50 Years of Innovation In Sweden’s Forest Based Bioeconomy

Philipp Jonas Kreutzer

2024-10-16

Forest-Based Bioeconomy

An economic system that uses (forest-based) biomass instead of fossil-based resources for fuel and material input.

RQ

1. How innovative is the Swedish forest-based bioeconomy?

2. What explains the patterns of innovation in the forest-based bioeconomy?

Data of Significant Swedish Innovations, Matched Public Funding Applications & Published PhD Theses

Significant Swedish Innovations

~ 5000 unique innovations

Literature-Based Innovation Output method

from 15 independent trade journals (Sjöö et al., 2014)

Linked to patents Taalbi & Martynovich (2024)

Linked to public funding applications (Fink & Taalbi, forthcoming)

Bioeconomy identified through

Core Sectors e.g. Pulp and Paper
Forest biomass value chain keywords in innovation descriptions

Definition of Bioeconomy

PhD Theses in Engineering and Natural Sciences

18 461 PhD theses published between 1970 and 2020

Classified into bioeconomy based on keywords in Title and Keywords

List of keywords

Results

Output and Innovation Producers Declined

Figure 1: Actors, Innovation Output Over Time for Bioeconomy Innovations and Total Innovations.

Has Innovation Become More Complex?

Figure 3: Linked Patents per Innovation Count

Figure 4: Count of CPC Classes per Patent

Has Bioeconomy Innovation Become Less Attractive?

Figure 5: Innovation Experience of 10 Most Innovative Firms.

Two Overlapping Life Cycles of Bioeconomy Innovation?

Figure 6: Innovation Novelty From Firm Perspective For Bioeconomy And Other Innovation

Take Aways

Swedish bioeconomy innovation is declining. relative to total innovation
Successful transformation might require larger buy in from large Swedish firms.
A first wave of innovation in the 1970s mechanized forestry. A second wave, focused on upgrading biomass, might be starting but is weak compared to other sectors.

Get the (Old) Paper

References

Avelino, F. (2011). Power in Transition: Empowering Discourses on Sustainability Transitions. https://repub.eur.nl/pub/30663

Avelino, F., & Rotmans, J. (2009). Power in Transition: An Interdisciplinary Framework to Study Power in Relation to Structural Change. European Journal of Social Theory, 12(4), 543–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431009349830

Avelino, F., & Rotmans, J. (2011). A dynamic conceptualization of power for sustainability research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(8), 796–804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.11.012

Sjöö, K., Taalbi, J., Kander, A., & Ljungberg, J. (2014). A Database of Swedish Innovations, 1970-2007. Lund Papers in Economic History, General Issues(133), 77.

Taalbi, J., & Martynovich, M. (2024). On the urban bias of patents and the scaling of innovation. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21963.81448

Appendix

Research Questions on Collaboration and Power

Old Focus

1. How collaborative is the innovation system?

2. Which innovation producers exercise most power?

Theoretical Framework

Typology of Power Relations (Avelino, 2011, p. 75)
Relation Type	Manifestation of Power Relations
More / Less Power	Cooperation A exercises more power than B, but collective goals	Competition A exercises more power than B, but mutually exclusive goals	Co-existence A exercises more power than B, independent co-existent goals

(Avelino & Rotmans, 2009, 2011)

Most Powerful Bioeconomy Innovation Producers Included Sweden’s Biggest Companies

Which are more active producing innovation for non-bioeconomy purposes

Figure 9: Innovation Experience of 10 Most Connected Actors.

Bioeconomy Innovation Producer Network Summary

Network	Nodes	Links	Average Degree	Density
1970-1983	87	64	1.47	0.02
1984-1990	52	40	1.54	0.03
1991-2008	78	65	1.67	0.02
2009-2021	35	27	1.54	0.05
Total	231	196	1.70	0.01

The Innovation Producer Network Was Highly Fragmented

Figure 10: Network of bioeconomy collaboration over time. Gray circles indicate final network.

Embedded network Disaggregated network

Bioeconomy Degree Distribution

Bioeconomy network

Embedded Network

Figure 13: Network of all innovation in database. For better clarity, only nodes with more than 1 collaboration are shown. Sizes of individual nodes correspond with cumulated total innovation. Fill color shows a company’s share of innovation within the bioeconomy compared to its total innovation in SWINNO data. Collaborations resulting in a bioeconomy innovation are highlighted in color.

