Indicators To Monitor And Evaluate The Sustainability Of Bioeconomy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYXX indicators at the product/value chain level,FAO has been working for many years on non-foodbiomass products (including sustainable bioenergy)including indicators used for standards,and biotechnology, and it received a mandatecertificates, and labels (SCL).to coordinate international work on ‘food first’One of the objectives of this review is to avoidsustainable bioeconomy by 62 Ministers present atthe Global Forum for Food and Agriculture (GFFA)replication and build on indicators and data that2015. Moreover, FAO has received support from theare already available and countries/stakeholdersGovernment of Germany to develop guidelines onmay already report on.Important gaps and weaknesses emerge insustainable bioeconomy development (Phase 1:2016; Phase 2: 2017-mid 2020). This involves workthe reviewed literature with regard to social,on the bioeconomy monitoring, including theeconomic and environmental impact categoriesselection and use of indicators.of the bioeconomy, and associated dataavailability. First, the indicators identified inThe ultimate aim of FAO’s work onsustainability indicators is to provide technicalthe literature review, although quantitativelyassistance to countries and stakeholdersrelevant, are unequally distributed among thein developing and monitoring sustainablevarious principles and criteria. For instance,bioeconomy, more particularly on identifyingenvironmental sustainability criteria aresuitable indicators in line with the Sustainableaddressed the most, followed by social andBioeconomy Aspirational Principles andeconomic sustainability criteria.Secondly, this study introduces links betweenrelated Criteria, agreed upon in 2016 by theInternational Sustainable Bioeconomy Workingthe territorial and the product/value chain levels.Group created in the context of FAO’s projectOne key issue is how to clearly attribute theon Sustainable Bioeconomy Guidelines. Thesemeasurement of the indicators to the productionindicators shall help both policy makers andand use of biomass. This methodologicalproducers/manufacturers in monitoringchallenge is referred to as the “attributionand evaluating the sustainability of theirissue” and it is connected to both the attributionbioeconomy strategies and interventions.of statistical data to the bioeconomy and theattribution of general effects to the bioeconomy.In order to cover all the relevant aspectsAnother key issue identified by this studyand issues for a sustainable bioeconomy, ourapproach identifies impact categories fromis the availability and quality of data for thethe sustainable bioeconomy principles andindicators. In fact, data for many indicators arecriteria. The monitoring approach suggestedoften not collected on a regular basis and datais balanced, since it considers the threequality is a key problem for the estimation ofsustainability dimensions (social, economic andsome indicators. The study suggests the use ofenvironmental); at the same time, it proposes toproxy indicators as a complement to detaileduse a limited set of core indicators, to keep themeasurement. Good practices are introduced asmonitoring feasible and cost-effective.potential complementary indicators. Monitoringthe adoption of good practices and the qualityThe suggested methodology starts with areview of existing monitoring approaches toof their implementation can be useful toidentify already available indicators, from whichacknowledge and measure progress.This report also discusses trade-offs andthe authors compiled two comprehensive lists:synergies between the different sustainabilityXX indicators at the territorial level, whichissues. For instance, economic developmentincludes bioeconomy-relevant SDG indicators;ix

The recommended methodology is based oncould happen at the expense of inclusiveness(including the type of jobs created and the faira participatory approach: the choice of relevanttreatment of employees and working conditions)hotspots, priorities and indicators must occurand climate change mitigation.through stakeholder and expert engagement.The methodology also allows for some flexibilityFinally, the study identifies solutions anda possible way forward to help countries andto reflect circumstances and specific needs ofpractitioners in their monitoring and evaluationthe stakeholders. It also facilitates the inclusionefforts: a stepwise approach to monitoringof new indicators in order to improve thethe bioeconomy sustainability, includingmonitoring approach over time, and to adaptthe selection of relevant indicators, both atindicators as the sector and/or policy needsterritorial and product levels (Figure ES1).evolve over time.x

