Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
biological research, among other things, to decrease US dependence on petro-
leum-based products while increasing domestic manufacturing of biobased
fuels and chemicals, and the need for the US to capitalise on developments in
the sector as an economic imperative. Following this, in April 2012 the
Whitehouse published its National Bioeconomy Blueprint [2]. This was
designed to encourage the development of the bioeconomy for what was seen
as its ability to harness innovation in the biological sciences to drive economic
growth, particularly in rural America, while delivering in areas of public good.
The blueprint focus on high-tech biotechnology applications, a sector currently
valued at $100 billion. Here there is less emphasis on reducing GHG emissions
(although biofuels do feature), and more on harnessing the value proposition
offered by exploiting and nurturing leading-edge technology and innovation in
biological sciences. Key actions include: supporting research and development
(R&D) investments in underpinning science and technology areas; facilitating
the transition from research to implementation; reducing barriers (particularly
regulatory barriers and development costs); knowledge building and training
development in higher education establishments; the identification of, and
support for, public-private partnerships; and pre-competitive collaborations to
encourage joint working.
There is clearly a lot of common ground between the US and EU objectives that
stem from such initiatives, and these reflect the issues commonly afflicting
developing technologies where risks are high for investors looking at new and
relatively unproven technologies and recipient markets may need considerable
education and development to stimulate interest.
This is the scenario of classic 'market failure' that allows governments to intervene
to assist, support and nurture business and technology over the early stages of
development, effectively providing market support, diminishing as technologies
become established and/or technology costs fall and markets develop naturally.
Many different types of initiatives can flow from such strategies, for example
ring fencing of funding within programmes for research and innovation (e.g.
Horizon 2010 in Section 8.5.1.1) or measures to shape public purchasing decisions
(e.g. BioPreferred Programme in Section 8.4.2.1).
Governments have the ability to create new markets though policy actions in
support of strategic policy objectives. The development of biofuel and biobased
heat and power markets are obvious examples; they would not exist at such scales
without efforts to reduce the cost differential between renewable and fossil options
or to mandate the use of renewable materials and fuels, undertaken as part of a
package of measures to reduce GHG emissions.
8.4 Direct Measures
This section identifies the rationale adopted for such positions and the types of
policy measures that can and have been adopted to support the development of
biobased chemical, materials and energy.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search