Critical review demonstrates the limitations of biomass substitution alone across global bio-based production systems, indicating a need for multidimensional socio-ecological assessment.
The sustainable bioeconomy is moving beyond its original role as a renewable-resource substitute for fossil production. That transition is occurring under simultaneous pressures from accelerating climate risk, transgressed Earth-system limits, biodiversity decline, resource insecurity, public-health impacts, rapid digitalization and geopolitical uncertainties. This critical review redefines the sustainable bioeconomy as a dynamic socio-ecological-technological system whose performance must be assessed across six interdependent pillars: climate mitigation and adaptation; circular and regenerative resource management; nature-positive development; human and planetary health; digital intelligence and responsible innovation; and socioeconomic resilience supported by adaptive governance. Recent high-impact evidence is synthesized to show why renewable biological origin alone is insufficient: bio-based pathways can lower emissions, recover nutrients and create new products, yet can also shift burdens to land, water, biodiversity, health, energy demand or vulnerable communities. This paper critically reviews complementary approaches relevant to bioeconomy assessment, including life-cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic assessment (TEA), corporate sustainability and Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) frameworks, Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) and Earth-system-based approaches, Planetary Health and One Health frameworks, and systems, multi-criteria, and digitally enabled assessment methods. This analysis provides operational questions and maps the complementary roles and blind spots of major assessment approaches. Building on this synthesis, an integrated assessment framework and research roadmap are proposed in which minimum environmental and social safeguards, life-cycle and economic performance, resilience testing, transparent governance and continuously updated evidence are combined. The resulting perspective shifts the objectives of the bioeconomy from maximizing biomass utilization to sustaining regenerative, low-carbon and equitable system performance aligned with population health under changing climatic and societal conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moradi-Lakeh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: