The economic concept of the circular bioeconomy addresses not only the sectors of the traditional bioeconomy but also, in particular, the sectors of bio-based chemicals and energies as well as waste management. This concept is basically based on closing material cycles, in particular, but not only, that of carbon. Managing these material cycles is costly, which is why economic sustainability and, in the current transition phase, competitiveness with fossil-based value chains remain a constant challenge. Because of the large material turnover of the mentioned industries, in the interest of environmental sustainability the circular bioeconomy has to respect the limits of natural resources. With the raw material shift from fossil to renewable resources, regional economic structures and jobs will change and, in addition, circularity requires a change in consumption behavior. Both are challenges that need to be addressed in the interest of social acceptance and sustainability. The article focuses on the economic, but addresses also the ecological and social aspects, discusses options for achieving a comprehensively sustainable circular bioeconomy, and identifies research needs necessary for the further development of the bioeconomy.
Citation: Manfred Kircher. The bioeconomy needs economic, ecological and social sustainability[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2022, 9(1): 33-50. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2022003
[1] | Yanlin Li, A. A. Abdel-Salam, M. Khalifa Saad . Primitivoids of curves in Minkowski plane. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 2386-2406. doi: 10.3934/math.2023123 |
[2] | Jiafan Zhang, Xingxing Lv . On the primitive roots and the generalized Golomb's conjecture. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 5654-5663. doi: 10.3934/math.2020361 |
[3] | Lilan Dai, Yunnan Li . Primitive decompositions of idempotents of the group algebras of dihedral groups and generalized quaternion groups. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 28150-28169. doi: 10.3934/math.20241365 |
[4] | Anthony Overmars, Lorenzo Ntogramatzidis, Sitalakshmi Venkatraman . A new approach to generate all Pythagorean triples. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(2): 242-253. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.2.242 |
[5] | Jiafan Zhang, Xingxing Lv . Correction: On the primitive roots and the generalized Golomb's conjecture. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 8607-8608. doi: 10.3934/math.2022480 |
[6] | Wenpeng Zhang, Tingting Wang . The primitive roots and a problem related to the Golomb conjecture. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 3899-3905. doi: 10.3934/math.2020252 |
[7] | Yaguo Guo, Shilin Yang . Projective class rings of a kind of category of Yetter-Drinfeld modules. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10997-11014. doi: 10.3934/math.2023557 |
[8] | Guoqing Wang . A generalization of Kruyswijk-Olson theorem on Davenport constant in commutative semigroups. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 2992-3001. doi: 10.3934/math.2020193 |
[9] | Shahida Bashir, Ahmad N. Al-Kenani, Maria Arif, Rabia Mazhar . A new method to evaluate regular ternary semigroups in multi-polar fuzzy environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 12241-12263. doi: 10.3934/math.2022680 |
[10] | Ze Gu, Xiang-Yun Xie, Jian Tang . On C-ideals and the basis of an ordered semigroup. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 3783-3790. doi: 10.3934/math.2020245 |
The economic concept of the circular bioeconomy addresses not only the sectors of the traditional bioeconomy but also, in particular, the sectors of bio-based chemicals and energies as well as waste management. This concept is basically based on closing material cycles, in particular, but not only, that of carbon. Managing these material cycles is costly, which is why economic sustainability and, in the current transition phase, competitiveness with fossil-based value chains remain a constant challenge. Because of the large material turnover of the mentioned industries, in the interest of environmental sustainability the circular bioeconomy has to respect the limits of natural resources. With the raw material shift from fossil to renewable resources, regional economic structures and jobs will change and, in addition, circularity requires a change in consumption behavior. Both are challenges that need to be addressed in the interest of social acceptance and sustainability. The article focuses on the economic, but addresses also the ecological and social aspects, discusses options for achieving a comprehensively sustainable circular bioeconomy, and identifies research needs necessary for the further development of the bioeconomy.
Primitive semigroups have been an important topic of semigroup researches since the 1950s. In fact, as early as 1954, Preston who is one of the founders of the algebraic theory of semigroups studied primitive inverse semigroups in [16], and then he gave the characterization of primitive regular semigroups and applied it to the study of matrix representations of inverse semigroups in [17]. In particular, he pointed out that a regular semigroup (resp. an inverse semigroup) with zero is primitive if and only if it is the $ 0 $-direct union of a family of completely $ 0 $-simple semigroups (resp. Brandt semigroups) (See also the monographs [5,12,18]). In addition, from the view of category Lawson [12] showed that an inverse semigroup with zero is primitive if and only if it is isomorphic to a groupoid with zero adjoined. On the other hand, Theorem Ⅲ.3.5 and Corollary Ⅲ.3.6 in [5] together give that a regular semigroup (resp. an inverse semigroup) without zero is primitive if and only if it is a completely simple semigroup (resp. a group). Furthermore, primitive orthodox semigroups were also concerned in Venkatesan [21].
As generalizations of regular semigroups, abundant semigroups were introduced and investigated in 1982 by Fountain in [2] where the class of primitive abundant semigroups and its several subclasses, such as primitive abundant semigroups with regularity condition, primitive quasi-adequate semigroups and primitive adequate semigroups etc., were also characterized. We observe that the roles of quasi-adequate semigroups and adequate semigroups in the range of abundant semigroups are similar to those of orthodox semigroups and inverse semigroups in the range of regular semigroups, respectively.
In 1991, Lawson [13] went a further step to generalize abundant semigroups to $ U $-semiabundant semigroups where $ U $ is a nonempty subset of the set of idempotents and correspondingly generalize quasi-adequate semigroups and adequate semigroups to weakly $ U $-orthodox semigroups and Ehresmann semigroups, respectively. The class of Ehresmann semigroups and its special subclasses (for example, the class of restriction semigroups) now form a hot research topic, and a lot of achievements in this line have been obtained by many semigroup experts, for example, see [3,4,6,8,10,11,13,20] and the references therein. In particular, Gould [3,4] gave the equivalent definition of Ehresmann semigroups from the view of variety, and Jones explicitly introduced the notion of primitive Ehresmann semigroups in [8] and by using small categories obtained a construction of primitive Ehresmann semigroups with zero in [10] which is analogous to that of primitive inverse semigroups with zero given in Lawson [12] by using groupoids. We also observe that Lawson [14] investigated a class of primitive $ U $-semiabundant semigroups named Rees semigroups and Wang [22] characterized primitive weakly $ U $-orthodox semigroups, which generalize the corresponding results of primitive abundant semigroups provided in [2].
On the other hand, Jones [7] generalized Ehresmann semigroups to $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups from a varietal perspective and provided a common framework for Ehresmann semigroups and regular *-semigroups. Regular *-semigroups first appeared in Nordahl and Scheiblich [15] and a generalization of this class of semigroups was investigated in the author [23]. For more details for regular $ ^\ast $-semigroups, the reader may consult the texts[1,7,15,19,23] and their references. At present, some valuable results have been obtained on $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups. For instance, the constructions of $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups have been considered by "fundamental approach" in [7] and [25,26] by "categorical approach", respectively. Variety properties, semigroup algebras and completions of $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups have been explored in Jones [8], Wang [24] and Yan and Wang [27], respectively.
From the above discussions, the following problem is natural: How to introduce and characterize primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups? The aim of this paper is to solve the above problem. We have introduced the notion of projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups and established the structures of projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups. In particular, we show that projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups are always $ P $-restriction. Our work may be regarded as extending primitive Ehresmann semigroups introduced and investigated by Jones in [8] and [10], respectively.
In this section, after recalling some necessary notions and results on $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups, we shall introduce projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups and explore their basic properties.
For a semigroup $ S $, we always denote the set of idempotents in $ S $ by $ E(S) $. From Lemma 2.2 and its dual in Gould [3], a bi-unary semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is called an Ehresmann semigroup if the following identities hold:
$ x^+ x = x, (xy)^+ = (xy^+)^+, (x^+y^+)^+ = x^+ y^+, x^+y^+ = y^+x^+, (x^+)^\ast = x^+ $ |
$ xx^\ast = x, (xy)^\ast = (x^\ast y)^\ast, (x^\ast y^\ast)^\ast = x^\ast y^\ast, x^\ast y^\ast = y^\ast x^\ast, (x^\ast)^+ = x^\ast. $ |
To extend Ehresmann semigroups, $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups were introduced in Jones [7] from the view of variety. A bi-unary semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is called a P-Ehresmann semigroup if the following identities hold:
![]() |
A $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is called $ P $-restriction if
$(xy)^+x = xy^+{x}^\ast \mbox{ and } x(yx)^\ast = x^+y^\ast x \mbox{ for all } x,y\in S$. |
In a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $, the set of projections is $ P_{S} = \{a^+\mid a\in S\} $ which is equal to $ \{a^\ast\mid a\in S\} $ by (ⅴ) and (ⅴ)$ ' $. The following lemmas collect some basic properties of $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups first given in Jones [7].
