. (2008). Environmental Life Cycle Costing, CRC press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurmekoski, E., Myllyviita, T., Seppälä, J., Heinonen, T., Kilpeläinen, A., Pukkala, T., et al. (2020) Impact of Structural Changes in Wood-using Industries on Net Carbon Emissions in Finland. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 24(4), 899912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbert, E., & Falcone, P. M. (2020). Chapter 6. Social Assessment, pp. 166–191.Google Scholar
ISO. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework. ISO 14040., Pub. L. No. ISO 14040. (2006a).Google Scholar
ISO. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines. ISO 14044., Pub. L. No. ISO 14044. (2006b).Google Scholar
Ladu, L., & Morone, P. (2021). Holistic Approach in the Evaluation of the Sustainability of Bio-Based Products: An Integrated Assessment Tool. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 28, 911–924e6.Google Scholar
Lokesh, K., Matharu, A. S., Kookos, I. K., … Clark, J. (2020). Hybridised Sustainability Metrics for Use in Life Cycle Assessment of Bio-based Products: Resource Efficiency and Circularity. Green Chemistry, 22(3), 803813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marazza, D., Merloni, E., & Balugani, E. (2020). Chapter 7. Indirect Land Use Change and Bio-based Products, pp. 192–222.Google Scholar
Martin, M., Røyne, F., Ekvall, T., & Moberg, Å. (2018). Life Cycle Sustainability Evaluations of Bio-based Value Chains: Reviewing the Indicators from A Swedish Perspective. Sustainability, 10(2), 547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Blanco, J., Lehmann, A., Chang, Y. J., & Finkbeiner, M. (2015). Social Organizational LCA (SOLCA) – A New Approach for Implementing Social LCA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20(11), 15861599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miah, J. H., Koh, S. C. L., & Stone, D. (2017). A Hybridised Framework Combining Integrated Methods for Environmental Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 846866.Google Scholar
Morone, P., & Yilan, G. (2020). A Paradigm Shift in Sustainability: From Lines to Circles. Acta Innovations, (36), 516.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, S., Sharma, P. K., & Kumar, M. (2020). Bioeconomy and Environmental Sustainability. In Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Elsevier, pp. 373397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, G. A. (2006). Social Impacts in Product Life Cycles – Towards Life Cycle Attribute Assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 11(S1), 97104.Google Scholar
Popovic, T., & Kraslawski, A. (2015). Social Sustainability of Complex Systems, pp. 605–614.Google Scholar
Sijtsema, S. J., Onwezen, M. C., Reinders, M. J., Dagevos, H., Partanen, A., & Meeusen, M. (2016). Consumer Perception of Bio-Based Products – An Exploratory Study in 5 European Countries. NJAS: Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 77(1), 6169.Google Scholar
Soimakallio, S, Saikku, L, Valsta, L, Pingoud, K. (2016). Climate Change Mitigation Challenge for Wood Utilization: The Case of Finland. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(10):5127–34.Google Scholar
Statistics Finland, 2021. Greenhouse gas emissions in Finland 1990 to 2019. National Inventory Report under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. Submission to the European Union, p. 581.Google Scholar
Swarr, T. E., Hunkeler, D., Klöpffer, W., … Pagan, R. (2011). Environmental Life-Cycle Costing: A Code of Practice. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 16(5), 389391.Google Scholar
UNEP. (2020). Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products and Organizations. Retrieved from www.lifecycleinitiative.org/library/guidelines-for-social-life-cycle-assessment-of-products-and-organisations-2020/Google Scholar
UNEP/SETAC. (2011). Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment.Google Scholar
Vance, C., Sweeney, J., & Murphy, F. (2022). Space, Time, and Sustainability: The Status and Future of Life Cycle Assessment Frameworks for Novel Biorefinery Systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 159, 112259.Google Scholar
Vera, I., Wicke, B., Lamers, P., … van der Hilst, F. (2022). Land Use for Bioenergy: Synergies and Trade-offs Between Sustainable Development Goals. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 161, 112409.Google Scholar
Weiss, M., Haufe, J., Carus, M., … Patel, M. K. (2012). A Review of the Environmental Impacts of Biobased Materials. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16, S169–S181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yilan, G., Cordella, M., & Morone, P. (2023). Evaluating and Managing the Sustainability Performance of Investments in Green and Sustainable Chemistry: Development and Application of an Approach to Assess Bio-Based and Biodegradable Plastics. Current Research in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 6, 100353.Google Scholar