Bioeconomy network

The 10 Most Connected Nodes – Disaggregated

Network	Nodes	Links	Average Degree	Density
1970-1983	94	75	1.60	0.02
1984-1990	63	68	2.16	0.03
1991-2008	97	100	2.06	0.02
2009-2021	85	116	2.73	0.03
Total	318	359	2.26	0.01

Bioeconomy Network – Disaggregated

Bioeconomy network

Embedded Network – Disaggregated

Figure 15: Network of all innovation in database. For better clarity, only nodes with more than 1 collaboration are shown. Sizes of individual nodes correspond with cumulated total innovation. Fill color shows a company’s share of innovation within the bioeconomy compared to its total innovation in SWINNO data. Collaborations resulting in a bioeconomy innovation are highlighted in color.

Data – Defining the Bioeconomy

Table 1: Key Sectors Used in Query

SNI Code	Description
02	Forestry and related services
20	Wood and wood product manufacturing except furniture
21	Pulp, paper and paper product manufacturing
36	Furniture manufacturing; other manufacturing

Table 2: Swedish Keywords used in Query: WHERE description LIKE %keyword% OR ...

Swedish	English
virke	timber
cellulos	cellulose
lignin	lignin
spån	chip
bark	bark
levulinsyra	levulinic acid
furfural	furfural
svarttjära	black tar
svartlut	black liquor
växtbas	plant-based
ved	wood
trä	timber
skog	forest
biobränsle	biofuel
biologiskt	biological
nedbrytbar	biodegradable
papper	paper
karton	carton
lyocell	lyocell

Back to Data

Data – Defining Bioeconomy PhD Theses

Swedish	English
virke	timber
cellulos	cellulose
lignin	lignin
bark	bark
levulinsyra	levulinic acid
furfural	furfural
svarttjära	black tar
svartlut	black liquor
växtbas	plant-based
ved	wood
trä	tree
skog	forest

biobränsle	biofuel
nedbrytbar	biodegradable
karton	carton
lyocell	lyocell
bioekonomi	bioeconomy
biomassa	biomass
pulp	pulp
papper	paper
biologiskt	biological

Back to Data


	Dependent variable: % Bioeconomy Innovation

	(1)	(2)	(3)

Intercept	5.180^***	0.129^***	4.395^***
	(0.811)	(0.019)	(1.266)
Year	-0.003^***		-0.002^***
	(0.000)		(0.001)
% Bioeconomy Theses		-0.555^*	0.368
		(0.281)	(0.374)
% Bioeconomy of Funded		0.334^***	0.207^***
		(0.061)	(0.067)

Observations	51	51	51
R²	0.439	0.459	0.564
Adjusted R²	0.427	0.436	0.536
Residual Std. Error	0.043 (df=49)	0.042 (df=48)	0.038 (df=47)
F Statistic	38.322^*** (df=1; 49)	20.357^*** (df=2; 48)	20.285^*** (df=3; 47)

Note:	^p<0.1; ^p<0.05; ^**p<0.01

50 Years of Innovation In Sweden’s Forest Based Bioeconomy

Forest-Based Bioeconomy

RQ

Data of Significant Swedish Innovations, Matched Public Funding Applications & Published PhD Theses

Significant Swedish Innovations

PhD Theses in Engineering and Natural Sciences

Results

Output and Innovation Producers Declined

Significant Correlation Between Share of Total Funded Innovations

Has Innovation Become More Complex?

Has Bioeconomy Innovation Become Less Attractive?

Two Overlapping Life Cycles of Bioeconomy Innovation?

Pulp & Paper and Wood Manufacturing Sectors Increase Innovation Output

Bioeconomy Innovation Demand Probably Problem Driven (E.G. Pulp & Paper)

Take Aways

References

Appendix

Research Questions on Collaboration and Power

Theoretical Framework

Most Powerful Bioeconomy Innovation Producers Included Sweden’s Biggest Companies

Bioeconomy Innovation Producer Network Summary

The Innovation Producer Network Was Highly Fragmented

Producing Sectors Total of Bioeconomy

Use Sectors Total of Bioeconomy

Bioeconomy Degree Distribution

Embedded Network

The 10 Most Connected Nodes – Disaggregated

Bioeconomy Network – Disaggregated

Embedded Network – Disaggregated

Data – Defining the Bioeconomy

Data – Defining Bioeconomy PhD Theses