Page 47 - Biofuels for a More Sustainable Future

Biofuel transitions 41

dominant position of individual car transport fuelled with biofuels on the
detriment of collective transport or cycling. At the same time, the biomass
which was not used for producing biofuels could be used for other bioec-
onomy sectors, including packaging or most crucial food production, fol-
lowing the cascading approach adopted in integrated biorefineries.
Although food problems, as well as problems related to indirect land use
changes, GHGs emissions, and biodiversity loss are directly addressed
through regulations, standards, and policies, for example, in the form of
obligatory emissions reductions and bans on production of biomass in cer-
tain natural land in the EU and the United States, the development of holis-
tic food-energy or bioeconomy policies seems to be still insufficient. In the
remainder of this section we will broaden the concepts of comprehensive
bioeconomy, climate, and sustainability policies, focusing on their relations
to economic growth and global challenges.
The analysis developed so far seems to confirm the suggestion of Malik
et al. (2016) concerning the insufficient role of technological improvements
to combat CO 2 emissions. As a consequence, policy actions should focus
also on the demand side. This is indeed the case for biofuels, in particular,
and bioeconomy policy, in general. One way to address environmental
problems could be the adoption of “sufficiency” principle in resource con-
sumption and thus turning to economic models that go beyond GDP
growth, such as degrowth or steady-state economy (O’Neill et al., 2018,
p. 92).
However, as observed by Raftery et al. (2017, p. 3) “policies to reduce
GDP per capita seem unlikely.” In addition, Malik et al. (2016, p. G) stated
that “it is not only difficult but also impossible to implement policies for
interfering in people’s freedom of choice, and restraining their consump-
tion, particularly in liberal-democratic societies of most developed nations.”
Nevertheless, justifying inappropriate or insufficient policies and regulations
with the concept of “freedom of choice” could lead to over-blame con-
sumers for environmental degradation, releasing at the same time policy-
makers and other important stakeholders from their responsibilities in main-
taining the unsustainable status quo (Walker, 2015, pp. 55–56; Shove et al.,
2012, p. 164; Evans, 2011). This clash of responsibilities increases the risk for
behaviors that undermine human well-being, while favoring business
models that promote environmentally and socially unsustainable activities.
Therefore we argue that scientists and policy-makers should promote
deeper—rather than purely technological—societal changes. For instance,
in the case of biofuels, along with the development of sustainability