Lemma 2.1 ([7]). A bi-unary semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is Ehresmann (resp. restriction) if and only if $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is $ P $-Ehresmann (resp. $ P $-restriction) and $ P_{S} $ is a subsemilattice of $ {S} $.
Lemma 2.2 ([7]). Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup and $ x, y \in S, \; e, f\in P_{S} $.
(1) $ (x^+y)^+ = x^+y^+x^+, \; x^{++} = x^+, \; x^+(xy)^+x^+ = (xy)^+ $.
(2) $ (xy^\ast)^\ast = y^\ast x^\ast y^\ast, \; x^{\ast\ast} = x^\ast, \; y^\ast(xy)^\ast y^\ast = (xy)^\ast $.
(3) $ (ef)^2 = ef, \; e^+ = e = e^\ast, \; (ef)^+ = efe = (fe)^\ast \in P_{S} $.
(4) $ ef\in P_{S} $ if and only if $ ef = fe $.
Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup. Define a relation on $ P_S $ by the rule
$ e\leq f \;{\rm{ if \;and \;only \;if }}\; e = ef = fe\; {\rm{ for \;all }}\;e,f\in P_S. $ |
Then it is easy to see that $ \leq $ is a partial order on $ P_S $. By Lemma 2.2, the following corollary is obvious.
Corollary 2.3. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup and $ x, y \in S, e, f\in P_{S} $. Then $ (xy)^+\leq x^+, \; (xy)^\ast\leq y^\ast $ and $ efe\leq e $.
Similar to the case of restriction semigroups appeared in Jones [8], we call a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ without zero or with zero $ 0 $ satisfying $ 0\not\in P_S $ projection-primitive if
$ (\forall e,f\in P_S)\; \; e\leq f\Longrightarrow e = f, $ |
while call a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ with zero $ 0 $ satisfying $ 0\in P_S $ projection-primitive if
$ (\forall e,f\in P_S)\; \; e\leq f\Longrightarrow e = 0 \;{\rm{ or }}\; e = f. $ |
Observe that a primitive Ehresmann semigroup without zero is just a momoid in which the identity is the only projection by Lemma 2.1. We first characterize projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups without zero.
Proposition 2.4. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup without zero. Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) $ S $ is projection-primitive.
(2) $ (xy)^+ = x^+ $ for all $ x, y\in S $.
(3) $ (xy)^\ast = y^\ast $ for all $ x, y\in S $.
Proof. We only show that (1) is equivalent to (2), and one can prove that (1) is equivalent to (3) by similar arguments. If $ S $ is projection-primitive and $ x, y\in S $, then $ (xy)^+\leq x^+ $ by Corollary 2.3. This implies that $ (xy)^+ = x^+ $. Conversely, let $ e, f\in P_S $ and $ e\leq f $. Then $ ef = fe = e $. By the given condition and Lemma 2.2, we have $ f = f^+ = (fe)^+ = e^+ = e $. This gives the projection-primitivity of $ S $.
From Jones [9], a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is called reduced if $ P_S $ contains exactly one element. By the identities (ⅰ) and (ⅰ)$ ' $, in this case $ S $ is a monoid with the only projection as its identity. Obviously, reduced $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups are always projection-primitive. In fact, we have the following result.
Proposition 2.5. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero $ 0 $ and $ 0\not\in P_S $. Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) $ S $ is projection-primitive.
(2) $ x^+ = 0^+ $ for all $ x\in S $.
(3) $ x^\ast = 0^\ast $ for all $ x\in S $.
In this case, $ S $ is a reduced $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with the identity $ 0^+ $ and so is an Ehresmann semigroup.
Proof. We only show that (1) is equivalent to (2), and one can prove that (1) is equivalent to (3) by similar arguments. Let $ S $ be projection-primitive and $ x\in S $. Then $ 0^+ = (x0)^+\leq x^+ $ by Corollary 2.3, and so $ 0^+ = x^+ $. Conversely, the given condition (2) implies that $ P_S = \{x^+\mid x\in S\} = \{0^+\} $. This gives that $ S $ is reduced and has identity $ 0^+ $, and so is projection-primitive certainly.
Remark 2.6. By Proposition 2.5, a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann (or Ehresmann) semigroup $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ with zero $ 0 $ and $ 0\not\in P_S $ is reduced and is exactly a monoid with zero containing at least two elements.
Now we consider projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups with zero $ 0 $ as a projection.
Proposition 2.7. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero $ 0 $ and $ 0\in P_S $.
(1) For all $ x\in S $, $ x^+ = 0 \Longleftrightarrow x = 0 \Longleftrightarrow x^\ast = 0. $
(2) For all $ x, y\in S\setminus \{0\} $, $ xy\not = 0 \Longleftrightarrow x^\ast y^+x^\ast = x^\ast\Longleftrightarrow y^+x^\ast y^+ = y^+ $.
Proof. (1) Let $ x\in S $. We only prove that $ x^+ = 0 $ if and only if $ x = 0 $. The other equivalence can be showed by symmetry. In fact, if $ x^+ = 0 $, then $ x = x^+ x = 0x = 0 $ by (ⅰ). To show the converse, we first observe that $ 0^+ = (a0)^+\leq a^+ $ for all $ a\in S $ by Corollary 2.3. This implies that $ 0^+ $ is the minimum element in $ P_S $. Since $ 0\in P_S $, it follows that $ 0^+ = 0^+ 0 = 0 $.
(2) Let $ x, y\in S\setminus \{0\} $. We only prove that $ xy\not = 0 $ if and only if $ x^\ast y^+x^\ast = x^\ast $. The other equivalence can be showed by symmetry. If $ xy\not = 0 $, then $ xx^\ast y^+ y = xy\not = 0 $ by the identities (ⅰ) and (ⅰ)$ ' $. This implies that $ x^\ast\not = 0 $ and $ x^\ast y^+\not = 0 $. By item (1) we have $ x^{\ast+}\not = 0 $ and $ (x^\ast y^+)^+\not = 0 $. But Corollary 2.3 gives that $ (x^\ast y^+)^+\leq x^{\ast+} $, and so $ (x^\ast y^+)^+ = x^{\ast+} $ by the projection-primitivity of $ S $. Moreover, Lemma 2.2 provides that $ x^\ast y^+ x^\ast = (x^\ast y^+)^+ = x^{\ast+} = x^\ast $. Conversely, if $ x^\ast y^+x^\ast = x^\ast $, then by using (ⅱ), (ⅰ)$ ' $, (ⅱ), Lemma 2.2 (3), (ⅰ)$ ' $ and item (1) of the present lemma in order, we have
$ \begin{equation} (xy)^+ = (xy^+)^+ = (xx^\ast y^+)^+ = (x(x^\ast y^+)^+)^+ = (xx^\ast y^+ x^\ast)^+ = (xx^\ast)^+ = x^+\not = 0, \end{equation} $ | (2.1) |
which implies that $ xy\not = 0 $ by item (1) of the present lemma again. To end this section, we observe the following interesting result.
Theorem 2.8. A projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup is always $ P $-restriction.
Proof. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup and $ x, y\in S $. Firstly, if $ S $ contains no zero, then $ (xy)^+x = x^+x = x $ by Proposition 2.4. By Corollary 2.3, we have $ x^\ast y^+ x^\ast\leq x^\ast $, and so $ x^\ast y^+ x^\ast = x^\ast $ by the projection-primitivity of $ S $. This implies that $ xy^+x^\ast = xx^\ast y^+ x^\ast = xx^\ast = x $ by (ⅰ)$ ' $. Thus $ (xy)^+x = xy^+x^\ast $. Dually, we have $ x(yx)^\ast = x^+y^\ast x $. Secondly, if $ S $ contains a zero $ 0 $ and $ 0\not\in P_S $, then it is obvious that $ (xy)^+x = xy^+ x^\ast $ and $ x(yx)^\ast = x^+y^\ast x $ by Proposition 2.5. Finally, assume that $ S $ contains a zero $ 0 $ and $ 0 \in P_S $. If $ xy = 0 $, then by Proposition 2.7 (1) and (ⅱ) we have $ 0 = (xy)^+ = (xy^+)^+ $ and $ xy^+ = 0 $. This implies that $ (xy)^+x = 0 = xy^+ x^\ast $. If $ xy\not = 0 $, then $ (xy)^+\not = 0 $ and $ x^\ast = x^\ast y^+ x^\ast $ by Proposition 2.7. Since $ (xy)^+\leq x^+ $ by Corollary 2.3, the projection-primitivity of $ S $ gives that $ (xy)^+ = x^+ $. This implies that
$ xy^+x^\ast = xx^\ast y^+x^\ast = xx^\ast = x = x^+x = (xy)^+x $ |
by (ⅰ) and (ⅰ)$ ' $. Therefore, $ (xy)^+x = xy^+ x^\ast $. Dually, we have $ x(yx)^\ast = x^+y^\ast x $. Thus, $ S $ is $ P $-restriction in all cases.
