Meanwhile, I have been noticing the development of another hot topic,
which is the bioeconomy. Back in April, the US published its National BioEconomy Blueprint which
according to the White House, has two main purposes – “to lay out
strategic objectives that will help realize the full potential of the U.S.
bioeconomy and to highlight early achievements toward those objectives”.
In Brussels, the European Commission proposed its
Bioeconomy Strategy – Innovating for
Sustainable Growth: a Bioeconomy for Europe, which emphasizes the need for Europe
to transition to a post-petroleum society. Its aim is to “pave the way to a more innovative, resource efficient and competitive
society that reconciles food security with the sustainable use of renewable
resources for industrial purposes, while ensuring environmental protection”.
In China, the country has placed bioeconomy as one of
its key development priorities and in its 12th Five-Year Plan, biotechnology has
been included as one of China’s seven strategic emerging industries.
And in Malaysia, we have what’s called the Bioeconomy
Initiative Malaysia (BIM), which is expected to produce new ideas and methods
of utilizing renewable energy under the support of the National Biotech Policy.
It seems that the world is all abuzz over this
emerging engine of growth and countries are racing to become the global leader
in biotechnology.
So what is the bioeconomy and why is it given so much attention these days?
According to the United Nations Conference on
Sustainable Development’s (UNCSD) Rio +20 event on Bio-economy and Development,
“the functioning of today’s economic
system essentially depends on non-renewable resources, and cannot be therefore
sustained forever, it cannot be eternal…”
There is a steady realization that the conventional model
of unlimited growth cannot be sustainable because it does not take into account
that the energy and natural resources we are currently dependent on are finite.
Continuing to intensely exploit these resources could lead to what is described
as “an alteration of the biological
balances, up to ecologic and economic rejection".
 |
| Source: The European Bioeconomy in 2030: Delivering Sustainable Growth byAddressing the Grand Societal Challenges |
In this regard, the bioeconomy presents an alternative solution that could harness innovation, contribute to economic growth and most importantly produce beneficial outcomes for society and the environment.
Also referred to as the “green economy” or “biotechonomy”, the bioeconomy has been defined and described in several different ways. The OECD stated:
“From a broad economic perspective, the bioeconomy refers to the set of economic activities relating to the invention, development, production and use of biological products and processes”.
In the US, the emphasis on the bioeconomy is on “harnessing biological research innovations to meet national challenges in health, food, energy, and the environment”, whereas in the EU a bioeconomy “encompasses the production of renewable biological resources and the conversion of these resources and waste streams into value added products, such as food, feed, bio-based products and bioenergy”.
The UNCSD explains that “Bio-economy is an environmental and economic theory and practice by which you can proceed towards a new ecological and social development.” Thus, it is understood that the basic concept of the bioeconomy is to turn biomass into marketable goods and services such as biofuels, bioplastics, bioenergy, and so on.
According to Dato’ Dr Mohd Nazlee Kamal, CEO of the Malaysian Biotechnology Corporation (BiotechCorp), the biotechnology industry contributes roughly 2.2% towards Malaysia’s GDP and about $5.4bn in investments for private and public spending. The Chairman of BiotechCorp, Dato’ Dr Zakri Abdul Hamid, explained “instead of an economy dependent on the planet's limited supply of non-renewable resources such as petroleum and coal, we could convert plant material, municipal and livestock waste and biomass into electricity, fuels, plastics and the basic components of chemical processes”.
 |
| Source: New Straits Times |
Skepticism were expressed by the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC), in The New Biomassters - Synthetic Biology and The Next Assault on Biodiversity and Livelihoods, as it argues that “what’s behind the dash to biomass is not high ideals but the calculated interest of the corporate bottom line. Far from changing to a new economy, the biomass transition describes the retooling of the same old economy of production, consumption, capital accumulation, and exploitation – only now a new source of carbon is being plundered to keep the industrial machines going".
The International Food Policy Research Institute (in their paper on Water and Food in the Bio-economy: Challenges and Opportunities for Development) also stated concerns with regard to the impact of the bioeconomy on water and land resources in relation to biofuel production, reporting that "the water requirement for energy derived from biomass is quite large—about 70 to 400 times greater than other energy carriers such as fossil fuels, wind and solar (Gerben-Leenes et al. 2008 as quoted in DeFraiture and Berndes 2009)".
Hence, while it appears that the bioeconomy could contribute to major socio-economic developments, such as improving health outcomes, boosting the productivity of agriculture and industrial processes, and enhancing environmental sustainability, harnessing its potential will require coordinated policy action by governments, collaborative business models for knowledge-sharing, strategic investments in research, active citizen participation, and effective dialogue between all actors involved in the transition. Without proper regulation and implementation, the bioeconomy could bring future risks and further exacerbate social and environmental problems.
Nice article. Admire that.
ReplyDeleteThank you. Appreciate it. :)
ReplyDelete