224 E. J. Iversen et al.
R&D- oriented service firms, was also included, echoing our original focus on
R&D expenditure described above (an overlap of 14 entities).
The purpose of the exercise was not to perform a representative survey of
activity in the circular bioeconomy (cf. Biosmart) but to get a better idea of
how biomass and organic waste is used by different entities in different
markets. The instrument was therefore addressed to entities in the NIoBE
population to increase the likelihood that respondents in fact hosted (or
planned) activities involving such organic resources. We go on now to briefly
introduce the design of the non- probabilistic sample procedure and of the
questionnaire, before finishing by reviewing some of the results. A more indepth account of the data collection process can be found in a separate report
by the TIK Centre at the University of Oslo (Normann, 2018).
11.3.3.1 Approach and population
A questionnaire was used to collect data about the extent and orientation of
organic waste activities, the sources of feedstock used, the distribution of
innovation in different contexts and other questions such as barriers to
innovation activities or the importance of collaboration. In this sense, the
instrument modelled some of its questions on items in the Community
Innovation Survey (CIS), as well as adding in other questions (about feedstocks, etc.).
The questionnaire consisted of nine sets of questions, including a control
question about current activities by type of organic waste. The sections collected information about the types of feedstocks, technology and knowledge
sources, drivers and barriers, the importance of public measures, costing and
financing relevant activities, collaboration, innovation activities, as well as
generic information about the firm. A pilot round was used to calibrate the
questionnaire before a new version was sent to a population of 304 entities.
The survey was sent by email. The relevant contact points at the individual
entities were identified in advance either by accessing publicly available
information (website) or by phoning the entity.
A census- type survey approach was applied to collect data in this mapping
exercise. Given the noted problems when identifying target firms, data collection utilised the NIoBE dataset (above) as a population frame for the Norwegian circular bioeconomy. The sample for this exercise included about
12% of the total NIOBE data current at the time of sampling. The design for
this subpopulation was based on a number of clear criteria. Selection criteria
included the following:
1 the entity was a private sector firm;
2 the firm was linked to at least one of the six targeted activities, namely
(i) forestry, (ii) aquaculture and seafood processing, (iii) beer brewing,
(iv) meat processing, (v) dairy and (vi) organic waste processing; or a
seventh category consisting of R&D- oriented service firms;
R&D- oriented service firms, was also included, echoing our original focus on
R&D expenditure described above (an overlap of 14 entities).
The purpose of the exercise was not to perform a representative survey of
activity in the circular bioeconomy (cf. Biosmart) but to get a better idea of
how biomass and organic waste is used by different entities in different
markets. The instrument was therefore addressed to entities in the NIoBE
population to increase the likelihood that respondents in fact hosted (or
planned) activities involving such organic resources. We go on now to briefly
introduce the design of the non- probabilistic sample procedure and of the
questionnaire, before finishing by reviewing some of the results. A more indepth account of the data collection process can be found in a separate report
by the TIK Centre at the University of Oslo (Normann, 2018).
11.3.3.1 Approach and population
A questionnaire was used to collect data about the extent and orientation of
organic waste activities, the sources of feedstock used, the distribution of
innovation in different contexts and other questions such as barriers to
innovation activities or the importance of collaboration. In this sense, the
instrument modelled some of its questions on items in the Community
Innovation Survey (CIS), as well as adding in other questions (about feedstocks, etc.).
The questionnaire consisted of nine sets of questions, including a control
question about current activities by type of organic waste. The sections collected information about the types of feedstocks, technology and knowledge
sources, drivers and barriers, the importance of public measures, costing and
financing relevant activities, collaboration, innovation activities, as well as
generic information about the firm. A pilot round was used to calibrate the
questionnaire before a new version was sent to a population of 304 entities.
The survey was sent by email. The relevant contact points at the individual
entities were identified in advance either by accessing publicly available
information (website) or by phoning the entity.
A census- type survey approach was applied to collect data in this mapping
exercise. Given the noted problems when identifying target firms, data collection utilised the NIoBE dataset (above) as a population frame for the Norwegian circular bioeconomy. The sample for this exercise included about
12% of the total NIOBE data current at the time of sampling. The design for
this subpopulation was based on a number of clear criteria. Selection criteria
included the following:
1 the entity was a private sector firm;
2 the firm was linked to at least one of the six targeted activities, namely
(i) forestry, (ii) aquaculture and seafood processing, (iii) beer brewing,
(iv) meat processing, (v) dairy and (vi) organic waste processing; or a
seventh category consisting of R&D- oriented service firms;