In the remainder of this paper, we shall establish the structures of projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups. The present section is devoted to projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups without zero or with zero which is not a projection. The following theorem characterize these semigroups completely.
Theorem 3.1. Let $ I $ and $ \Lambda $ be two sets and $ \phi:I\rightarrow \Lambda, i\mapsto i\phi $ be a bijection. Assume that $ M $ is a monoid, $ |I\times M\times \Lambda|\not = 1 $ and $ P = (p_{\lambda i})_{\Lambda\times I} $ is a $ \Lambda\times I $-matrix over $ M $ satisfying $ p_{i\phi, i} = e = p_{i\phi, j}p_{j\phi, i} $ for all $ i, j\in I $, where $ e $ is the identity of $ M $. Define a binary and two unary operations on the set
$ S = {\cal M}(I, \Lambda, M,P) = \{(i,x,\lambda)\mid i\in I,x\in M, \lambda\in \Lambda\} $ |
as follows:
$ (i,x,\lambda)(j,y,\mu) = (i,xp_{\lambda j}y,\mu), (i,x,\lambda)^+ = (i,e,i\phi), (i,x,\lambda)^\ast = (\lambda\phi^{-1},e,\lambda). $ |
Then $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup without zero or with zero which is not a projection. Conversely, every such semigroup can be obtained in this way.
Proof. Direct part. By hypothesis, $ S^0 $ can be regarded as a Rees matrix semigroup over the monoid $ M^0 $. Denote $ P(S^0) = \{(i, p^{-1}_{\lambda i}, \lambda)\mid i\in I, \lambda\in \Lambda\}\cup \{0\} $ and $ U = \{(i, e, i\phi)\mid i\in I\} $. Then by Proposition 1.5 in Lawson [14], we can easily show that for all $ (i, x, \lambda), (j, y, \mu)\in S $,
$ (i,x,\lambda)\, \widetilde{\cal R}^{P(S^0)}\, (j, y,\mu) \Longleftrightarrow (i,x,\lambda)\, \widetilde{\cal R}^{U}\, (j, y,\mu)\Longleftrightarrow i = j, $ |
$ (i,x,\lambda)\, \widetilde{\cal L}^{P(S^0)}\, (j, y,\mu) \Longleftrightarrow (i,x,\lambda)\, \widetilde{\cal L}^{U}\, (j, y,\mu)\Longleftrightarrow \lambda = \mu. $ |
Moreover, $ \widetilde{\cal R}^{U} $ (resp. $ \widetilde{\cal L}^{U} $) is a left congruence (resp. a right congruence) on $ S $ by Lemma 1.9 in Lawson [14]. By the given condition on the matrix $ P $, it is easy to see that $ U $ is both a right projection-set and a left projection-set of $ S $ in the sense of Jones [7] (see page 629). According to Theorem 6.1 of Jones [7] and its dual, $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup and $ P_S = U $. Moreover, in view of Proposition 1.7 of Lawson [14], no two different elements in $ P_S $ can be compatible. Thus $ S $ is projection-primitive. If $ (i, z, \lambda) $ is the zero element of $ S $, then for all $ (j, y, \mu)\in S $, we have $ (i, z, \lambda)(j, y, \mu) = (i, z, \lambda) = (j, y, \mu)(i, z, \lambda) $. This implies that $ i = j $ and $ \lambda = \mu $. In this case, $ |I| = |\Lambda| = 1 $ and so $ P_S $ contains only one element. By hypothesis, $ S $ has at least two elements and so the zero is not a projection.
Converse part. Let $ (M, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero which is not a projection. Then by Proposition 2.5 and Remark 2.6, $ M $ has at least two elements and is a monoid with the only projection $ e $ as its identity. In this case, $ M $ has the form in the theorem certainly.
Now let $ (T, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup without zero. Then it is easy to see that $ T^0 $ is a Rees semigroup with respect to $ U = P_T^0 $ in the sense of Lawson [14], and $ \widetilde{\cal L}^U = \{(a, b)\in T^0\times T^0\mid a^\ast = b^\ast\}\cup \{(0, 0)\} $ and $ \widetilde{\cal R}^U = \{(a, b)\in T^0\times T^0\mid a^+ = b^+\}\cup \{(0, 0)\} $ (see page 28 in [14]). Fix an element $ e\in P_T $ and denote $ I = \{xe\mid x\in P_T\}, \; \Lambda = \{ex\mid x\in P_T\} $. Define $ \phi: I\rightarrow \Lambda, \; xe\mapsto ex $ for all $ x\in P_T $. Then $ \phi $ is a bijection. In fact, if $ x, y\in P_T $ and $ xe = ye $, then $ x = x^+ = (xe)^+ = (ye)^+ = y^+ = y $ by Lemma 2.2 and Proposition 2.4, and so $ ex = ey $. This fact and its dual give that $ \phi $ is bijection. We assert that $ p_{i\phi, i} = e = p_{i\phi, j}p_{j\phi, i} $ for all $ i, j\in I $. In fact, take $ i = xe, j = ye\in I $ where $ x, y\in P_T $. Then $ i\phi = ex $ and $ j\phi = ey $. This implies by Lemma 2.2 and Proposition 2.4 that $ p_{i\phi, i} = (i\phi) i = (ex)(xe) = exe = (ex)^+ = e^+ = e $ and
$ p_{i\phi,j}p_{j\phi,i} = ((i\phi)j)((j\phi)i) = exyeey xe = exyeyxe = (e(xyeyx))^+ = e^+ = e. $ |
On the other hand, for every $ t\in T $, we have $ (t^+e)^+ = t^+ $ and $ (et^\ast)^\ast = t^\ast $ by Proposition 2.4. In view of Lemma 2.2 (4), $ I $ and $ \Lambda $ can index the non-zero $ \widetilde{\cal R}^U $-classes and $ \widetilde{\cal L}^U $-classes of $ T^0 $, respectively. Denote $ M = \{a\in T\mid a^+ = a^\ast = e\}\cup \{0\} $. For $ i\in I $ and $ \lambda\in \Lambda $, let $ r_i = i $ and $ q_\lambda = \lambda $ and denote $ p_{\lambda i} = q_\lambda r_i = \lambda i $. Since $ (t^+e)^+ = t^+ $, $ (et^\ast)^\ast = t^\ast $, $ (ete)^+ = (ete)^\ast = e $ and $ t = (t^+ e)ete(et^\ast) $ by Lemma 2.2 and Proposition 2.4, in view of the proof of Theorem 3.6 in Lawson [14],
$ \theta: T^0\rightarrow S = {\cal M}^0(I, \Lambda, M, P), \,\, t\mapsto (t^+e, ete, et^\ast),\,\, 0\mapsto 0 $ |
is a semigroup isomorphism. Moreover, if we define
$ (i,a,\lambda)^+ = (i,e,i\phi),\, (i,a,\lambda)^\ast = (\lambda\phi^{-1},e,\lambda),\, 0^+ = 0^\ast = 0 $ |
on $ S $, then we can see that $ \theta $ also preserves $ ^+ $ and $ ^\ast $ by Lemma 2.2 and Proposition 2.4. By the construction of $ P = (p_{\lambda i}) $, $ \theta|_{T} $ is a $ (2, 1, 1) $-isomorphism from $ T $ onto $ {\cal M}(I, \Lambda, M, P) $.
In Theorem 3.1, if we identify $ i $ with $ i\phi $ for all $ i\in I $, we can assume that $ I = \Lambda $. So we have the following corollary.
Corollary 3.2. Let $ I $ be a set and $ M $ a monoid with $ |I\times M|\not = 1 $. Assume that $ P = (p_{\lambda i})_{I\times I} $ is an $ I\times I $-matrix over $ M $ satisfying $ p_{ii} = e = p_{ij}p_{j, i} $ for all $ i, j\in I $, where $ e $ is the identity of $ M $. Define a binary and two unary operations on the set
$ S = {\cal M}(I, M,P) = \{(i,x,j)\mid i,j\in I,x\in M\} $ |
as follows:
$ (i,x,j)(k,y,l) = (i,xp_{jk}y,l), (i,x,j)^+ = (i,e,i), (i,x,j)^\ast = (j,e,j). $ |
Then $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ is a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup without zero or with zero which is not a projection. Conversely, every such semigroup can be obtained in this way.
