Conclusions 299
of firm organisations, which constitute a fertile ground where an employee’s
idea about waste valorisation can arise and develop? Systematic qualitative
research on this subject could shed light on how to bring and keep sidestreams within the set of a firm’s core strategic resources. Second, a better
understanding is needed of how inter- firm governance leads to waste valorisation. How do boards of directors change following waste valorisation strategies? Can we identify recurrent patterns in the evolution of senior
management and of ownership, as coupled with intersectoral flows of sidestreams? Given the usually public nature of data describing ownership and top
management, quantitative analyses could provide precise answers to the questions above.
Different solutions may be adopted in accordance with different types of
firm management and of industry structure. The fact that the valorisation of
waste from a firm often requires coordination with other activities that do not
normally pertain to the firm’s industry makes it necessary to investigate specific types of innovation, and in particular of organisational innovation.
Moreover, research is needed to understand how the new value assigned to
waste can be recognised by markets and be translated into firm profits.
15.5 Policy and regulation of waste valorisation
To improve the sustainability and economic viability of the bioeconomy,
policymakers should try to both increase and improve the use of organic waste
streams. We have seen in this book that waste streams in many sectors are put
to poor use from both an economic and sustainability perspective. In Part II,
we have, in contrast, seen that most organic waste streams were put to some
sort of use: urban food waste was incinerated or turned into biogas, acid whey
and farmers’ spent grain were used as animal feed and waste from on- shore
aquaculture operations was used as fertiliser. Nevertheless, most of these waste
streams could have been used more effectively still. Food waste could have
been prevented or the food could have been reused, the acid whey and
farmers’ spent grain could have been used in the production of food additives
and pharmaceuticals and the sludge from aquaculture could have been used to
produce omega- 3 fatty acids (see Chapters 5, 6, 8 and 9). These alternative
applications have the potential for greater economic returns and improved
sustainability. Policymakers should therefore focus as much on improving as on
increasing the utilisation of organic waste. Nevertheless, policymakers should
also be aware that achieving greater economic returns on some residual
streams can result in uses that are less sustainable.
Policymakers should consider three main pitfalls when they attempt to
govern and regulate the bioeconomy. First, they should be aware that lockins can easily arise from investments in organisational capabilities and physical
infrastructure and prevent further improvements in sustainability. The case
study on urban organic waste, in Chapter 5, illustrated how investments in
physical infrastructure – such as optical sorting plants, biogas facilities and
of firm organisations, which constitute a fertile ground where an employee’s
idea about waste valorisation can arise and develop? Systematic qualitative
research on this subject could shed light on how to bring and keep sidestreams within the set of a firm’s core strategic resources. Second, a better
understanding is needed of how inter- firm governance leads to waste valorisation. How do boards of directors change following waste valorisation strategies? Can we identify recurrent patterns in the evolution of senior
management and of ownership, as coupled with intersectoral flows of sidestreams? Given the usually public nature of data describing ownership and top
management, quantitative analyses could provide precise answers to the questions above.
Different solutions may be adopted in accordance with different types of
firm management and of industry structure. The fact that the valorisation of
waste from a firm often requires coordination with other activities that do not
normally pertain to the firm’s industry makes it necessary to investigate specific types of innovation, and in particular of organisational innovation.
Moreover, research is needed to understand how the new value assigned to
waste can be recognised by markets and be translated into firm profits.
15.5 Policy and regulation of waste valorisation
To improve the sustainability and economic viability of the bioeconomy,
policymakers should try to both increase and improve the use of organic waste
streams. We have seen in this book that waste streams in many sectors are put
to poor use from both an economic and sustainability perspective. In Part II,
we have, in contrast, seen that most organic waste streams were put to some
sort of use: urban food waste was incinerated or turned into biogas, acid whey
and farmers’ spent grain were used as animal feed and waste from on- shore
aquaculture operations was used as fertiliser. Nevertheless, most of these waste
streams could have been used more effectively still. Food waste could have
been prevented or the food could have been reused, the acid whey and
farmers’ spent grain could have been used in the production of food additives
and pharmaceuticals and the sludge from aquaculture could have been used to
produce omega- 3 fatty acids (see Chapters 5, 6, 8 and 9). These alternative
applications have the potential for greater economic returns and improved
sustainability. Policymakers should therefore focus as much on improving as on
increasing the utilisation of organic waste. Nevertheless, policymakers should
also be aware that achieving greater economic returns on some residual
streams can result in uses that are less sustainable.
Policymakers should consider three main pitfalls when they attempt to
govern and regulate the bioeconomy. First, they should be aware that lockins can easily arise from investments in organisational capabilities and physical
infrastructure and prevent further improvements in sustainability. The case
study on urban organic waste, in Chapter 5, illustrated how investments in
physical infrastructure – such as optical sorting plants, biogas facilities and