ArticleOpen research Europe2025
Insights from an extensive multi-step multi-stakeholder engagement in circular bio-based economy.
Article in Open research Europe, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Insights from an extensive multi-step multi-stakeholder engagement in circular bio-based economy.Open research Europe · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The goal of achieving a net-zero emissions European economy by 2050 requires a shift from linear fossil-based to circular bio-based systems. However, this transition relies on societal transformations, cutting-edge technologies, and multi-actor processes, which in turn require new economic frameworks and policy priorities. This study bridges the gap between literature and circular bio-based economy (CBBE) practice by presenting the results of stakeholder engagement activities where the barriers identified in the literature were discussed, ranked and validated. Methods: Adopting a three-step approach, including a focus group, interviews, and a final survey, we present a list of 31 barriers under six different clusters: cultural, economic, environmental, governance, structural, and technical hindering the transition to a CBBE. Results: The literature findings validated through stakeholder engagement underline that the transition requires structural and governance changes to steer the current economic model to a more circular and sustainable one. The most prominent barriers include: Consumer confusion and lack of trust due to generic sustainability claims and the proliferation of certification schemes and labels; High investment costs and risks for establishing circular bio-based industries; Concerns over (local) biomass feedstock availability within the limits of carrying capacity; Regulatory complexities and lack of support for the transition at the government level; Lack of harmonized waste collection systems and infrastructure and Incompatible and/or insufficient infrastructure capacity for EoL product collection, transportation, storage and management. Conclusions: Stakeholder involvement is a critical element of the transition to CBBE, to bridge the gap between scientific advancements and practical implementation. This study aims to identify the most prominent barriers to the CBBE transition with an extensive stakeholder engagement strategy with representatives from the construction, chemicals, plastics, and textile sectors. The findings in this study are expected to feed into the further development of policy recommendations to overcome these barriers in the transition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.