In this section, we consider the structures of projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups with zero as a projection. To this aim, we need to recall some necessary notions and results. From Jones [7], a left projection algebra consists of a nonempty set $ P $ and a binary operation $ "\times" $ satisfying the following axioms:
(P1) $ e\times e = e $.
(P2) $ e\times(e\times f) = (e\times f)\times e = e\times f $.
(P3) $ (e\times f)\times g = e\times (f\times(e\times g)) $.
(P4) $ e\times(f\times g) = (e\times f)\times (e\times (f\times g)) $.
For simplicity, we use the words "projection algebra" to replace "left projection algebra" in the sequel. Let $ (P, \times) $ be a projection algebra. Define a relation $ "\leq_P" $ on $ P $ by the rule that for all $ e, f\in P $, $ e\leq_P f \;{\rm{ if \;and\; only\; if }}\;e = f\times e. $ Then $ \leq_P $ is a partial order on $ P $ by (P1)–(P4). Moreover, by (P2) it is easy to see that
$ \begin{equation} e\times f\leq_P e \end{equation} $ | (4.1) |
for all $ e, f\in P $. A projection algebra $ (P, \times) $ with the least element $ 0 $ with respect to $ \leq_P $ is called primitive if no two different elements in $ P\setminus\{0\} $ can be compatible. On primitive projection algebras, we have the following simple results.
Proposition 4.1. A primitive projection algebra $ (P, \times) $ is just a (2, 0)-type algebra $ (P, \times, 0) $ satisfying the following conditions: For all $ e, f\in P $,
(Pr1) $ e\times e = e $.
(Pr2) $ 0\times e = 0 = e\times 0 $.
(Pr3) $ e\times f = 0 \;\mathit{{or}}\; e\times f = e $.
(Pr4) $ e\times f = 0 \;\mathit{{if \;and \;only\; if}} \;f\times e = 0 $.
In particular, if $ e\times f = f\times e $ for all $ e, f\in P $, then $ e\times f\not = 0 $ if and only if $ e = f\not = 0 $.
Proof. Let $ (P, \times) $ be a primitive projection algebra with the least element $ 0 $. We only need to show that (Pr2)–(Pr4) hold. Let $ e, f\in P $. Since $ 0\leq_P e $, we have $ e\times 0 = 0 $, and so $ 0\times e = (e\times 0)\times e = e\times 0 = 0 $ by (P2). This proves (Pr2). In view of (4.1), (Pr3) is true. Finally, if $ e\times f = 0 $ and $ f\times e\not = 0 $, then $ f\times e = f\not = 0 $ by (Pr3). However,
$ f\times e = (f\times e)\times e = f\times (e\times (f\times e)) = f\times (e\times f) = f\times 0 = 0 $ |
by (P3) and (Pr2). This is a contradiction. So (Pr4) holds.
Conversely, let $ (P, \times, 0) $ be a (2, 0)-type algebra satisfying the given conditions. We only need to show that (P2)–(P4) hold. Let $ e, f, g\in P $. By (Pr3), $ e\times f = 0 $ or $ e\times f = e $. In the former case, all items in (P2) are equal to $ 0 $ by (Pr2). In the latter case, all items in (P2) are equal to $ e $ by (Pr1). This shows (P2). Moreover, we also have $ e\times g = 0 $ or $ e\times g = e $. Then the following four cases may occur:
$ (1)\, e\times f = e, e\times g = e;\,\, (2)\, e\times f = e, e\times g = 0;\,\, (3)\, e\times f = 0, e\times g = e;\,\,(4)\, e\times f = 0, e\times g = 0. $ |
In case (1), $ (e\times f)\times g = e\times g = e $ and $ e\times(f\times (e\times g)) = e\times(f\times e) $. By (Pr3) and (Pr4), $ f\times e = f $ in the case. So $ e\times(f\times e) = e\times f = e $. This proves (P3) for case (1). The other cases can be showed similarly. Finally, we consider (P4). By (Pr3), $ f\times g = f $ or $ f\times g = 0 $. In the former case, the left side of (P4) is $ e\times f $, the right side of (P4) is $ (e\times f)\times (e\times f) = e\times f $ by (Pr1), and so they are equal. In the latter case, the two sides of (P4) are both $ 0 $ by (Pr2). The final result of the proposition follows from (Pr1), (Pr3) and (Pr4).
By the dual of Proposition 2.4 in [7], and Propositions 2.7 and 4.1, we have the following result easily.
Lemma 4.2. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero $ 0 $ and $ 0\in P_S $. Define a binary operation $ "\times_{S}" $ on $ P_{S} $ as follows: For all $ e, f\in P_{S} $, $ e\times_{S} f = (ef)^+ = efe $. Then $ (P_{S}, \times_{S}, 0) $ forms a primitive projection algebra. In particular, if $ S $ is Ehresmann, then $ e\times_S f = f\times_S e $ for all $ e, f\in P_S $ by Lemma 2.1.
Let $ C $ be a nonempty set with a partial binary operation $ \cdot $ and $ (P, \times, 0) $ a primitive projection algebra with $ (P\setminus\{0\})\subseteq C $. Assume that $ {\bf d}: C\rightarrow P, x\mapsto {\bf d}(x), \ \ {\bf r}: C\rightarrow P, x\mapsto {\bf r}(x) $ are maps such that $ {\bf d}(C)\cup {\bf r}(C)\subseteq (P\setminus\{0\}) $ and
$ \begin{equation} {\bf d}(e) = e = {\bf r}(e) \end{equation} $ | (4.2) |
for all $ e\in (P\setminus\{0\}) $. According to Wang [26], $ {\bf C} = (C, \cdot, {\bf d}, {\bf r}, P) $ is called a generalized category over $ (P, \times, 0) $ if the following conditions hold:
(G1) For all $ x, y\in C $, $ x\cdot y $ is defined if and only if $ {\bf r}(x)\times {\bf d}(y)\not = 0 $ and then $ {\bf d}(x\cdot y) = {\bf d}(x) $ and $ {\bf r}(x\cdot y) = {\bf r}(y) $.
(G2) If $ x, y, z\in C $ such that both $ x\cdot y $ and $ y\cdot z $ are defined, then $ (x\cdot y)\cdot z = x\cdot(y\cdot z) $.
(G3) For all $ x\in C $, $ {\bf d}(x)\cdot x $ and $ x\cdot {\bf r}(x) $ are defined and $ {\bf d}(x)\cdot x = x = x\cdot {\bf r}(x) $.
(G4) If $ e, f\in P $ and $ e\times f\not = 0 $, then $ (e\cdot f)\cdot e = e $.
If $ e\times f = f\times e $ for all $ e, f\in P $, then $ e\times f\not = 0 $ if and only if $ e = f $, and so (G4) is always satisfied by (4.2), (G3) and Proposition 4.1. In this case, $ {\bf C} = (C, \cdot, {\bf d}, {\bf r}, P) $ is a category in usual sense.
Proposition 4.3. Let $ {\bf C} = (C, \cdot, {\bf d}, {\bf r}, P) $ be a generalized category over the primitive projection algebra $ (P, \times, 0) $. Put $ C^0 = C\cup \{0\} $. Define a binary operation on $ C^0 $ as follows: If $ x, y\in C $ and $ x\cdot y $ is defined in $ C $, then $ xy = x\cdot y $; all other products in $ C^0 $ are $ 0 $. Moreover, define two unary operations on $ C^0 $ as follows: $ 0^\clubsuit = 0^\spadesuit = 0 $ and $ x^\clubsuit = {\bf d}(x), x^\spadesuit = {\bf r}(x) $ for all $ x\in C $. With these operations $ C^0 $ is a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with $ 0 $ as a projection. In the sequel, we call $ (C^0, \cdot, \clubsuit, \spadesuit) $ a generalized category with zero adjoined.
