Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bio-energy supply chains and stakeholders

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

What are the management challenges and opportunities of bio-energy chains for both running their business efficiently and effectively and fostering the relationships with most relevant external stakeholders? This question is approached by systematically reviewing papers at the interface of bio-energy and supply chain or logistics issues. The review conducted as content analysis is based on an analytic framework that conceives bio-energy chains between challenges and benefits of bio-energy production with simultaneous internal supply chain management and external stakeholder management needs. Smartly designed and operated bio-energy projects hold promising potentials of contributing to sustainable development by both mitigating climate change and strengthening adaptation capabilities. Our analysis distils specific strategies and success factors for tapping this potential on two levels: On a supply chain level, individually adapted and designed supply chain systems relying on trustful information exchange, cooperation and relational governance safeguard profitability while holding adverse ecological and social impacts of operation down; they allow, for instance, minimising costs and emissions, implementing new technologies, and coping with environmental uncertainties such as crop failures and volatile prices. On a stakeholder level, governments as key actors for designing the future legal framework of bio-energy are primary targets for lobbying activities of bio-energy representatives. Respective arguments may focus on economic development and job generation. By minimising its adverse impacts on society and eco-systems and by communicating these efforts credibly, bio-energy warrants its superiority over fossil energy systems. Involving NGOs and residents in early stages of bio-energy projects via transparent two-way communication considerably increase societal acceptance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

References of papers contained in the literature review

  • Abraham ER, Ramachandran S, Ramalingam V (2007) Biogas: can it be an important source of energy? Environ Sci Pollut Res 14(1):67–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Angelidaki I, Ellegaard L (2003) Codigestion of manure and organic wastes in centralized biogas plants—status and future trends. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 109(1–3):95–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayoub N, Martins R, Wang K, Seki H, Naka Y (2007) Two levels decision system for efficient planning and implementation of bioenergy production. Energy Convers Manage 48(3):709–723

    Google Scholar 

  • van Belle JF, Temmerman M, Schenkel Y (2003) Three level procurement of forest residues for power plant. Biomass Bioenergy 24(4):401–409

    Google Scholar 

  • Caputo AC, Palumbo M, Pelagagge PM, Scacchia F (2005) Economics of biomass energy utilization in combustion and gasification plants: effects of logistic variables. Biomass Bioenergy 28(1):35–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Caniëls MCJ, Romijn HA (2008) Supply chain development: insights from strategic niche management. Learn Organ 15(4):336–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Damen K, Faaij A (2006) A greenhouse gas balance of two existing international biomass import chains—The case of residue co-firing in a pulverised coal-fired power plant in the Netherlands. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 11(5–6):1023–1050

    Google Scholar 

  • Deswarte FEI, Clark JH, Wilson AJ, Hardy JJE, Marriott R, Chahal SP, Jackson C, Heslop G, Birkett M, Bruce TJ, Whiteley G (2007) Toward an integrated straw-based biorefinery. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefin 1(4):245–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunnett A, Adjiman C, Shah N (2007) Biomass to heat supply chains: applications of process optimization. Trans IChemE Part B 85:419–429

    Google Scholar 

  • Elghali L, Clift R, Sinclair P, Panoutsou C, Bauen A (2007) Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems. Energy Policy 35(12):6075–6083

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasol CM, Martínez S, Rigola M, Rieradevall J, Anton A, Carrasco J, Ciria P, Gabarrell X (2009) Feasibility assessment of poplar bioenergy systems in the Southern Europe. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 13(4):801–812

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghafoori E, Flynn PC (2007) Optimizing the logistics of anaerobic digestion of manure. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 137(1):625–637

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronalt M, Rauch P (2007) Designing a regional forest fuel supply network. Biomass Bioenergy 31(6):393–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustavsson L, Madlener R, Hoen HF, Jungmeier G, Karjalainen T, Klöhn S, Mahapatra K, Pohjola J, Solberg B, Spelter H (2006) The role of wood material for greenhouse gas mitigation. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 11(5–6):1097–1127

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamelinck CN, Suurs RAA, Faaij APC (2005) International bioenergy transport cost and energy balance. Biomass Bioenergy 29(2):114–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaton EA, Clifton-Brown J, Voigt TB, Jones MB, Long SP (2004) Miscanthus for renewable energy generation: European Union experience and projections for Illinois. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 9(4):433–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinimö J, Ojanen V, Kass T (2008) Views on the international market for energy biomass in 2020: results from a scenario study. Int J Energy Sect Manage 2(4):547–569