Yilan, G., Kadirgan, M. A. N., & Çiftçioğlu, G. A. (2020). Analysis of Electricity Generation Options for Sustainable Energy Decision Making: The Case of Turkey. Renewable Energy, 146, 519529.Google Scholar
Yıldız-Geyhan, E., Yılan, G., Altun-Çiftçioğlu, G. A., & Kadırgan, M. A. N. (2019). Environmental and Social Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Different Packaging Waste Collection Systems. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 143, 119132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, D., Tan, H., & Ruan, Y. (2011). A Future Bamboo-Structure Residential Building Prototype in China: Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Use and Carbon Emission. Energy and Buildings, 43(10), 26382646.Google Scholar
Zeug, W., Bezama, A., & Thrän, D. (2020). Towards a Holistic and Integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of the Bioeconomy: Background on Concepts, Visions and Measurements, UFZ Discussion Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bathelt, H., & Cohendet, P. (2014). The creation of knowledge: local building, global accessing and economic development – Toward an agenda. Journal of Economic Geography, 14(5), 869882.Google Scholar
Befort, N. (2021). The promises of drop-in vs. functional innovations: The case of bioplastics. Ecological Economics, 181, 106886.Google Scholar
Birch, K. (2016). Innovation, regional development and the life sciences: Beyond clusters, Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, K. (2017). Innovation, regional development and the life sciences: Beyond clusters, First published. ed, Regions and cities. London, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Bolwig, S., Ponte, S., du Toit, A., Riisgaard, L., & Halberg, N. (2010). Integrating poverty and environmental concerns into value-chain analysis: A conceptual framework. Development Policy Review, 28(2), 173194.Google Scholar
Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Knowledge specialization, organizational coupling, and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 597621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128.Google Scholar
Cooke, P. (2010). Regional innovation systems: development opportunities from the ‘green turn.’ Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(7), 831844.Google Scholar
Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G., & Soete, L. (Eds.). (1988). Technical change and economic theory, London: Pinter.Google Scholar
European Commission. (2012). Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions SWD(2012).Google Scholar
Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics. 19(1). doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309Google Scholar
Galambos, L., Hikino, T., & Zamagni, V. (2007). The global chemical industry in the age of the petrochemical revolution, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gereffi, G. (1994). The organization of buyer-driven global commodity chains: How US retailers shape overseas production networks. Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism, 95122.Google Scholar
Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. (2005). The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12(1), 78104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregersen, B., & Johnson, B. (1997). Learning economies, innovation systems and European integration. Regional Studies, 31(5), 479490.Google Scholar
Hellsmark, H., Frishammar, J., Söderholm, P., & Ylinenpää, H. (2016). The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy. Research Policy, 45(9), 17431761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Limoges, C., Scott, P., Schwartzman, S., Nowotny, H., & Gibbons, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. The New Production of Knowledge, 1192. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221853Google Scholar
Lipinsky, E. S. (1981). Chemicals from biomass: Petrochemical substitution options. Science, 212(4502), 14651471.Google Scholar
Lipinsky, E. S., & Sinclair, R. G. (1986). Is lactic acid a commodity chemical. Chemical Engineering Progress, 82(8), 2632.Google Scholar
Lundvall, B.-A. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
Lundvall, B.-A. (1998). Why study national systems and national styles of innovation? Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 10(4), 403422.Google Scholar
Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31(2), 247264.Google Scholar
Marchi, V. de, Maria, E. di, & Micelli, S. (2013). Environmental strategies, upgrading and competitive advantage in global value chains. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22(1), 6272.Google Scholar
Mazzucato, M. (2021). Mission economy: A moonshot guide to changing capitalism, Penguin UK.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Oltra, V., & Saint Jean, M. (2009). Variety of technological trajectories in low emission vehicles (LEVs): A patent data analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(2), 201213.Google Scholar
Pansera, M., & Fressoli, M. (2021). Innovation without growth: Frameworks for understanding technological change in a post-growth era. Organization, 28(3), 380404.Google Scholar
Pauliuk, S. (2018). Critical appraisal of the circular economy standard BS 8001: 2017 and a dashboard of quantitative system indicators for its implementation in organizations. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 129, 8192.Google Scholar
Ponte, S. (2014). The evolutionary dynamics of biofuel value chains: From unipolar and government-driven to multipolar governance. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 46(2), 353372.Google Scholar
Ponte, S. (2019). Business, power and sustainability in a world of global value chains, Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Pyka, A. (2017), Dedicated innovation systems to support the transformation towards sustainability: Creating income opportunities and employment in the knowledge-based digital bioeconomy. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 3(4), 27.Google Scholar
Pyka, A., & Urmetzer, S. (2023). Transformation-analysis – Potentials and current limits of evolutionary economic. In K. Dopfer, ed., Elgar Research Agenda for Evolutionary Economics, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2023.Google Scholar
Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: RD, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47(9), 15541567.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J. (2018). Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world. Research Policy, 47(8), 13671387.Google Scholar
The Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2015). Towards a circular economy: Business rationale for an accelerated transition. Retrieved from https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/towards-a-circular-economy-business-rationale-for-an-accelerated-transitionGoogle Scholar
Unruh, C. G. (2000). Understanding carbon lock-in. Energy Policy, 28, 817830.Google Scholar
von Hippel, E. (1994). “Sticky Information” and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science, 40(4), 429439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilke, U., Schlaile, M., Urmetzer, S., Müller, M., Bogner, K, & Pyka, A. (2021), Time to say ‘Good Buy’ to the passive consumer? A conceptual review of the consumer in the bioeconomy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 34, 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Asselin, A., Rabaud, S., Catalan, C., … Neveux, G. (2020). Product biodiversity footprint – A novel approach to compare the impact of products on biodiversity combining life cycle assessment and ecology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 248, 119262.Google Scholar
Befort, N. (2020). Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153, 119923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biomonitor. (2022). Biomonitor Project. Retrieved from https://biomonitor.eu/Google Scholar
Bracco, S., Tani, A., Çalıcıoğlu, Ö., Gomez San Juan, M., & Bogdanski, A. (2019). Indicators to Monitor and Evaluate the Sustainability of Bioeconomy: Overview and a Proposed Way Forward, FAO.Google Scholar
Calicioglu, Ö., & Bogdanski, A. (2021). Linking the bioeconomy to the 2030 sustainable development agenda: Can SDG indicators be used to monitor progress towards a sustainable bioeconomy? New Biotechnology, 61, 4049.Google Scholar
Circle economy. (2018). The Circularity Gap Report 2018. Circle Economy.Google Scholar
Corona, B., Shen, L., Reike, D., Rosales Carreón, J., & Worrell, E. (2019). Towards sustainable development through the circular economy – A review and critical assessment on current circularity metrics. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 151, 104498.Google Scholar
D’Adamo, I., Falcone, P. M., & Morone, P. (2020). A new socio-economic indicator to measure the performance of bioeconomy sectors in Europe. Ecological Economics, 176, 106724.Google Scholar
Daily, G. C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., … Shallenberger, R. (2009). Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1), 2128.Google Scholar
de Wit, M., Hoogzaad, J., & von Daniels, C. (2018). The Circularity gap report. Circle Economy.Google Scholar
Citizen, Dual. (2022). Global Green Economy Index (GGEI). Retrieved from https://dualcitizeninc.com/global-green-economy-index/Google Scholar
EC. (2022). EU Bioeconomy Monitoring System. Retrieved from https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/bioeconomy/monitoring_enGoogle Scholar