Proof. Let $ x, y, z\in C^0 $. It is routine to check that $ (xy)z = 0 $ precisely when $ x(yz) = 0 $. Thus $ C^0 $ is a semigroup by (G2). We shall show that the identities (ⅰ)–(ⅴ) and (ⅰ)$ ' $–(ⅴ)$ ' $ are satisfied. Let $ x, y\in C^0 $. If $ 0\in \{x, y\} $, the identities (ⅰ)–(ⅴ) and (ⅰ)$ ' $–(ⅴ)$ ' $ are satisfied obviously. So we assume that $ x, y\in C $. Firstly, since $ {\bf d}(x)\cdot x = x $ by (G3), we have $ x^\clubsuit x = x $. This gives (ⅰ). Dully, we have (ⅰ)$ ' $. Secondly, since $ {\bf d}(y^\clubsuit) = {\bf d}({\bf d}(y)) = {\bf d}(y) $ by (4.2), it follows that $ xy^\clubsuit\not = 0 $ if and only if $ xy\not = 0 $ by (G1). If this is the case, we have
$ (xy^\clubsuit)^\clubsuit = {\bf d}(xy^\clubsuit) = {\bf d}(x) = {\bf d}(xy) = (xy)^\clubsuit $ |
by (G1) again. This is exactly the identity (ⅱ). Dually, (ⅱ)$ ' $ is also true. Thirdly, by (4.2), (G1) and (Pr4), we can see that
$ x^\clubsuit y^\clubsuit \not = 0\Longleftrightarrow {\bf d}(x)\times {\bf d}(y)\not = 0\Longleftrightarrow x^\clubsuit y^\clubsuit x^\clubsuit \not = 0. $ |
In this case, we have
$ (x^\clubsuit y^\clubsuit)^\clubsuit = {\bf d}( {\bf d}(x) {\bf d}(y)) = {\bf d}( {\bf d}(x)) = {\bf d}(x) $ |
by (G1) and $ x^\clubsuit y^\clubsuit x^\clubsuit = {\bf d}(x) {\bf d}(y) {\bf d}(x) = {\bf d}(x) $ by (G4). This implies that the identity (ⅲ) is true. Dually, (ⅲ)$ ' $ is valid. Moreover, by (4.2), (G1) and (G3) we have
$ x^\clubsuit x^\clubsuit = {\bf d}(x) {\bf d}(x) = {\bf d}( {\bf d}(x)) {\bf d}(x) = {\bf d}(x). $ |
This gives (ⅳ). Similarly, we have (ⅳ)$ ' $. The identities (ⅴ) and (ⅴ)$ ' $ follow from the fact $ (x^\clubsuit)^\spadesuit = {\bf r}({\bf d}(x)) = {\bf d}(x) = x^\clubsuit $ by (4.2) and its dual. We have shown that $ (C^0, \cdot, \clubsuit, \spadesuit) $ is a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with the set of projections
$ P_{C^0} = \{x^\clubsuit\mid x\in C^0\} = P = \{ {\bf d}(x)\mid x\in C\}\cup\{0\} = \{ {\bf r}(x)\mid x\in C\}\cup\{0\}. $ |
Finally, let $ e, f\in P_{C^0} $ and $ e\leq f $. Then $ e = ef = fe $. If $ e\not = 0 $, then $ f\cdot e $ is defined and so $ e = {\bf d}(e) = {\bf d}(fe) = {\bf d}(f) = f $ by (4.2) and (G1). Thus, $ (C^0, \cdot, ^\clubsuit, ^\spadesuit) $ is projection-primitive.
Remark 4.4. Let $ {\bf C} = (C, \cdot, {\bf d}, {\bf r}, P) $ be a generalized category over the primitive projection algebra $ (P, \times, 0) $. If $ P $ contains at least three elements and $ e\times f\not = 0 $ for all $ e, f\in P\setminus\{0\} $, then $ x\cdot y $ is defined for all $ x, y\in C $. By Propositions 4.3 and 2.5, $ (C, \cdot, ^\clubsuit, ^\spadesuit) $ is a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup without zero. On the other hand, if $ P $ contains two elements, say, $ P = \{0, 1\} $, then $ (C, \cdot, ^\clubsuit, ^\spadesuit) $ is a reduced $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup. In fact, $ (C, \cdot) $ is a monoid with $ 1 $ as identity, and $ (C^0, \cdot) $ is a monoid with zero adjoined. Thus we can think that generalized categories with zero adjoined covers the semigroups considered in the last section.
Now we can give the main result of this section, which is a generalization of a result on restriction semigroups obtained by Jones in Section 4 of [10].
Theorem 4.5. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero as a projection and $ |S| > 1 $. Then $ S $ is projection-primitive if and only if $ S $ is (2, 1, 1)-isomorphic to a generalized category with zero adjoined.
Proof. We have proved in Proposition 4.3 that every generalized category with zero adjoined is a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero as a projection. To prove the converse, let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero $ 0 $ and $ 0\in P_S $. By Lemma 4.2, $ (P_{S}, \times_{S}, 0) $ forms a primitive projection algebra. Denote $ C = S\setminus\{0\} $. Define a partial binary operation $ "\cdot" $ as follows:
$ \begin{equation} x\cdot y = \left\{\begin{array}{cc} xy & {\rm if }\ xy\not = 0,\\ {\rm undefined} & {\rm if }\ xy = 0, \end{array} \right. \end{equation} $ | (4.3) |
where $ xy $ denotes the multiplication of $ x $ and $ y $ in the semigroup $ S $. Define maps
$ \begin{equation} {\bf d}: C\rightarrow P_S, x\mapsto x^+,\ \ {\bf r}: C\rightarrow P_S, x\mapsto x^\ast. \end{equation} $ | (4.4) |
Then we have $ {\bf d}(C)\cup {\bf r}(C)\subseteq (P_S\setminus \{0\}) $ by Proposition 2.7 (1), and $ {\bf d}(e) = e = {\bf r}(e) $ for all $ e\in P_S\setminus \{0\} $ by Lemma 2.2, respectively.
We assert that $ (C, \cdot, {\bf d}, {\bf r}, P_S) $ is a generalized category over the primitive projection algebra $ (P_S, \times_S, 0) $. First, let $ x, y\in C $. By Proposition 2.7 (2) and (Pr3), (Pr4),
$ x\cdot y \;{\rm{ is \;defined }}\;\Longleftrightarrow x^\ast y^+ x^\ast = x^\ast $ |
$ \Longleftrightarrow y^+x^\ast y^+ = y^+\Longleftrightarrow {\bf r}(x)\times_S {\bf d}(y)\not = 0\Longleftrightarrow {\bf d}(y)\times_S {\bf r}(x)\not = 0. $ |
In this case, by the identities defining $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups and Lemma 2.2 we have
$ {\bf d}(x\cdot y) = {\bf d}(xy) = (xy)^+ = (xy^+)^+ = (xx^\ast y^+)^+ $ |
$ = (x(x^\ast y^+)^+)^+ = (xx^\ast y^+ x^\ast)^+ = (xx^\ast)^+ = x^+ = {\bf d}(x). $ |
Dually, we have $ {\bf r}(x\cdot y) = {\bf r}(y) $. Thus (G1) holds. Next, let $ x, y, z\in C $, and $ x\cdot y $ and $ y\cdot z $ be defined. Since $ {\bf r}(x\cdot y) = {\bf r}(y) $ and $ {\bf d}(y\cdot z) = {\bf d}(y) $, $ (x\cdot y) \cdot z $ and $ x\cdot (y \cdot z) $ are defined, and so $ (x\cdot y)\cdot z = (xy)z = x(yz) = x\cdot(y\cdot z) $. This gives (G2). Moreover, for $ x\in C $, since $ x^+x = x\not = 0 $, it follows that $ x^+\cdot x $ is defined and $ {\bf d}(x)\cdot x = x $. Dually, $ x\cdot x^\ast $ is defined and $ x\cdot {\bf r}(x) = x $. Thus (G3) is true. Finally, let $ e, f\in P_S $ and $ e\times_S f\not = 0 $. Then $ f\times_S e\not = 0 $ by (Pr4) and $ e = e\times_S f = efe $ by (Pr3). In view of (G2), $ (e\cdot f)\cdot e $ is defined and $ (e\cdot f)\cdot e = (ef)e = efe = e $. Thus (G4) is valid.
By Proposition 4.3, we have a generalized category with zero adjoined $ (C^0, \cdot, ^\clubsuit, ^\spadesuit) $. We shall show that $ S $ is (2, 1, 1)-isomorphic to $ C^0 $. Define a map $ \psi: S\rightarrow C^0 $ by assigning $ 0\psi = 0 $ and $ x\psi = x $ for all $ x\in C = S\setminus\{0\} $. Obviously, $ \psi $ is a bijection. Let $ x, y\in S $. If $ x = 0 $ or $ y = 0 $, then $ x\psi = 0 $ or $ y\psi = 0 $, whence $ (xy)\psi = 0\psi = 0 = (x\psi)(y\psi) $. Assume that $ x, y\in C = S\setminus\{0\} $. Then $ xy = 0 $ in $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ if and only if $ x\cdot y $ is not defined in the generalized category $ (C, \cdot, {\bf d}, {\bf r}, P_S) $, if and only if $ xy = 0 $ in $ (C^0, \cdot, ^\clubsuit, ^\spadesuit) $ by (4.3) and Proposition 4.3. This implies that $ (xy)\psi = (x\psi)(y\psi) $ for all $ x, y\in C $. Thus $ \psi $ is a semigroup homomorphism. Furthermore, observe that $ 0^+ = 0 $ by Proposition 2.7 (1) and $ 0^\clubsuit = 0 $ by Proposition 4.3, it follows that $ (0\psi)^\clubsuit = 0^\clubsuit = 0 = 0\psi = 0^+\psi $. Dually, we have $ (0\psi)^\spadesuit = 0^\ast\psi $. If $ x\in C = S\setminus\{0\} $, then $ x^+\in C $ by Proposition 2.7 (1), this implies that $ (x\psi)^\clubsuit = x^\clubsuit = {\bf d}(x) = x^+ = x^+\psi $ by Propositions 4.3 and (4.4). Dually, we have $ (x\psi)^\spadesuit = x^\ast\psi $ for all $ x\in C $. We have shown that $ \psi $ is a (2, 1, 1)-isomorphism. By Lemma 4.2 and the statements before Proposition 4.3, we have the following result appeared in Jones [10].
