Abstract
Scenarios and models are frequently used tools to describe the various elements of the bioeconomy system and possible developments in the future and to analyse them in terms of their impact on society, the economy and the environment. Scenarios offer a methodological approach to the participatory development of future images, both qualitatively in the form of narratives and quantitatively in the form of numerical data. Within this framework, models play a central role in the quantitative description of scenarios. They can represent individual elements of the bioeconomy (e.g. economy, land use, environment), but also the complex interactions between these elements. Examples of the current application of scenarios and models to questions of shaping a sustainable bioeconomy are presented, and requirements for the further development and refinement of these tools are formulated.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
For more information see 7 https://www.isi.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/isi/dokumente/ccv/2018/Zukunftsbilder_BioKompass_Langfassung.pdf
References
Aguiar, A., Narayanan, B., & McDougall, R. (2016). An overview of the GTAP 9 data base. Journal of Global Economic Analysis, 1(1), 181–208.
Alcamo, J. (2008). Chapter six the SAS approach: Combining qualitative and quantitative knowledge in environmental scenarios. Developments in Integrated Environmental Assessment, 2, 123–150.
Alkemade, R., Van Oorschot, M., Miles, L., Nellemann, C., Bakkenes, M., & ten Brink, B. (2009). GLOBIO3: A framework to investigate options for reducing global terrestrial biodiversity loss. Ecosystems. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-009-9229-5
An, L. (2012). Modeling human decisions in coupled human and natural systems: Review of agent-based models. Ecological Modelling, 229, 25–36.
Anderson, T. R., Hawkins, E., & Jones, P. D. (2016). CO2, the greenhouse effect and global warming: From the pioneering work of Arrhenius and Callendar to today’s earth system models. Endeavour. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.endeavour.2016.07.002
Arnold, J. G., Moriasi, D. N., Gassman, P. W., Abbaspour, K. C., White, M. J., Srinivasan, R., Santhi, C., Harmel, D., van Griensven, A., van Liew, M. W., Kannan, N., & Jha, M. K. (2012). SWAT: Model use, calibration, and validation. Transactions of the ASABE, 55(4), 1491–1508.
Banse, M., Zander, K., Babayan, T., Bringezu, S., Dammer, L., Egenolf, V., Göpel, J., Haufe, H., Hempel, C., Hüfner, R., Millinger, M., Morland, C., Musonda, F., Partanen, A., Piotrowski, S., Schaldach, R., Schier, F., Schüngel, J., Sturm, N., Thrän, D., Weimar, H., Wilde, A., Will, S. (2020). Eine Biobasierte Zukunft in Deutschland - Szenarien und Gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen. Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut, Braunschweig. https://www.thuenen.de/media/institute/ma/Downloads/BEPASO-Broschuere.pdf. Accessed 01 Sept 2019.
Bchir, H., Decreux, Y., Guérin, J. L., & Jean, S. (2002). MIRAGE, a computable general equilibrium model for trade policy analysis. CEPII. https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/1256.pdf. Accessed 01 Sept 2019.
Bondeau, A., Smith, P. C., Zaehle, S., Schaphoff, S., Lucht, W., Cramer, W., Gerten, D., Lotze-Campen, H., Müller, C., Reichstein, M., & Smith, B. (2007). Modelling the role of agriculture for the 20th century global terrestrial carbon balance. Global Change Biology, 13(3), 679–706.
Bossel, H. (1994). Modellbildung und Simulation: Konzepte, Verfahren und Modelle zum Verhalten dynamischer Systeme; ein Lehr-und Arbeitsbuch. Vieweg.
Bringezu, S., Distelkamp, M., Lutz, C., Wimmer, F., Schaldach, R., Hennenberg, K. J., Böttcher, H., & Egenolf, V. (2021). Environmental and socioeconomic footprints of the German bioeconomy. Nature Sustainability, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00725-3
Egenolf, V., & Bringezu, S. (2019). Conceptualization of an indicator system for assessing the sustainability of the bioeconomy. Sustainability, 11(2), 443.
Eggleston, S., Buendia, L., Miwa, K., Ngara, T., & Tanabe, K. (2006). Intergovernmental panel on climate change guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC Secretariat.
Hamilton, S. H., ElSawah, S., Guillaume, J. H. A., Jakeman, A. J., & Pierce, S. A. (2015). Integrated assessment and modelling: Overview and synthesis of salient dimensions. Environmental Modelling and Software. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.12.005
Havlík, P., Schneider, U. A., Schmid, E., Böttcher, H., Fritz, S., Skalský, R., Aoki, K., De Cara, S., Kindermann, G., Kraxner, F., Leduc, S., McCallum, I., Mosnier, A., Sauer, T., & Obersteiner, M. (2011). Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets. Energy Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.030 .
Hudson, L. N., Newbold, T., Contu, S., Hill, S. L. L., Lysenko, I., De Palma, A., … Purvis, A. (2014). The PREDICTS database: A global database of how local terrestrial biodiversity responds to human impacts. Ecology and Evolution, 4(24), 4701–4735.
Hurrell, J. W., Holland, M. M., Gent, P. R., Ghan, S., Kay, J. E., Kushner, P. J., … Marshall, S. (2013). The community earth system model: A framework for collaborative research. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 94(9), 1339–1360.
Jordan, M., Lenz, V., Millinger, M., Oehmichen, K., & Thrän, D. (2019). Future competitive bioenergy technologies in the German heat sector: Findings from an economic optimization approach. Energy, 189, art. 116194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116194
Kosow, H., & Gaßner, R. (2008). Methods of future and scenario analysis: Overview, assessment, and selection criteria. DIE Studies 39. Bonn: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/19366 . Accessed 01 Sept 2019.
