Search

Abstract Evolving complex concepts, such as bioeconomy, cannot be applied without selecting (consciously or unconsciously) some definitions and excluding others. This process of selection may have a considerable impact on how bioeconomy is understood. This paper presents how the concept of bioeconomy took shape in a participatory development project that created foundations for new professional specialisation studies within the Finnish bioeconomy. Written documents (n = 21), produced in different phases of the project, were analysed with qualitative content analysis to find out how bioeconomy was A) understood as an activity, and B) conceptually linked with different global meta-discourses. Bioeconomy was primarily understood as an intensive use of diverse biomasses within a forest cluster, agriculture, the food industry, waste management and the energy sector, whereas many other bioeconomy sectors were marginalised or excluded. The idea that biomasses should be saved was very rare, and the concepts that prioritise some biomass uses over others, such as the cascade principle, were excluded. Bioeconomy itself was understood as a societally and globally influential new way of thinking i.e. as a meta-discourse. Strong associations were also made to nationalistic and statist meta-discourses. Conceptual transformation during the project was most distinct in the sustainable development meta-discourse: sustainability turned from a self-evident characteristic of bioeconomy into a consciously reflected and desirable goal. The results illustrate how a common consensus of bioeconomy is built through exclusion and inclusion in a participatory development project. Project organisers should be conscious about this process and explicitly state how and why some aspects, actors and activities are emphasised while others are downplayed or excluded in their bioeconomy projects. Only then we can create far-reaching policies and considered actions to guide societies toward the desired and defined future. Highlights • Conceptualisation of bioeconomy in a development project was analysed. • Intensive use of biomass was emphasised in the project. • Many bioeconomy sectors and activities were marginalised or excluded. • Some learning in sustainability issues was identified during the project. • Developers should be better aware of the conceptual choices they necessarily make. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, various environmental issues associated with plastics have become well documented, spurring a growing volume of research on the barriers, drivers, and solutions related to the development and commercialization of sustainable—bio-based, biodegradable and circular—plastics. However, a systemic perspective that addresses the complex interdependencies across the value chain has so far been missing from the analysis. Based on a qualitative study covering the entire plastics value chain in Finland and Northern Europe, this paper addresses the research gap with two main findings. First, the paper identifies three core conundrums that describe the complex and interrelated nature of technological, operational, economic, and societal factors, which are inhibiting the transition to sustainable plastics at three critical junctures of the value chain. Second, the findings describe four solution mechanisms, which suggest that the value chain actors need to shift (i) from the supply of bulk materials to material solutions; (ii) from firm-centric material development to cross-tier collaboration; (iii) from price competition to competition on sustainability benefits; and (iv) from isolated technologies to infrastructure development. These findings extend our understanding of the systemic challenges for the transition to a sustainable plastics economy and shed new light on the ways in which companies can address the challenges for a system-wide impact. • The environmental problems associated with plastics are well documented. • Transition to sustainable plastics economy requires systemic changes. • Systemic change calls for new types of offerings and value chain roles for actors. • Sustainability values should be leveraged in market competition. • Collaborative infrastructure development is a prerequisite for systemic transition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper empirically examines the role of a sustainability strategy in the relation between a digital business strategy and financial performance. By classifying two capabilities (managerial capability and operational capability) that are needed to realize a digital business strategy, this study suggests that a sustainability strategy serves as a promoter in the relation between managerial capability and financial performance but inhibits the relation between operational capability and financial performance. Using a structured survey questionnaire, the data was collected from 280 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which operate in both the service and manufacturing industries in Finland. Four developed hypotheses were tested using the regression analysis to find the relationship between digital business strategy, sustainability strategy and financial performance. The findings suggest that a sustainability strategy serves as a promoter in the relation between managerial capability and financial performance but inhibits the relation between operational capability and financial performance. • The relations between a digital business strategy, a sustainability strategy and financial performance are studied. • Two capabilities (managerial capability and operational capability) are needed to realize a digital business strategy. • Sustainability strategy facilitates the relation between a digital business strategy and financial performance. • Sustainability strategy serves as a promoter in the relation between managerial capability and financial performance. • Sustainability strategy inhibits the relation between operational capability and financial performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]