F I G U R E E S 1.STEPWISE APPROACHES TO INDICATOR SELECTIONS AT TERRITORIAL AND PRODUCT LEVELSTERRITORIAL LEVELPRODUCT LEVELSTEP 1STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENTSTEP 1STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENTSTEP 2CHOICE OF RELEVANT TERRITORIALLEVEL (GLOBAL, REGIONAL, NATIONALAND SUB-NATIONAL LEVELS)STEP 2CHOICE OF KEY PRODUCTS/VALUE CHAINSSTEP 3SELECTION OF RELEVANT INDICATORSTO ENSURE ADEQUATE COVERAGE OFSUSTAINABILITY ISSUESSTEP 3IDENTIFICATION OF HOTSPOTS ANDTHEIR SUSTAINABILITY ISSUESCHOICE OF A SET OF INDICATORS THATREFLECT THE PERFORMANCE/PROGRESS OFTHE BIOECONOMY STRATEGY OBJECTIVESSTEP 4SELECTION OF RELEVANT INDICATORS TO ENSUREADEQUATE COVERAGE OF SUSTAINABILITY ISSUESFOR EACH IDENTIFIED HOTSPOTSTEP 5DISCUSSION AND SELECTION OFREFERENCE VALUES FOR EACH INDICATORSTEP 5DISCUSSION AND SELECTION OF REFERENCEVALUES FOR EACH INDICATORSTEP 6DEFINITION OF DATA COLLECTIONMETHODOLOGY AND ASSESSMENT OFDATA AVAILABILITYSTEP 6DEFINITION OF DATA COLLECTIONMETHODOLOGY AND ASSESSMENT OFDATA AVAILABILITYSTEP 4(OPTIONAL)STEP 7(OPTIONAL)STEP 7SELECTION OF GOOD PRACTICES TOADDRESS SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES(OPTIONAL)SELECTION OF GOOD PRACTICES TO ADDRESSTHE HOTSPOTS AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUESSTEP 8ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS TOWARDSBIOECONOMY STRATEGY OBJECTIVESAND SUSTAINABILITY GOALSSTEP 8ASSESSMENT OF THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THEVALUE CHAIN AND ITS CONTRIBUTION TOBIOECONOMY STRATEGY OBJECTIVESSTEP 9EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATIONOF THE RESULTSSTEP 9EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATIONOF THE RESULTSxi

C H A P T E R1INTRODUCTION1.1BACKGROUNDAND RATIONALEto measure, one needs to know where themeasurement shall start and where it shall end.Some sources depict the bioeconomy as a newdevelopment path, an alternate model to thecurrent (petrol-based) economy. The bioeconomyis seen as a “master narrative” to tackle andovercome the limits of the current economicsystem. Biomass or biological resources are atThe concept of the bioeconomy aims to addressthe heart of the discourse. Shifting from the useseveral global challenges such as climate change,of fossil fuel resources to the use of biologicalfood security, health, and energy security in aresources in the production and use of materialscoherent way. At the same time, the bioeconomysuch as plastics, textiles and chemicals is seen asis seen as an engine for innovation, fuelled bya way to make our daily lives “greener”, “fairer”new research and development in the biologicaland “more inclusive”. In a nutshell, this newand engineering sciences. However, despite thesedevelopment path is thought to lead to a moregrand claims, there does not seem to be onesustainable paradigm. Its boundaries are widecommon understanding of what the bioeconomyand open. In this narrative, the bioeconomy isactually means. What does it entail, where are itssought to be a new economic model – at local,boundaries? When discussing monitoring andnational, regional or global scale. The focus forevaluation (M&E) with regards to the impact ofM&E is the contribution of the bioeconomy tobioeconomy development, these are importanteconomic development, and its (positive andquestions to ask, because before one can startnegative) impacts on nature and society.1