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Horst D (2008) Social enterprise and renewable energy—emerging initiatives and communities of practice. Soc Enterpr J 4(3):171–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Junginger M, Bolkesjø T, Bradley D, Dolzand P, Faaij A, Heinimö J, Hektor B, Leistad Ø, Ling E, Perry M, Piacente E, Rosillo-Calle F, Ryckmans Y, Schouwenberg PP, Solberg B, Trømborg E, da Silva WA, de Wit M (2008) Developments in international bioenergy trade. Biomass Bioenergy 32(8):717–729

    Google Scholar 

  • Jungmeier G, Spitzer J (2001) Greenhouse gas emissions of bioenergy from agriculture compared to fossil energy for heat and electricity supply. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 60(1–3):267–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Korhonen J, Niutanen V (2003) Material and energy flows of a local forest industry system in Finland. Sustain Dev 11(3):121–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Sokhansanj S, Flynn PC (2006) Development of a multicriteria assessment model for ranking biomass feedstock collection and transportation systems. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 129(1–3):71–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Leduc S, Schmid E, Obersteiner M, Riahi K (2009) Methanol production by gasification using a geographically explicit model. Biomass Bioenergy 33(5):745–751

    Google Scholar 

  • Londo M, Deurwaarder E (2007) Developments in EU biofuels policy related to sustainability issues: overview and outlook. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefin 1(4):292–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Mabee WE, Fraser EDG, McFarlane PN, Saddler JN (2006) Canadian biomass reserves for biorefining. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 129(1–3):22–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Mabee WE, Gregg DJ, Saddler JN (2005) Assessing the emerging biorefinery sector in Canada. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 123(1–3):765–778

    Google Scholar 

  • Madlener R, Bachhiesl M (2007) Socio-economic drivers of large urban biomass cogeneration: sustainable energy supply for Austria’s capital Vienna. Energy Policy 35(2):1075–1087

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield CA, Foster CD, Smith CT, Gan J, Fox S (2007) Opportunities, barriers, and strategies for forest bioenergy and bio-based product development in the Southern United States. Biomass Bioenergy 31(9):631–637

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick K, Kåberger T (2007) Key barriers for bioenergy in Europe: economic conditions, know-how and institutional capacity, and supply chain co-ordination. Biomass Bioenergy 31(7):443–452

    Google Scholar 

  • Möller B (2003) Least-cost allocation strategies for wood fuel supply for distributed generation in Denmark—A geographical study. Int J Sustainable Energy 23(4):187–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Möller B, Nielsen PS (2007) Analysing transport costs of Danish forest wood chip resources by means of continuous cost surfaces. Biomass Bioenergy 31(5):291–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Owens GM (2007) Analyzing impacts of bioenergy expansion in China using strategic environmental assessment. Manag Environ Qual Int J 18(4):396–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Perpiná C, Alfonso D, Pérez-Navarro A, Penalvo E, Vargas C, Cárdenas R (2009) Methodology based on Geographic Information Systems for biomass logistics and transport optimization. Renewable Energy 34(3):555–565

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry M, Rosillo-Calle F (2008) Recent trends and future opportunities in UK bioenergy: maximising biomass penetration in a centralised energy system. Biomass Bioenergy 32(8):688–701

    Google Scholar 

  • Pessoa-Jr A, Roberto IC, Menossi M, dos Santos RR, Filho SO, Penna TCV (2005) Perspectives on bioenergy and biotechnology in Brazil. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 121(1–3):59–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Puy N, Tàbara D, Molins JB, Almera JB, Rieradevall J (2008) Integrated assessment of forest bioenergy systems in Mediterranean basin areas: The case of Catalonia and the use of participatory IA-focus groups. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 12(5):1451–1464

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauch P (2007) SWOT analyses and SWOT strategy formulation for forest owner cooperations in Austria. Eur J For Res 126(3):413–420

    Google Scholar 

  • Searcy E, Flynn P, Ghafoori E, Kumar A (2007) The relative cost of biomass energy transport. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 137–140(1–12):639–659

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims REH, Venturi P (2004) All-year-round harvesting of short rotation coppice eucalyptus compared with the delivered costs of biomass from more conventional short season, harvesting systems. Biomass Bioenergy 26(1):27–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornley P, Rogers J, Huang Y (2008) Quantification of employment from biomass power plants. Renewable Energy 33(8):1922–1927

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods J, Hemstock S, Burnyeat W (2006) Bio-energy systems at the community level in the South Pacific: impacts & monitoring. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 11(2):469–500

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto H, Fujino J, Yamaji K (2001) Evaluation of bioenergy potential with a multi-regional global-land-use-and-energy model. Biomass Bioenergy 21(3):185–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshioka T, Aruga K, Nitami T, Kobayashi H, Sakai H (2005) Energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) balance of logging residues as alternative energy resources: system analysis based on the method of a life cycle inventory (LCI) analysis. J For Res 10(2):125–134