Ellen Mac Arthur Foundation. (2022b). Resources and toolkits for the Material Circularity Indicator. Retrieved from https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/material-circularity-indicatorGoogle Scholar
European standards. DIN EN 16785-1 Bio-based products – Bio-based content – Part 1: Determination of the bio-based content using the radiocarbon analysis and elemental analysis. (2022). Retrieved from www.en-standard.eu/din-en-16785-1-bio-based-products-bio-based-content-part-1-determination-of-the-bio-based-content-using-the-radiocarbon-analysis-and-elemental-analysis/?gclid=CjwKCAjwve2TBhByEiwAaktM1EIYGW2nda20UtVE_VHghu4m_A3QZc4FWydtNrcHBSfbXGNOszC6xxoCkYAQAvD_BwEGoogle Scholar
Fava, F., Gardossi, L., Brigidi, P., Morone, P., Carosi, D. A. R., & Lenzi, A. (2021). The bioeconomy in Italy and the new national strategy for a more competitive and sustainable country. New Biotechnology, 61, 124136.Google Scholar
Giampietro, M., & Renner, A. (2021). The Generation of Meaning and Preservation of Identity in Complex Adaptive Systems the LIPHE4 Criteria, pp. 29–46.Google Scholar
Haas, W., Krausmann, F., Wiedenhofer, D., & Heinz, M. (2015). How circular is the global economy?: An assessment of material flows, waste production, and recycling in the European Union and the world in 2005. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 19(5), 765777.Google Scholar
Harrison, P. A., Dunford, R., Barton, D. N., … Zulian, G. (2018). Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: A decision tree approach. Ecosystem Services, 29, 481498.Google Scholar
Holmgren, S., D’Amato, D., & Giurca, A. (2020). Bioeconomy imaginaries: A review of forest-related social science literature. Ambio, 49(12), 18601877.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ISTAT. (2022). Istat indicators for sustainable development goals. Retrieved from www.istat.it/it/benessere-e-sostenibilit%C3%A0/obiettivi-di-sviluppo-sostenibile/gli-indicatori-istatGoogle Scholar
Jørgensen, A., le Bocq, A., Nazarkina, L., & Hauschild, M. (2008). Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 13(2), 96103.Google Scholar
Kangas, A. (2015). Natural Resources Institute Finland – A foundation for the bioeconomy.Google Scholar
Kardung, M., Cingiz, K., Costenoble, O., … Zhu, B. X. (2021). Development of the circular bioeconomy: Drivers and indicators. Sustainability, 13(1), 413.Google Scholar
Kardung, M., & Drabik, D. (2021). Framework for Assessing the Development of a Circular Bioeconomy: BioMonitor Policy Brief# 5.Google Scholar
Karvonen, J., Halder, P., Kangas, J., & Leskinen, P. (2017). Indicators and tools for assessing sustainability impacts of the forest bioeconomy. Forest Ecosystems, 4(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.07.039Google Scholar
Lier, M., Aarne, M., Kärkkäinen, L., Korhonen, K. T., Yli-Viikari, A., & Packalen, T. (2018). Synthesis on bioeconomy monitoring systems in the EU Member States.Google Scholar
Morales, M. R., Tirado, A. A., & Lobato-Calleros, O. (2015). Additional indicators to promote social sustainability within government programs: Equity and efficiency. Sustainability (2071–1050), 7(7).Google Scholar
Natural Capital Coalition. (2016). Natural Capital Protocol. Retrieved from www.naturalcapitalcoalition.org/protocolGoogle Scholar
OECD. (2022). Green growth indicators framework. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/greengrowth/green-growth-indicators/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CGreen%20growth%20is%20about%20fostering,give%20rise%20to%20new%20economicGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, M., Miguel, M., van Langen, S. K., … Genovese, A. (2021). Circular economy and the transition to a sustainable society: Integrated assessment methods for a new paradigm. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1(1), 99113.Google Scholar
SEEA. (2022). Green growth indicators. System of Environmental-Economic Accounting. Retrieved from https://seea.un.org/Google Scholar
Sikkema, R., Dallemand, J. F., Matos, C. T., van der Velde, M., & San-Miguel-Ayanz, J. (2017). How can the ambitious goals for the EU’s future bioeconomy be supported by sustainable and efficient wood sourcing practices? Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 32(7), 551558.Google Scholar
ten Brink, P., Mazza, L., Badura, T., Kettunen, M., & Withana, S. (2012). Nature and its role in the transition to a green economy. A TEEB Report. www.Teebweb.org and www.Ieep.eu.Google Scholar
TNFD. (2022). Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures. Retrieved from https://tnfd.global/.Google Scholar
Villamagna, A. M., Angermeier, P. L., & Bennett, E. M. (2013). Capacity, pressure, demand, and flow: A conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecological Complexity, 15, 114121.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×