Laborde, D., & Valin, H. (2012). Modeling land-use changes in a global CGE: Assessing the EU biofuel mandates with the MIRAGE-BioF model. Climate Change Economics, 3(03), 1250017.
Lapola, D. M., Schaldach, R., Alcamo, J., Bondeau, A., Koch, J., Koelking, C., & Priess, J. A. (2010). Indirect land-use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(8), 3388–3393.
Lotze-Campen, H., Müller, C., Bondeau, A., Rost, S., Popp, A., & Lucht, W. (2008). Global food demand, productivity growth, and the scarcity of land and water resources: A spatially explicit mathematical programming approach. Agricultural Economics, 39(3), 325–338.
Mathijs, E., Brunori, G., Carus, M., Griffon, M., Last, L., Gill, M., Koljonen, M., Lehoczky, OI, & Potthast, A. (2015). Sustainable agriculture, forerstry and fisheries in the bioeconomy – A challenge for Europe. Standing Committee on Agricultural Research 4th Foresight Exercise.
Matthews, R. B., Gilbert, N. G., Roach, A., Polhill, J. G., & Gotts, N. M. (2007). Agent-based land-use models: A review of applications. Landscape Ecology, 22(10), 1447–1459.
McGuffie, K., & Henderson-Sellers, A. (2005). A climate modelling primer. Wiley.
Mekonnen, M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2011). National water footprint accounts: The green, blue and grey water footprint of production and consumption. Value of water research report No. 50. Delft: Unesco-IHE Institute for Water Education. https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/5146137/Report50-NationalWaterFootprints-Vol1.pdf . Accessed 1 Sept.2019.
Miller, S. A., Landis, A. E., Theis, T. L., & Reich, R. A. (2007). A comparative life cycle assessment of petroleum and soybean-based lubricants. Environmental Science and Technology, 41(11), 4143–4149.
Newbold, T., Hudson, L. N., Hill, S. L., Contu, S., Lysenko, I., Senior, R. A., … Purvis, A. (2015). Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature, 520(7545), 45–50.
Nilsson, M., & Costanza, R. (2015). Overall framework for the sustainable development goals. In A.-S. Stevance (Ed.), Review of targets for the sustainable development goals: The science perspective (pp. 7–12). International Council for Science (ICSU), International Social Science Council (ISSC).
O’Brien, M., Schütz, H., & Bringezu, S. (2015). The land footprint of the EU bioeconomy: Monitoring tools. Gaps and needs. Land Use Policy, 47, 235–246.
O’Brien, M., Wechsler, D., Bringezu, S., & Schaldach, R. (2017). Toward a systemic monitoring of the European bioeconomy: Gaps, needs and the integration of sustainability indicators and targets for global land use. Land Use Policy, 66, 162–171.
Rosenzweig, C., Elliott, J., Deryng, D., Ruane, A. C., Müller, C., Arneth, A., … Jones, J. W. (2014). Assessing agricultural risks of climate change in the 21st century in a global gridded crop model intercomparison. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(9), 3268–3273.
Rotmans, J., & van Asselt, M. B. A. (2001). Uncertainty management in integrated assessment modeling: Towards a pluralistic approach. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 69(2), 101–130.
Schaldach, R., & Priess, J. A. (2008). Integrated models of the land system: A review of modelling approaches on the regional to global scale. Living Reviews in Landscape Research, 1, 1.
Schaldach, R., Alcamo, J., Koch, J., Kölking, C., Lapola, D. M., Schüngel, J., & Priess, J. A. (2011). An integrated approach to modelling land-use change on continental and global scales. Environmental Modelling and Software, 26(8), 1041–1051.
Stanton, E. A., Ackerman, F., & Kartha, S. (2009). Inside the integrated assessment models: Four issues in climate economics. Climate and Development, 1(2), 166–184.
Stehfest, E., van Vuuren, D., Kram, T., & Bouwman, L. (Eds.). (2014). Integrated assessment of global environmental change with IMAGE 3.0: Model description and policy applications. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
Thrän, D., Arendt, O., Banse, M., Braun, J., Fritsche, U., Gärtner, S., Hennenberg, K. J., Hünneke, K., Millinger, M., Ponitka, J., Rettenmaier, N., Schaldach, R., Schüngel, J., Wern, B., & Wolf, V. (2017). Strategy elements for a sustainable bioenergy policy based on scenarios and systems modeling: Germany as example. Chemical Engineering and Technology, 40(2), 211–226.
Tukker, A., Bulavskaya, T., Giljum, S., de Koning, A., Lutter, S., Simas, M., Stadler, K., & Wood, R. (2016). Environmental and resource footprints in a global context: Europe’s structural deficit in resource endowments. Global Environmental Change, 40, 171–181.
Uusitalo, L., Lehikoinen, A., Helle, I., & Myrberg, K. (2015). An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support. Environmental Modelling and Software, 63, 24–31.
Woltjer, G. B., & Kuiper, M. H. (2014). The MAGNET model: Module description (S. 14–057). Wageningen: LEI Wageningen University & Research Centre, LEI Report.
van Asselen, S., & Verburg, P. H. (2013). Land cover change or land-use intensification: Simulating land system change with a global-scale land change model. Global Change Biology, 19(12), 3648–3667.
Zah, R., Faist, M., Reinhard, J., & Birchmeier, D. (2009). Standardized and simplified life-cycle assessment (LCA) as a driver for more sustainable biofuels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(1), 102–105.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schaldach, R., Thrän, D. (2022). Scenarios and Models for the Design of a Sustainable Bioeconomy. In: Thrän, D., Moesenfechtel, U. (eds) The bioeconomy system. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-64415-7_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-64415-7_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-64414-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-64415-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)