INDICATORS TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE THE SUSTAINABILITY OF BIOECONOMYbased on the assumption that the bioeconomyOther sources look at the bioeconomy from ais a new development path. In this case,production angle. At the centre of the discourseindicators seek to measure the contributionis the bioproduct, not the economy as a whole.of the bioeconomy to the overall economy andRather than a new development path, this schoolwellbeing. This study considers four territorialof thought sees the potential of the biological andlevels: global level, regional level (macro-engineering sciences (among others) to replaceregions, such as the EU), national level,selected fossil resource-driven processes andsub-national level. For simplicity, the resultsproducts with the variety of bio-technologiesof these four levels are often shown togetherand innovations provided by research andunder the label “territorial”.development. The development of a bioeconomy2 A second approach on the use of productat product level represents improvementlevel/value chain indicators to measure theopportunities along the various stages ofimpact of bioeconomy at product level, basedexisting resource flows, exchanging materialon the assumption that the overall impactand energy from fossil fuels with sources ofof bioeconomy builds upon the effect ofbiological origin. Be it agricultural residuesreplacing fossil fuel resources with biologicalor crops from the primary production stage,resources in the various value chain stagesbio-waste from processing or food waste at theand the diversification of existing productsconsumer stage – these are valuable resourcesfrom the same biomass.for value addition.Compared to the overarching vision thatThe two approaches (territorial or product/depicts the bioeconomy as a new developmentpath, this production outlook is much morevalue chain) can be complementary (Section 6.3).confined. The boundaries start and end with theThat being said, despite the aim of monitoringbiomass flows, from production and processing(sustainable) bioeconomy at both levels,to use and re-use. The bioeconomy and itscommonly available methodologies for datasustainability considerations, in this vision, arecollection and assessment are often not adequatelimited to selected processes and products ofto assess the contribution of the bioeconomyexisting or new value chains. For this reason, itwithin the larger economy.is important that the significant gap betweenthese two bioeconomy “visions” is filled by1.2STUDY OBJECTIVEadditional work at research, private sector andgovernance levels.While these two different outlooks on what thebioeconomy means and entails are an importantdistinction to make when discussing monitoringand evaluation of the bioeconomy, bothGiven the importance of monitoring theperspectives require monitoring of the economybioeconomy, one of the key outputs of theand beyond, including social and environmentalFAO “Towards sustainable bioeconomyaspects. To that end, the Internationalguidelines” project concerns the identificationSustainable Bioeconomy Working Group (ISBWG)of indicators to monitor and evaluate theestablished in the context of FAO’s project onperformance of sustainable bioeconomysustainable bioeconomy guidelines, has proposeddevelopment. In that respect, a first step wasa set of Aspirational Principles and Criteria forthe definition and agreement of aspirationalSustainable Bioeconomy (see Table 1 below).Principles and Criteria (P&Cs) by the ISBWGStarting from this logic, FAO has developedestablished by the project in 2016. In addition, ontwo approaches to M&E of a sustainable17-18 April 2018, FAO and the German Ministrybioeconomy:for Food and Agriculture (BMEL) organizedan international workshop on “Measuring the1 One approach uses territorial indicators tosustainability of the bioeconomy: Where do wemeasure the impact of the bioeconomy atstand/What gaps/What next?” in Berlin.national, regional or sub-national scale,2

Introductioniii While the national sovereignty principleThe ultimate aim of FAO’s work onis key, international/global dimension issustainability indicators is to provide technicalalso important: there is an existing gap onassistance to countries and stakeholders inlinking these two levels (e.g. no internationalmonitoring sustainable bioeconomy, moreconvention - such as on climate change - andparticularly on identifying suitable indicatorstherefore no international accountability ofin line with the ISBWG-agreed aspirationalcountries). Indicators which ensure sustainableP&Cs. Appropriate indicators are deemed crucialtrade can help in bridging this gap;to monitoring and evaluating the progressiv Be sufficiently inclusive in the developmentand impact of bioproducts and of differentand implementation of bioeconomy M&E:dimensions of bioeconomy development onThe inclusion of all relevant stakeholderssustainability. More particularly, to:is key to ensure public acceptance of theXX strengthen the capacity of assessing andbioeconomy; which is in turn crucial to ensurecomparing the development of a sustainablesustainability in bioeconomy developmentbioeconomy,(not least to ensure a market for bioproducts).XX provide clear information for raisingawareness,The above should take into account the twoXX increase cooperation among differentmain typologies of approaches to measuring thestakeholders, andbioeconomy, i.e. at territorial and at product/XX support evidence-based policy making.value chain levels, and the need to link the twolevels. The former are meant to inform policyFollowing the recommendations ofthe international workshop, the work onmaking, while the latter will help to identifyindicators will:sustainable production processes, business/investment opportunities, consumptioni Avoid ‘reinventing the wheel’ and reducebehaviours and end-of-life options.the risk of duplication. This means thatThe remainder of the study is structuredthe bioeconomy monitoring and evaluationas follows. The next section introduces the(M&E) should fit as much as possible intomethodology adopted to identify indicators forthat of the Sustainable Development Goalssustainable bioeconomy. Section 3 introduces(SDGs), because the latter already exist,some useful definitions and indicator typologiescountries have committed to them and arewhich help to interpret the results of the reviewstaking steps to measure their implementation.done in Section 4 and 5. These two sectionsMoreover, the SDGs define sustainability in areview the main M&E approaches at territorialcomprehensive way, and every developmentand at product levels, provide a list of identifiedstrategy should fit into this context;indicators and examine data availability. Sectionii Keep the monitoring and measurement6 discusses current approaches and points toof the bioeconomy simple but stillgaps and shortfall of the reviewed indicators andinternationally recognized andmonitoring approaches. The last section presentsscientifically robust (science-based), forconcrete suggestions for a guidance frameworkinstance by means of SMART (specific;for countries and private sector actors that wishmeasurable; achievable; relevant and time-to monitor and evaluate the bioeconomy impactsbound) indicators;at both national and product-levels.3

C H A P T E R2METHODOLOGYAND STRUCTUREOF THE REPORTThe transition to the bioeconomy is oftensuch as the GDP, are increasingly consideredassociated with a range of economic,inadequate metrics to gauge well-being overenvironmental and social benefits; however, thetime particularly in its economic, environmental,bioeconomy is not sustainable per se. Severaland social sustainability dimension (Stiglitz, Senenvironmental and socio-economic risks mightand Fitoussi, 2009). Research in recent years hasundermine the sustainability of the bioeconomy,produced a wide range of sustainability metricssuch as through an increase in land competitionand indicators, and many of these can be usedbetween food crops and fuel crops, direct andin a monitoring framework for bioeconomyindirect land use change, the use of marginalsustainability.In Section 3, in order to cover all relevantlands with negative effects on biodiversity,GHG emissions, and biomass production posingsustainability aspects for the bioeconomy,pressure on the surrounding natural ecosystems,this report adopts as a starting point the P&Cswith a particular attention to water use andagreed in 2016 by the ISBWG, and extractsquality and soil degradation (Pfau et al., 2014).impact categories from them. The authors of thisFor this reason, the bioeconomy should followstudy identified 69 impact categories througha holistic sustainability approach grounded ona desk review, based on the P&Cs. The impactenvironmental, economic, and social aspects.categories link the criteria to the indicatorsSince its birth in the Brundtland Reportin a comprehensive and accurate manner. For(Brundtland, 1987) and the Rio Earth Summiteach impact category, a series of indicators isin 1992, the concept of sustainability has beenidentified by means of a thoughtful review ofgaining importance. In the new millennium, theexisting approaches and initiatives to monitorneed to measure sustainability performancessustainable bioeconomy both at territorial andbecame prominent. Purely economic measures,product levels. The criteria that were taken5

INDICATORS TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE THE SUSTAINABILITY OF BIOECONOMYregulations and institutional set up relevantinto account in selecting the approaches areto bioeconomy sectors are adequatelylisted below:harmonized, 7.2. Knowledge generation andXX The geographical scope: this study coversinnovation are promoted; thus, they have notdifferent territorial levels – global, regional,been addressed separately by the selectednational, sub-national - for monitoring andapproaches as in the case of the primary andevaluation of the bioeconomy.secondary sectors (see Section 5).XX Sector variety: in order to address the wideiv In addition to the ISIC Sectors, the indicatorsrange of products and/or value chains involvedalso cover ecosystem state and conditions,in the bioeconomy, relevant approaches atand consequently the capacity to providesectoral and/or bioproduct levels have beenecosystem services. These includereviewed. Following the UNStat-ISIC Sectors,provisioning services such as food, feed andthe sectors have been divided into:bio-based products as well as supporting,regulating and cultural services.i primary production sectors, involved mainlyin the production of food and non-foodFrom these approaches, the authors compiledbiomass, i.e. agriculture, forestry and fishery,two comprehensive lists of indicators:ii secondary production sectors, concerningmainly manufacturing, i.e. food andi one at the territorial level – priority was givenagroindustry, bio-based constructionto SDG indicators for addressing the impactmaterials and furniture, pulp and paper,categories, where possible, andbio-based textiles, bio-based chemicalsii one at the product/value cha

iv 7. Conclusion and proposed way forward 103 7.1 Stepwise approach to monitoring the bioeconomy 104 Step 1: Stakeholder engagement 106 Step 2: Choice of system boundaries 107 Step 3: Identification of sustainability issues and relevant indicators 108 Step 4: Choice of indicators that reflect bioeconomy strategy objectives or hotspots 110 Step 5: Discussion and selection of reference values .