Sustainable Capital? The Neoliberalization of Nature and Knowledge in the European “Knowledge-based Bio-economy”

By Kean Birch, Les Levidow, T. Papaioannou. 2010

225 citations recorded by the source corpus.

As an EU policy agenda, the “knowledge-based bio-economy” (KBBE) emphasizes bio-technoscience as the means to reconcile environmental and economic sustainability. This frames the sustainability problem as an inefficiency to be overcome through a techno-knowledge fix. Here ecological sustainability means a benign eco-efficient productivity using resources which are renewable, reproducible and therefore sustainable. The KBBE narrative has been elaborated by European Technology Platforms in the agri-food-forestry-biofuels sectors, whose proposals shape research priorities. These inform policy agendas for the neoliberalization of both nature and knowledge, especially through intellectual property. In these ways, the KBBE can be understood as a new political-economic strategy for sustainable capital. This strategy invests great expectations for unlocking the productive potential of natural resources through a techno-knowledge fix. Although eco-efficiency is sometimes equated with biological productivity, commercial success will be dependent upon new combinations of “living” and “dead” labour.

Subfields: General Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Global and Planetary Change, Physiology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f6e82126bb1c78f276e9d106c8431380d8cb683f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

1. R. Meyer
2. K. McCormick
3. T. Heimann
4. Niina Kautto
5. Les Levidow
6. Rick Bosman
7. Jan Rotmans
8. E. Gawel

In Global and Planetary Change

1. T. Heimann
2. K. McCormick
3. Niina Kautto
4. Les Levidow
5. P. McMichael
6. Rick Bosman
7. R. Meyer
8. Simon Springer

In Physiology

1. K. McCormick
2. T. Heimann
3. Niina Kautto
4. R. Meyer
5. Les Levidow
6. D. Tyfield
7. Kean Birch

Citations in the corpus

• EU criteria for sustainable biofuels: accounting for carbon, depoliticising plunder (2013, background): “The KBBE shapes policy agendas for the neoliberalization of both nature and knowledge, especially through R&D agendas prioritising intellectual property (Birch et al., 2010).”
• A Path Transition Towards a Bioeconomy—The Crucial Role of Sustainability (2019, background): “7), own translation) for the “neoliberalization of nature” [41], which secures a “regime of accumulation against major sociopolitical and ecological challenges” [42].”
• The Handbook of Neoliberalism (2016, background): “Together with medical or ‘red’ biotech, this has also generated official discourses of ‘knowledge-based bio-economies’ as instances of the neoliberal fetishization of innovation (Birch et al. 2010).”
• Transition Governance towards a Bioeconomy: A Comparison of Finland and The Netherlands (2016, background): “The case for the bioeconomy is made by claiming that it could contribute to tackling persistent problems of food security, climate change and resource dependencies [14], but it is also clear that a number of supporters see the potential for exploiting the economic opportunities of biotechnology [21]”
• The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview (2013, methodology): “As to biorefineries, they are seen as vehicles of the dominant vision that connect agriculture and energy sectors with private interests; an integrated biorefinery therefore exemplifies a ―techno-knowledge fix‖ [44].”
• A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices (2017, background): “[29] and our own analysis tends to support this view.”
• The land grab and corporate food regime restructuring (2012, background): “In particular, it is perhaps the clearest manifestation of the pressing value question surrounding land, driven by a ‘neoliberalization of nature’ (Birch et al. 2010).”
• Theorizing the Bioeconomy (2013, background): “…Hilgartner 2007), the very concept of the bioeconomy is not simply a way to anticipate or conceptualize future socioeconomic developments, it is also an attempt to shape these developments, drive them forward, and embed them in wider institutions (see also Birch, Levidow, and Papaioannou 2010).”
• Visions of Sustainability in Bioeconomy Research (2014, unknown): “Others review the role of sustainability in policy documents regarding the bioeconomy [7–9].”
• A Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Approach to Regional Innovation Systems in the Transformation to a Forestry-Based Bioeconomy (2016, background): “It has been argued that bioeconomy is just another buzzword for sustainable development and a Bgreening of the economy^ (see e.g. Birch et al. 2010; Birch 2012).”
• Bioeconomy and SDGs: Does the Bioeconomy Support the Achievement of the SDGs? (2019, methodology): “(2008); Danielsen et al. (2009); Landis et al. (2008); Smolker (2008); OECD (2009); Stein (2010); Tilman et al. (2009); Blakeney (2011); Meenakshi et al. (2010); Banward (2011); Chappell & LaValle (2011), Varshney et al.”
• Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates (2017, background): “This approach was characterised as a “techno-fix” [55,102].”