Corollary 4.6 ([10]). Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be an Ehresmann semigroup with zero as a projection and $ |S| > 1 $. Then $ S $ is projection-primitive if and only if $ S $ is (2, 1, 1)-isomorphic to a category with zero adjoined.
Remark 4.7. Let $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ be a primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup without zero or with zero 0 but $ 0\not\in P_S $. Let $ \diamond\not\in S $ and define additionally $ x\diamond = \diamond x = \diamond = \diamond\diamond $ and $ \diamond^+ = \diamond^\ast = \diamond $. Then $ (S^\diamond, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ forms a primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroup with zero $ \diamond $ and $ \diamond\in P_{S^\diamond} $. In this case, the generalized category associated with $ S^\diamond $ constructed in the proof of Theorem 4.5 is just $ (S, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $ and the corresponding generalized category with zero adjoined is just $ (S^\diamond, \cdot, ^+, ^\ast) $. By Remark 4.4, we can think that Theorem 4.5 also works for the semigroups considered in the last section. However, it is trivial certainly in the case.
In this paper, we have obtained the structures of projection-primitive $ P $-Ehresmann semigroups. As a future work, one can investigate the associative algebras of these semigroups by using the results obtained in the present paper.
The author expresses his profound gratitude to the referees for the valuable comments and suggestions, which improve greatly the content and presentation of this article. In particular, according to the advices of one of the referees, we rewrite Section 3 (with the help of the results of Lawson [14] provided by the referee) and Section 4. This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11661082). Thanks also go to the editor for the timely communications.
The author declares there is no conflict of interest.
[1] | EC, What is the Bioeconomy, 2021. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/research/bioeconomy/policy/bioeconomy_en.htm. |
[2] | World Economic Forum, Why the world needs a 'circular bioeconomy' - for jobs, biodiversity and prosperity, 2020. Available from: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/circular-bioeconomy-nature-reset/. |
[3] |
Bergs T, Grünebaum T, Rey J, et al. (2020) A methodology for the ecological and economic assessment of manufacturing process sequences. Procedia CIRP 90: 488-493. https//:doi:10.1016/j.procir.2020.01.065. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2020.01.065
![]() |
[4] | Rastogi N, Trivedi MK (2016) PESTLE technique - A tool to identify external risks in construction projects. J Eng Technol 3: 2395-0056. Available from: www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072. |
[5] | Ritchie H, Roser M, CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. OurWorldInData, 2020. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions. |
[6] |
Olivier JGJ, van Aardenne JA, Dentener FJ, et al. (2005) Recent trends in global greenhouse gas emissions:regional trends 1970-2000 and spatial distribution of key sources in 2000. Environ Sci 2: 81-99. https://doi: 10.1080/15693430500400345. doi: 10.1080/15693430500400345
![]() |
[7] | UN, The Paris Agreement, 2015. Available from: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement. |
[8] |
Kardung M, Cingiz K, Costenoble O, et al. (2021) Development of the Circular Bioeconomy: Drivers and Indicators. Sustainability 13: 413. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010413. doi: 10.3390/su13010413
![]() |
[9] |
Dheskali E, Koutinas AA, Kookos IK (2020) Risk assessment modeling of bio-based chemicals economics based on Monte-Carlo simulations. Chem Eng Res Des 163: 273-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2020.09.011. doi: 10.1016/j.cherd.2020.09.011
![]() |
[10] | de Jong E, Stichnothe H, Bell G, et al. (2020) Biobased Chemicals - a 2020 status update. IEA Bioenergy Task 42 Webinar, 10 March 2020. Available from: https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Bio-based-chemicals-a-2020-update-final-200213.pdf. |
[11] |
Dimitrio I, Goldingay H, Bridgwater, et al. (2019) Techno-economic and uncertainty analysis of Biomass to Liquid (BTL) systems for transport fuel production. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 88: 160-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.023. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.023
![]() |
[12] | IEA, Biofuel and fossil-based transport fuel production cost comparison 2017, 2020. Available from: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/biofuel-and-fossil-based-transport-fuel-production-cost-comparison-2017. |
[13] | Ericsson K, Rosenqvist H, Nilsson LJ (2009) Energy crop production cost in the EU. Biomass Bioenergy 33: 1577-1586. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228465125_Energy_crop_production_costs_in_the_EU. |
[14] | IEA, Indicative shipping fuel cost ranges, 2020. Available from: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/indicative-shipping-fuel-cost-ranges. |
[15] | BGR, Energy Study 2015 - Reserves, Resources and availability of energy resources, 2015. Available from: https://www.bgr.bund.de/EN/Themen/Energie/Downloads/energiestudie_2015_en.pdf;jsessionid=5B9B4BF34E19EC0E67B18D6EE896DFC9.2_cid321?__blob=publicationFile&v=2. |
[16] | Edwards W, Duffy P (2014) Farm Management, In: van Alfen NK. Editor, Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52512-3.00111-X. |
[17] | Gebresenbet G, Bosona T (2012) Logistics and Supply Chains in Agriculture and Food, In: Groznik, A., Xiong, Y., Editors, Pathways to Supply Chain Excellence. InTechOpen. https://doi:10.5772/25907. |
[18] |
Lamers P, Tan ECD, Searcy EM, et al. (2015) Strategic supply system design - a holistic evaluation of operational and production cost for a biorefinery supply chain. Biofuel Bioprod Bioref 9: 648-660. https://doi: 10.1002/bbb.1575. doi: 10.1002/bbb.1575
![]() |
[19] | Nang'ole EM, Mithöfer D, Franzel S (2011) Review of guidelines and manuals for value chain analysis for agricultural and forest products. ICRAF Occasional Paper No. 17. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre. http://apps.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/Publications/PDFS/OP11160.pdf |
[20] |
Dohm, JC, Minoche AE, Holtgräwe D, et al. (2013) The genome of the recently domesticated crop plant sugar beet (Beta vulgaris). Nature 505: 546-549. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12817. doi: 10.1038/nature12817
![]() |
[21] | Kähler F, Carus M, Porc O, et al., Turning off the Tap for Fossil Carbon - Future Prospects for a Global Chemical and Derived Material Sector Based on Renewable Carbon, 2021. Available from: https://renewable-carbon.eu/publications/product/turning-off-the-tap-for-fossil-carbon-future-prospects-for-a-global-chemical-and-derived-material-sector-based-on-renewable-carbon/. |
[22] | Diestel S, Weimar H. Der Kohlenstoffgehalt in Holz- und Papierprodukten -Herleitung und Umrechnungsfaktoren, 2014. Available from: https://www.thuenen.de/media/publikationen/thuenen-workingpaper/ThuenenWorkingPaper_38.pdf. |
[23] |
García-Condado S, López-Lozano R, Panarello L, et al. (2019) Assessing lignocellulosic biomass production from crop residues in the European Union: Modelling, analysis of the current scenario and drivers of interannual variability. GCB Bioenergy 11: 809-831. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12604. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12604
![]() |
[24] | Denaro R, Cappello S, Yakimov MM (2020) Vegetable Oil Wastes, In: Timmis, K.N. Editor, Handbook of Hydrocarbon and Lipid Microbiology, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2393-2399. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77587-4_175. |
[25] | Kircher M (2018) Fundamental biochemical and biotechnological principles of biomass growth and use, In: Ayoub, A.S., Lucia, L. Editors, Introduction to renewable biomaterials, Hoboken, Chichester: Wiley, 1-37. |
[26] | Kircher M (2018) Implementing the Bioeconomy in a Densely Populated and Industrialized Country. Adv Ind Biotechnol 1: 003. Available from: http://www.heraldopenaccess.us/fulltext/Advances-in-Industrial-Biotechnology/Implementing-the-Bioeconomy-in-a-Densily-Populated-and%20Industrialized-Country.php. |
[27] |
Theuerl S, Herrmann C, Heiermann M, et al. (2019) The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision. Energies 12: 396. doi: 10.3390/en12030396. doi: 10.3390/en12030396
![]() |
[28] |
Seleiman MF, Santanen A, Mäkelä PSA (2020) Recycling sludge on cropland as fertilizer - Advantages and risks. Resour Conserv Recycl 155: 104647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104647. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104647
![]() |
[29] |
Bien JB, Malina G, Bien JD et al. (2004) Enhancing Anaerobic Fermentation of Sewage Sludge for Increasing Biogas Generation. J Environ Sci Heal A 39: 939-949. https://doi.org/10.1081/ESE-120028404. doi: 10.1081/ESE-120028404