    Google Scholar 

Further references

  • Allen J, Browne M, Hunter A, Boyd J, Palmer H (1998) Logistics management and costs of biomass fuel supply. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 28(6):463–477

    Google Scholar 

  • Arshinder KA, Deshmukh SG (2008) Supply chain coordination: perspectives, empirical studies and research directions. Int J Prod Econ 115(2):316–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Berelson B (1952) Content analysis in communications research. The Free Press, Glencoe

    Google Scholar 

  • Berndes G, Hoogwijk M, van den Broek R (2003) The contribution of biomass in the future global energy supply: a review of 17 studies. Biomass Bioenergy 25(1):1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • von Blottnitz H, Curran MA (2007) A review of assessments conducted on bio-ethanol as a transportation fuel from a net energy, greenhouse gas, and environmental life cycle perspective. J Cleaner Prod 15(7):607–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson P, Berglund M (2006) Environmental systems analysis of biogas systems—Part I: fuel-cycle emissions. Biomass Bioenergy 30(5):469–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon JP, Achrol RS, Gundlach GT (2000) Contracts, norms, and plural form governance. J Acad Mark 28(2):180–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen IJ, Paulraj A (2004) Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs and measurements. J Oper Manage 22(2):119–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the cooperation: concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad Manage Rev 20(1):65–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschek S (2004) Inter-firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Manage Rev 15(1):53–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer J, Singh H (1998) The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad Manage Rev 23(4):660–679

    Google Scholar 

  • Ecosense (ed) (2007) Klimafaktor Biokraftstoff. Experten zur Nachhaltigkeitszertifizierung [Bioenergy and its impact on the climate: experts discuss certification ensuring sustainability criteria]. Schriftenreihe zu Nachhaltigkeit und CSR, Volume 1, 2007

  • Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manage Rev 14(4):532–550

    Google Scholar 

  • EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (ed) (2007) Risk Communication in Action—The tools of message mapping. EPA/625/R-06/012, August 2007. http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/625r06012/625r06012.pdf. Cited 20 August 2009

  • Faaij A (2006) Modern biomass conversion technologies. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 11(2):335–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Fynes B, de Búrca S, Mangan J (2008) The effect of relationship characteristics on relationship quality and performance. Int J Prod Econ 111(1):56–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink A (2005) Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman RE, Reed DL (1983) Stockholders and stakeholders: a new perspective on corporate governance. Calif Manage Rev 25(3):88–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbens-Leenes W, Hoekstra AY, van der Meer TH (2009) The water footprint of bioenergy. Proc Natl Acad Sci (PNAS) 106(25):10219–10223

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold S, Seuring S, Beske P (2010) Sustainable supply chain management and inter-organisational resources: a literature review. Corp Soc Responsibility Environ Manage 17(4):230–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Golder Associates / ECOFYS (2009) Benchmarks of Bioenergy Permitting Procedures in the European Union. Final Report, January 2009. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/bioenergy/doc/installations/ecofys_final_report_benchmark_bioenergy.pdf. Cited 4 May 2010

  • Hoogwijk M, Faaij A, Van Den Broek R, Berndes G, Gielen D, Turkenburg W (2003) Exploration of the ranges of the global potential of biomass for energy. Biomass Bioenergy 25(2):119–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult GTM, Ketchen DJ Jr, Arrfelt M (2007) Strategic supply chain management: improving performance through a culture of competitiveness and knowledge development. Strateg Manage J 28(10):1035–1052

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (International Energy Agency) (2009) Key world energy statistics 2009. www.iea.org/Textbase/nppdf/free/2009/key_stats_2009.pdf. Cited 28 September 2010

  • IEA Task 40 (2005) Sustainable International Bioenergy Trade, under the IEA Bio-energy Agreement. http://www.bioenergytrade.org. Cited 28 September 2010

  • Jauch LR, Osborn RN, Martin TN (1980) Structured content analysis of cases: a complementary method for organizational research. Acad Manage Rev 5(4):517–525

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones C, Hesterly WS, Borgatti SP (1997) A general theory of network governance: exchange conditions and social mechanism. Acad Manage Rev 22(4):911–946

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter RM (1994) Collaborative advantage: the art of alliances. Harv Bus Rev 72(4):96–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerckow B (2007) Competition between agricultural and renewable energy production. Q J Int Agr 46(4):333–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause DR, Ellram LM (1997) Critical elements of supplier development. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 3(1):21–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayring P (2000) Qualitative Content Analysis [28 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1(2) [Online Journal]. http://qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-e/2-00inhalt-e.htm. Cited 24 April 2009

  • Mayring P (2003) Qualitative Inhaltanalyse—Grundlagen und Techniken [Qualitative content analysis—basics and techniques]. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick K, Kåberger T (2005) Exploring a pioneering bioenergy system: The case of Enköping in Sweden. J Clean Prod 13(5):1003–1014