![]() |
[30] | Bazzanella AM, Ausfelder F (2017) Technology study - Low carbon energy and feedstock for the European chemical industry. Dechema, Frankfurt. Available from: https://dechema.de/dechema_media/Downloads/PositionspapiereTechnology_study_Low_carbon_energy_and_feedstock_for_the_European_chemical_industry.pdf. |
[31] | IEA, Average costs of biogas production technologies per unit of energy produced (excluding feedstock) in 2018, 2020. Available from: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/average-costs-of-biogas-production-technologies-per-unit-of-energy-produced-excluding-feedstock-2018. |
[32] | IEA, Outlook for biogas and biomethane: Prospects for organic growth, 2020. Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/outlook-for-biogas-and-biomethane-prospects-for-organic-growth. |
[33] |
Mistré M, Morgan M, Hafner M (2018) Shale gas production costs: Historical developments and outlook. Energ Strat Rev 20: 20-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2018.01.001. doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2018.01.001
![]() |
[34] | Knoema, Cost to produce a barrel of oil or gas equivalent, 2020. Available from: https://knoema.com/infographics/nolsgce/cost-of-crude-oil-production-by-country-and-crude-oil-prices |
[35] | Siegemund S, Trommler M (2017) The potential of electricity-based fuels for low-emission transport in the EU. DENA, Berlin. Available from: https://www.dena.de/fileadmin/dena/Dokumente/Pdf/9219_E-FUELS-STUDY_The_potential_of_electricity_based_fuels_for_low_emission_transport_in_the_EU.pdf. |
[36] |
Thonemann N (2020) Environmental impacts of CO2-based chemical production: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Appl Energ 263: 114599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114599. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114599
![]() |
[37] | Olfe-Kräutlein B (2020) Advancing CCU Technologies Pursuant to the SDGs: A Challenge for Policy Making. Front Energ Res 8: 198. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenrg.2020.00198/full. |
[38] |
Chauvy R, Meunier N, Thomas D, et al. (2019) Selecting emerging CO2 utilization products for short- to mid-term deployment. Appl Energy 236: 662-680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.11.096. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.11.096
![]() |
[39] | IEA, Global Hydrogen review 2021, 2021. Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-hydrogen-review-2021. |
[40] |
Zetterholm J, Bryngemark E, Ahlström J, et al. (2020) Economic Evaluation of Large-Scale Biorefinery Deployment: A Framework Integrating Dynamic Biomass Market and Techno-Economic Models. Sustainability 12: 7126. https//:doi:10.3390/su12177126. doi: 10.3390/su12177126
![]() |
[41] | Dhamodharan K, Ahlawat S, Kaushal M, et al. (2020) Economics and cost analysis of waste biorefineries, In: Kumar, R.P., Gnansounou, E., Raman, J.K., Baskar, G. Editors, Refining Biomass Residues for Sustainable Energy and Bioproducts, Academic Press, 545-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818996-2.00025-9. |
[42] |
Kohli K, Prajapati R, Sharma BK (2019) Bio-Based Chemicals from Renewable Biomass for Integrated Biorefineries. Energies 12: 233. https//:doi:10.3390/en12020233. doi: 10.3390/en12020233
![]() |
[43] | Kheshgi HS, Prince RC (2005) Sequestration of fermentation CO2 from ethanol production. Energy 30: 1865-1871. Available from: https://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeeenergy/v_3a30_3ay_3a2005_3ai_3a10_3ap_3a1865-1871.htm. |
[44] |
Chinen A, Kozlov YI, Hara Y, et al. (2007) Innovative metabolic pathway design for efficient L-glutamate production by suppressing CO2 emission. J Biosci Bioeng 103: 262-269. Https//:doi:10.1263/jbb.103.262. doi: 10.1263/jbb.103.262
![]() |
[45] |
Czubaszek R, Wysocka-Czubaszek A, Banaszuk P (2020) GHG emissions and efficiency of energy generation through anaerobic fermentation of wetland biomass. Energies 13: 6497. doi: 10.3390/en13246497. doi: 10.3390/en13246497
![]() |
[46] | Loeffler M, Hinrichs J, Moß K, et al. (2018) Processing of Biobased Resources, In: Lewandowski, I., Moesenfechtel, U., Editors, Bioeconomy, Cham: Springer, Cham, 179-230. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68152-8_7. |
[47] | Lee TH, Kim MY, Ryujoung YW, et al. (2001) Estimation of theoretical yield for ethanol production from d-xylose by recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae using metabolic pathway synthesis algorithm. J Microbiol Biotechnol 11: 384-388. Available from: https://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO200111920817655.page. |
[48] | ETIP, Bioenergy in Europe, 2020. Available from: https://etipbioenergy.eu/images/ETIP_B_Factsheet_Bioenergy%20in%20Europe_rev_feb2020.pdf. |
[49] | Scarlat N, Dallemand J, Taylor N, et al., Brief on biomass for energy in the European Union. Publications Office of the European Union, 2019. Available from: https//:doi:10.2760/49052,JRC109354. |
[50] |
Daniel-Gromke J, Rensberg N, Denysenko V, et al. (2018) Current developments in production and utilization of biogas and biomethane in Germany. Chem Ing Tech 90: 17-35. https//:doi:10.1002/cite.201700077. doi: 10.1002/cite.201700077
![]() |
[51] |
Scarlat N, Dallemand JF, Fahl F (2018) Biogas: Developments and perspectives in Europe. Renew Energ 129: 457-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.006. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.006
![]() |
[52] |
Shahid EM, Jamal Y (2011) Production of biodiesel: A technical review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15: 4732-4745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.079. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.079
![]() |
[53] |
Hill J, Nelson E, Tilman D, et al. (2006) Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. JPNAS 103:11206-11210. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0604600103. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0604600103
![]() |
[54] | USDA, Biofuel Mandates in the EU by Member State and United Kingdom - 2021, 2021. Available from: https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=Biofuel%20Mandates%20in%20the%20EU%20by%20Member%20State%20and%20United%20Kingdom%20-%202021_Berlin_European%20Union_06-06-2021.pdf. |
[55] |
Dahmen N, Lewandowski I, Zibek S, et al. (2019) Integrated lignocellulosic value chains in a growing bioeconomy: Status quo and perspectives. GCB Bioenergy 11: 107-117. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12586. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12586
![]() |
[56] |
Lewandowski I, Bahrs E, Dahmen N, et al. (2019) Biobased value chains for a growing bioeconomy. GCB Bioenergy 11: 4-8. https//:doi:10.1111/gcbb.12578. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12578
![]() |
[57] | Zörb C, Lewandowski I, Kindervater R, et al. (2018) Biobased Resources and Value Chains, In: Lewandowski, I., Moesenfechtel, U. Editors, Bioeconomy,, 2018. Cham : Springer, 75-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68152-8_5. |
[58] |
Kumar A, Udugama IA, Gargalo CL, et al. (2020) Why is batch processing still dominating the biologics landscape? Towards an integrated continuous bioprocessing alternative processes. Processes 8: 1641. Https//:doi:10.3390/pr8121641. doi: 10.3390/pr8121641
![]() |
[59] | IQPC, The world's top 10 super refineries, 2013. Available from: https://www.iqpc.com/media/7791/11215.pdf. |
[60] | CropEnergies, The most efficient ethanol plant in Europe, 2021. Available from: https://www.cropenergies.com/en/company/locations/zeitz. |
[61] |
Zetterholm J, Bryngemark E, Ahlström J, et al. (2020) Economic evaluation of large-scale biorefinery deployment: A framework integrating dynamic biomass market and techno-economic models. Sustainability 12: 7126; https//:doi:10.3390/su12177126. doi: 10.3390/su12177126
![]() |
[62] | de Jong E, Jungmeier G (2015) Biorefinery concepts in comparison to petrochemical refineries, In: Pandey, A., Höfer, R., Taherzadeh, M., Nampoothiri, K.M., Larroche, C. Editors, Industrial Biorefineries and White Biotechnology, Elsevier B.V., 3-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63453-5.00001-X. |
[63] | BMWi, Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG 2017), 2018. Available from: https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/renewable-energy-sources-act-2017.pdf%3F__blob%3DpublicationFile%26v%3D3. |
[64] | Asen E, Carbon taxes in Europe, 2021, Tax foundation. Available from: https://taxfoundation.org/carbon-taxes-in-europe-2021/. |
[65] | EC, EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), 2021. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets_en. |
[66] |
Warne AS, Smith T, Goemann E H, et al. (2021) Systematic review on effects of bioenergy from edible versus inedible feedstocks on food security. npc Sci Food 5(9). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-021-00091-6. doi: 10.1038/s41538-021-00091-6
![]() |
[67] | EC Science Hub, Renewable Energy - Recast to 2030 (RED II), 2019. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/jec/renewable-energy-recast-2030-red-ii. |
[68] | Dechezleprêtre A, Nachtigall D, Venmans F (2018) The joint impact of the European Union emissions trading system on carbon emissions and economic performance, Paris: OECD. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/4819b016-en. |
[69] | Bazzanella AM, Ausfelder F (2017) Low carbon energy and feedstock for the European chemical industry. Frankfurt: Dechema. Available from: https://dechema.de/dechema_media/Downloads/PositionspapiereTechnology_study_Low_carbon_energy_and_feedstock_for_the_European_chemical_industry.pdf. |
[70] | epure, Overview of biofuels policies and markets across the EU-27 and the UK, 2021. Available from: https://www.epure.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/201104-DEF-REP-Overview-of-biofuels-policies-and-markets-across-the-EU-Nov.-2020.pdf. |
[71] | Bayer P, Aklin M (2020) The European Union Emissions Trading System reduced CO2 emissions despite low prices. PNAS 117: 8804-8812. Available from: www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1918128117. |
[72] | E4tech, Nova-institute, BTG, Dechema, Roadmap for the chemical industry in Europe towards a bioeconomy, 2019. Available from: https://roadtobio.eu/uploads/publications/roadmap/RoadToBio_strategy_document.pdf. |
[73] | EC, Effort sharing 2021-2030: targets and flexibilities, 2021. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/effort-sharing-member-states-emission-targets/effort-sharing-2021-2030-targets-and-flexibilities_en. |
[74] |
Levi PG, Cullen JM (2018) Mapping global flows of chemicals: From fossil fuel feedstocks to chemical products. Environ Sci Technol 52: 1725-1734. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b04573. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b04573
![]() |
[75] |
Kircher M (2021) Bioeconomy - present status and future needs of industrial value chains. New Biotechnol 60: 96-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2020.09.005. doi: 10.1016/j.nbt.2020.09.005
![]() |
[76] | Field CP, Raupach MR, Editors (2004) The global carbon cycle, SCOPE 62, Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press. Available from: https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/products/field-raupach-island-2004-outline.htm. |
[77] | Ritchie H, Roser M, Our World in Data, Global fossil fuel consumption, 2020. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels#global-fossil-fuel-consumption. |
[78] | FAO, World Food and Agriculture - Statistical Yearbook 2020, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1329en. |
[79] | FAO, Forest product statistics, 2020. Available from: https://www.fao.org/forestry/statistics/80938/en/. |
[80] |
Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J, et al. (2015) Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. SCIENCE 347: 6223. https//:doi:10.1126/science.1259855. doi: 10.1126/science.1259855
![]() |
[81] |
Salzman J, Bennett G, Carroll N, et al. (2018) The global status and trends of payments for Ecosystem Services. Nat Sustain 1: 136-144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0033-0. doi: 10.1038/s41893-018-0033-0
![]() |
[82] | EIA, About 7% of fossil fuels are consumed for non-combustion use in the United States, 2018. Available from: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=35672. |
[83] |
Winchester N, Reilly JM (2015) The feasibility, costs, and environmental implications of large-scale biomass energy. Energy Economics 51: 188-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.06.016. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2015.06.016
![]() |
[84] | Biofuels International, BA and Phillips 66 agree first ever UK produced SAF, 2021.Available from: https://biofuels-news.com/news/ba-and-phillips-66-agree-first-ever-uk-produced-saf/. |
[85] | Renewable Carbon News, How to meet the global need for carbon as a feedstock in the chemical and derived materials sector in the future? 2021. Available from: https://renewable-carbon.eu/news/how-to-meet-the-global-need-for-carbon-as-a-feedstock-in-the-chemical-and-derived-materials-sector-in-the-future/. |
[86] | EPA, Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, 2021. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data. |
[87] | Stegmann P, Londo M, Junginger M (2020) The circular bioeconomy: Its elements and role in European bioeconomy clusters. Resour Conserv Recycl X: 100029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcrx.2019.100029. |
[88] |
Hamelin L, Borzecka M, Kozak M, et al. (2019) A spatial approach to bioeconomy: Quantifying the residual biomass potential in the EU-27, 2019. Renew Sust Energ Rev 100: 127-142. Https//:doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.10.017. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.10.017
![]() |
[89] |
Meyer R (2017) Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates. Sustainability 9: 1031. https//:doi:10.3390/su9061031. doi: 10.3390/su9061031
![]() |
[90] |
Muscat A, de Olde EM, Ripoll-Bosch R, et al. (2021) Principles, drivers and opportunities of a circular bioeconomy. Nat. Food 2: 561-566. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00340-7. doi: 10.1038/s43016-021-00340-7
![]() |
[91] |
Dagle RA, Winkelman AD, Ramasamy KK, et al. (2020) Ethanol as a Renewable Building Block for Fuels and Chemicals. Ind Eng Chem Res 59: 4843-4853. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.9b05729. doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.9b05729
![]() |
[92] |
Bringezu S, Distelkamp M, Lutz C, et al. (2021) Environmental and socioeconomic footprints of the German bioeconomy. Nat Sustain 4: 775-783. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00725-3. doi: 10.1038/s41893-021-00725-3
![]() |
[93] |
Fragkos P, Paroussos L (2018) Employment creation in EU related to renewables expansion. Appl. Energy 230: 935-945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.09.032. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.09.032
![]() |
[94] |
Jander W, Wydra S, Wackerbauer J, et al. (2020) Monitoring bioeconomy transitions with economic-environmental and innovation indicators: Addressing data gaps in the short term. Sustainability 12: 4683. doi: 10.3390/su12114683. doi: 10.3390/su12114683
![]() |
[95] |
Piergiuseppe M, Caferra R, D'Adamo I, et al. (2021) Consumer willingness to pay for bio-based products: Do certifications matter? Int J Prod Econ 240: 108248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108248. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108248
![]() |
[96] |
Majer S, Wurster S, Moosmann D, et al. (2018) Gaps and Research Demand for Sustainability Certification and Standardisation in a Sustainable Bio-Based Economy in the EU. Sustainability 10: 2455. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072455. doi: 10.3390/su10072455
![]() |
[97] | Piotrowski S, Carus M, Carrez D (2020) European Bioeconomy in Figures 2008 - 2016, 2019, Knapsack: nova-Institute for Ecology and Innovation, Brussels: BIC. Available from: https://biovale.org.temp.link/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/European-Bioeconomy-in-Figures-2008-2016_0.pdf. |
[98] | Gawel E, Purkus A, Pannicke N, et al. (2018) A Governance Framework for a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Insights from the Case of the German Wood-based Bioeconomy, In: Filho, W.L., Pociovălișteanu, D.M., Borges de Brito, P.R., Borges de Lima, I. Editors, Towards a sustainable bioeconomy: Principles, challenges and perspectives, Springer International Publishing AG 517-537. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73028-8_26. |
[99] |
Kircher M (2021) The framework conditions must be aligned to the requirements of the bioeconomy. EFB Bioeconomy J 1:100003. https//:doi:10.1016/j.bioeco.2021.100003. doi: 10.1016/j.bioeco.2021.100003
![]() |
[100] |
Marvik OJ, Philp JC (2021) The systemic challenge of the bioeconomy: A policy framework for transitioning towards a sustainable carbon cycle economy. EMBO Reports 21:e51478. Https//:doi10.15252/embr.202051478. doi: 10.15252/embr.202051478
![]() |
[101] | BIC, Bioeconomy and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, 2018. Available from: https://biconsortium.eu/sites/biconsortium.eu/files/documents/Bioeconomy_and_the_SDGs_July%202018.pdf. |
[102] |
Linser S, Lier M (2020) The contribution of sustainable development goals and forest-related indicators to National Bioeconomy Progress Monitoring. Sustainability 12: 2898. doi: 10.3390/su12072898. doi: 10.3390/su12072898
![]() |
[103] | Heimann T (2019) Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Does the bioeconomy support the achievement of the SDGs? Earth's Future 7. https//:doi:10.1029/2018EF001014. |
[104] |
Welsby D, Price J, Pye S, et al. (2021) Unextractable fossil fuels in a 1.5 ℃ world. Nature 597: 230-234. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03821-8. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03821-8
![]() |