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer JT, Kahn KB (1995) A framework of logistics research. J Bus Logist 16(1):231–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer JT, DeWitt W, Keebler JS, Min S, Nix NW, Smith CD, Zacharia ZG (2001) Defining supply chain management. J Bus Logist 22(2):1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Meredith J (1993) Theory building through conceptual methods. Int J Oper Prod Manage 13(5):3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manage Rev 22(4):853–886

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan MJ, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman CJ (2002) Risk communication: A mental models approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Offermann R, Seidenberger T, Thrän D, Kaltschmitt M, Zinoviev S, Miertus S (2010) Assessment of global bioenergy potentials. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, doi:10.1007/s11027-010-9247-9

  • Poppo L, Zenger T (2002) Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strateg Manage J 23(8):707–725

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruf BM, Muralidhar K, Brown RM, Paul K (2001) An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: a stakeholder theory perspective. J Bus Ethics 32(2):143–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Searcy DL, Mentzer JT (2003) A framework for conducting and evaluating research. J Account Lit 22:130–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Seuring S (2009) The product-relationship-matrix as framework for strategic supply chain design based on operations theory. Int J Prod Econ 120(1):221–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Seuring S, Müller M (2008a) Core issues in sustainable supply chain management—a Delphi study. Bus Strategy Environ 17(8):455–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Seuring S, Müller M (2008b) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Cleaner Prod 16(15):1699–1710

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharfman MP, Shaft TM, Anex RP Jr (2009) The road to cooperative supply chain environmental management: trust and uncertainty among pro-active firms. Bus Strategy Environ 18(1):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Simatupang TM, Sridharan R (2005) An integrative framework of supply chain collaboration. Int J Logist Manag 16(2):257–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims REH (2003) Bioenergy to mitigate for climate change and meet the needs of society, the economy and the environment. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 8(4):349–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims RR, Brinkmann J (2003) Enron ethics (or: culture matters more than codes). J Bus Ethics 45(3):243–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Spekman RE, Kamauff JW Jr, Myhr N (1998) An empirical investigation into supply chain management: a perspective on partnerships. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag 28(8):630–650

    Google Scholar 

  • Stank TP, Crum MR, Arango M (1999) Benefits of interfirm coordination in food industry in supply chains. J Bus Logist 20(2):21–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann MS, Holm-Müller K (2010) Thuenen rings of biogas production—the effect of differences in transport costs of energy crops in the choice of renewable resources by biogas plants. Ger J Agric Econ 59(1):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Steurer R (2006) Mapping stakeholder theory anew: from the ‘stakeholder theory of the firm’ to three perspectives on business-society relations. Bus Strategy Environ 15(1):55–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Steurer R, Langer ME, Konrad A, Martinuzzi A (2005) Corporations, stakeholders and sustainable development I: a theoretical exploration of business-society relations. J Bus Ethics 61(3):263–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br J Manage 14(3):207–222

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs) (2006) Energy for sustainable development. United Nations, New York, http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/trends2006/energy.pdf. Cited 28 September 2010

  • Upham P, Shackley S (2006) Stakeholder opinion of a proposed 21.5 MWe biomass gasifier in Winkleigh, Devon: implications for bioenergy planning and policy. J Environ Plann Policy Manage 8(1):45–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Venema HD, Rehman IH (2007) Decentralized renewable energy and the climate change mitigation-adaptation nexus. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 12(5):875–900

    Google Scholar 

  • Wathne KH, Heide JB (2000) Opportunism in interfirm relationships: forms, outcomes, and solutions. J Mark 64(4):36–51

    Google Scholar 

  • WBGU (Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen [German Advisory Council on Global Change]) (ed) (2009) World in transition—Future bioenergy and sustainable land use. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (ed) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE (1989) Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Acad Manage Rev 14(4):516–531

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyman AK, Kelly CJ (1999) Risk perception and risk communication: a review of literature. Health & Safety Executive Books, Sheffield

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler D, Fabig H, Boele R (2002) Paradoxes and dilemmas for stakeholder responsive firms in the extractive sector: lessons from the case of Shell and the Ogoni. J Bus Ethics 39(3):297–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson O (1991) Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Adm Sci Q 36(2):269–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson O (1996) The mechanisms of governance. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu L, Beamon B (2006) Supply chain coordination and cooperation mechanisms: an attribute-based approach. J Supply Chain Manag 42(1):4–12

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Organic Agricultural Sciences, Department of International Management, University of Kassel, Steinstr. 19, 37213, Witzenhausen, Germany

    Stefan Gold

Authors
  1. Stefan Gold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Gold.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gold, S. Bio-energy supply chains and stakeholders. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 16, 439–462 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-010-9272-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-010-9272-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation