Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 101060264. Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies Updated in January 2025 Duygu Celik, Silvia Caneva, Chuan Ma, Yasmin Zaror D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 2 Document information Project name: SCALE-UP Project title: Concepts, tools and applications for community-driven bioeconomy development in European rural areas Project number: 101060264 Start date: 1st September 2022 Duration: 36 months Report: D5.1: Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies Work Package: WP5: Participatory Governance & Inclusive Transition Work Package leader: WIP Task: Task 5.1: Exploring the concept of “social innovation” in the context of rural bioeconomies Task leader: WIP Responsible author(s): Silvia Caneva, Duygu Celik (WIP) Internal peer review: Emilija Mihajloska, Pavlina Zdraveva (SDEWES) Planned delivery date: M18 Actual delivery date: M18 Revised date M27 Reporting period: RP1 Dissemination level of this report PU Public x PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENT & DISCLAIMER This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101060264. The information and views set out in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Cover page photos © BFR, CTA, UNIMOS, franceagritwittos.com, and pixabay.com D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following executive summary outlines the key findings and recommendations from the SCALE-UP project’s social innovation handbook about implementing social innovation in rural bioeconomies, focusing on the project’s pilot regions: Northern Sweden, Mazovia (Poland), French Atlantic Arc (France), Upper Austria (Austria), Strumica (North Macedonia), and Andalusia (Spain). The study addresses the crucial role of social innovation in enhancing the participation of social actors within rural bioeconomies, aligning with the European Union's recognition of social innovation as a vital component of innovation policy. Social innovation is defined as the creation of sustainable products or services that meet societal needs while fostering collaboration among citizens and stakeholders. Social innovation contributes to economic growth by creating new opportunities for innovation, job creation, and product/service enhancement. It addresses various societal concerns such as poverty, inequality, environmental sustainability, health, and economic development. The study identifies seven primary stakeholder groups essential for driving social innovation in rural bioeconomies: primary producers, secondary producers, government and policy bodies, research and academic institutions, industry associations, environmental organizations, and community representatives. Each group plays a unique role in fostering innovation and sustainable development. In each of the six pilot regions, tailored social innovation solutions are proposed to address specific challenges and capitalize on regional strengths. These solutions include collaborative platforms, incentive programs, educational campaigns, sustainable tourism initiatives, and circular economy trainings, among others. Overall, the SCALE-UP project aims to promote sustainable, inclusive, and fair circular bioeconomies by fostering citizen participation and implementing best practices tailored to each region's characteristics. Through the integration of participatory governance and innovative solutions, rural bioeconomies can transit towards more sustainable practices and resilient communities. D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 5 Table of contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 8 2. Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 9 3. The Social Innovation Concept ........................................................................................................ 10 3.1 Definitions of Social Innovation ........................................................................................ 11 3.2 The Relevance of Social Innovation ................................................................................ 12 4. Social Innovation for Rural Bioeconomies ..................................................................................... 15 4.1 Stakeholders .................................................................................................................... 16 4.2 Good Practices of Social Innovation for Rural Bioeconomies ......................................... 19 5. Social Innovations for the SCALE-UP Regions ............................................................................. 33 5.1 Northern Sweden ............................................................................................................. 35 5.2 Mazovia (Poland) ............................................................................................................. 37 5.3 French Atlantic Arc (Pays de la Loire/ Normandy/ Brittany/ New-Aquitaine) ................... 39 5.4 Upper Austria ................................................................................................................... 41 5.5 Strumica (North Macedonia) ............................................................................................ 42 5.6 Andalusia (Spain) ............................................................................................................. 44 6. Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................................. 45 7. References ......................................................................................................................................... 46 D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 6 Figures Figure 1: Visualisation of the project’s conceptual framework (Gerdes, et al., 2023) .......................... 8 Figure 2: How close are we to reaching global warming of 1.5˚C? (Copernicus Climate Service, 2022) ..................................... 13 Figure 3: Social tipping dynamics for stabilizing Earth’s climate by 2050 (Otto, et al., 2020) .................................................... 13 Figure 4: GFW online platform (Global Forest Watch, 2023) .......................................................................................................... 21 Figure 5: InnovaWood projects and initiatives (InnovaWood Project, 2023) ................................................................................ 22 Figure 6: Circular economy butterfly diagram (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2023) ..................................................................... 27 Figure 7: Valuewaste pilots (Valuewaste Communication Campaigns, 2023) ................................................................................ 29 Figure 8: Project Regions (SCALE-UP Regions, 2024) .................................................................................................................. 33 Photos Photo 1: Interaction with the SCALE-UP partners (SCALE-UP World Café) ................................................................................ 10 Photo 2: Presentation of the handbook on social innovation for rural bioeconomies (SCALE-UP World Café) ....................... 10 Photo 3: Lesná škola Levice LESY Slovenskej republiky š.p. organizačná zložka OZ Podunajsko (Forest Schools) ............. 20 Photo 4: Activists (The Climate Reality Project, 2023) .................................................................................................................... 30 Photo 5: Award ceremony (Week van de Circulaire Economie, 2023) ............................................................................................ 32 Photo 6: Northern Sweden (BioFuel Region) .................................................................................................................................. 35 Photo 7: Northern Sweden (BioFuel Region) .................................................................................................................................. 36 Photo 8: Mazovia (Unimos Alliance) ................................................................................................................................................ 37 Photo 9: Mazovia (Unimos Alliance) ................................................................................................................................................ 38 Photo 10: Andalusia (CTA) ............................................................................................................................................................. 44 Tables Table 1: The human needs (Benedetti, 2020) ................................................................................................................................. 15 Table 2: Social innovation stakeholders and their roles (WIP Renewable Energies) ................................................................... 17 D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 7 Abbreviations AT Austria CHP Combined Heat and Power CH4 Methane CO2 Carbon Dioxide EAFRD European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development ES Spain EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation FR France FSC Forest Stewardship Council GFW Global Forest Watch GHG Greenhouse Gas LG Logging Residues MK Macedonia NGO Non-Governmental Organization PL Poland REC Renewable Energy Community RTD Research, Technology, and Development SE Sweden SSP Share Socioeconomic Pathways STE Social Tipping Elements STI Social Tipping Interventions UHSN Normandy Union for Social Housing D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 8 1. Introduction There is an increasing awareness about how important is to include citizens and social aspects in the context of rural bioeconomies. Without this dimension, the impact of any action of bio-based innovations in rural areas will not be sufficient. Social innovation can be seen as the boost for the adaptation of sustainable and innovative practices. This handbook has been developed in the framework of SCALE-UP project with the aim of providing stakeholders with guidelines for the identification of good practises of social innovation in rural bioeconomies. The focus is on the stakeholders of the SCALE-UP project case study areas: Northern Sweden (SE), Mazovia (PL), French Atlantic Arc (FR), Upper Austria (AT), Strumica (MK), Andalusia (ES), and any activities addressing the research question of the SCALE-UP project: “How can social innovation increase the role of the social actors in a rural bioeconomy context?” The overall concept underpinning the SCALE-UP project builds on a holistic approach to boost the development of regional bioeconomies and promote social, environmental and economic benefits in the broader context of rural development. The ‘second pillar’ of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), aiming at strengthening the social, environmental and economic sustainability of rural areas, provides a relevant framework for the proposed activities (European Union, 2023). Related to the need to embed the bioeconomy in the context of rural development, SCALE-UP focuses on the six priorities of the EAFRD, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (European Commission, 2023) as shown in Figure 1: Visualisation of the project’s conceptual framework. Social innovation plays a significant role to support, develop, and implement biobased solutions in rural areas in line with the six priorities of the EAFRD. The first initiative to support social innovation was launched in 2011 by Manuel Barraso, at that time President of the European Commission (Ludvig, Weiss , Sarkki, Nijnik , & Živojinović , 2018). This initiative differs from other EU innovation strategies since it does not only focus on business-driven innovation, but also includes other areas such as health, social services and education. Since then, social innovation has been promoted and supported in different ways by the Commission, including competitions, calls, funding opportunities. Despite these commendable efforts, it is crucial to acknowledge the existing gaps, notably the absence of a robust, mature European-focused network of social innovators. The unequal access to new technologies across European countries poses a challenge in disseminating social innovation initiatives uniformly. Addressing these challenges will be integral to the success of the SCALE-UP project and the broader mission of integrating social innovation into the essence of rural bioeconomies across Europe. Figure 1: Visualisation of the project’s conceptual framework (Gerdes, et al., 2023) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 9 2. Methodology The methodology employed in selecting social innovations for the SCALE-UP project ensures a comprehensive and replicable approach that can be adapted for use in diverse regions and sectors beyond rural bioeconomies of SCALE-UP. The systematic process of the selected methodology unfolds through a series of key steps, described in the next paragraphs, emphasizing a holistic understanding of social innovation and its application in the specific context of rural bioeconomies. Throughout the entire process, ethical considerations were prioritized. Informed consent was obtained from the interviewed stakeholders, and the name of all references consulted are included in this handbook. • Literature Review and Projects Analysis A thorough investigation of related studies, reports, and outcomes of sister projects and relevant initiatives was conducted. Reference projects are as follows: BE-Rural, MainStreamBio, RuralBioUp, SafeHabitus, Ruralities, BE-Rural, Power4Bio, BIOEASTsUP, Magic, BIOREGIO, BRIGAID, SIMRA, SocialRES, RurAction, CircuBAD, SI-DRIVE, CoSIE, COOPID, CEE2ACT, ROBIN, and SONNET. Relevant documents, including deliverables, websites, digital platforms, and policy briefs, were scrutinized to extract valuable insights into social innovation within the bioeconomy context. • EU Policy Analysis The approach of the European Union towards social innovation was analysed by examining Commission's policy frameworks, funding-financial instruments, and social innovation ecosystems. This step ensures alignment with EU strategies and guidelines in the development of social innovations. The social innovation policy in the European Union was underpinned by three core frameworks: the Europe 2020 strategy (2010–2020), the Social Business Initiative, and the Social Investment Package. These frameworks served to provide coherence and organization to the implementation of social innovation policies. They not only outlined the specific objectives of social innovation initiatives but also contextualized them within the broader social, political, and economic goals of the EU. However, it is crucial to understand social innovation policies within their wider context to recognize how competing priorities, interests, and challenges are managed by public bodies and stakeholders (Nicholls & Edmiston , 2018). • Scientific Publications and Knowledge Synthesis A comprehensive review of scientific publications, focusing on academic papers, reports, case studies, and books related to social innovation, rural development, and bioeconomies, was conducted and listed in the references. This synthesized existing knowledge and identified key concepts, theories, good practices, and challenges in the field. • Definition of Social Innovation Following the collection of up-to-date information, a precise definition of social innovation was drafted (see chapter 3.1). This definition served as a guiding framework for the subsequent selection of social innovations in the six SCALE-UP regions. • Project Partner Interactions Continuous engagement and collaboration with SCALE-UP project partners played a pivotal role. Regular project meetings (see Photo 1 and Photo 2) provided a platform to exchange information, understand regional needs, and shape recommendations for the handbook. D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 16 One pivotal aspect of social innovation in rural bioeconomies involves fostering social awareness and collaboration. This includes cultivating a sense of shared responsibility and knowledge sharing among diverse stakeholders. Collaborative networks become instrumental in collectively addressing challenges and exploring innovative solutions that benefit both society and the bioeconomy. The exchange of good practices emerges as another cornerstone of social innovation within bioeconomies. By sharing successful models and approaches, communities can learn from each other, accelerating the adoption of effective strategies. This knowledge-sharing ecosystem plays a crucial role in navigating the complexities of rural bioeconomies and adapting solutions to local contexts. Circular economy principles feature prominently in the application of social innovation in bioeconomies. The emphasis here lies on minimizing waste, promoting resource efficiency, and closing material loops. This not only contributes to environmental sustainability but also fosters a more resilient and resourceconscious bioeconomy. Furthermore, social innovation actively supports sustainable agriculture and food systems within rural areas. Initiatives may include the introduction of innovative farming practices, community-supported agriculture models, and the promotion of local and organic food production. These endeavours not only contribute to the well-being of local communities but also align with the broader goals of sustainability and resilience. The utilization of renewable energy sources and biofuels represents a critical facet of social innovation in bioeconomies. By transitioning towards cleaner and more sustainable energy practices, rural areas can reduce their dependence on traditional energy sources, mitigate environmental impact, and contribute to a more sustainable and resilient bioeconomy. As we delve into the chapters ahead, a detailed exploration of exemplary cases will illuminate how these good practices have been effectively applied in similar contexts. The objective is to distil insights that can inform and inspire sustainable and impactful social innovation initiatives within the specific regions under examination in the SCALE-UP project. 4.1 Stakeholders Social innovation stakeholders cover wide range of groups who are individuals, organizations, and institutions that are involved in the creation, implementation, and support of social innovations. These stakeholders coming from a variety of sectors and backgrounds work together to create innovative solutions that address social problems and improve the well-being of individuals and communities. Stakeholder mapping is essential for ensuring a systematic and accurate identification of relevant stakeholders needed for the identified social innovation. It provides a structured approach to categorize and analyse stakeholders, developing a solid understanding of their roles, relationships, and potential contributions. Social innovation stakeholder groups are described in detail below. According to the authors of this handbook, their role can be categorized as shown in Table 2. Hannah Busing (Unsplash) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 17 Table 2: Social innovation stakeholders and their roles (WIP Renewable Energies) Stakeholders Role Primary Producers Contributing to sustainable resource management, technology adoption, environmental stewardship, and knowledge sharing Secondary Producers Creation of value-added goods or services, additional economic value Government and Policy Bodies Policy development and regulation, funding and investment, infrastructure development, promotion of collaboration, monitoring and evaluation Research and Academic Institutions R&D, knowledge dissemination through publications, policy advocacy, entrepreneurship and start-up support Industry Associations Member representation, market development, certification, setting standards, networking and collaboration Environmental Organizations Regulation and compliance, technical assistance, education and outreach, monitoring and evaluation Community Representatives Voice, community engagement, conflict resolution, local entrepreneurship Primary production includes agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and aquaculture. The focus is on the producers of agriculture, forestry and their bioproducts in order to be in line with the scope of SCALEUP project. Social innovation in rural bioeconomies stand for inclusive bioeconomies. Social inclusion is possible via several ways. According to Park and Grundmann, primary producers’ participation to social innovation practices could be as follows: inclusion through yield improvement technologies, rural development, valorisation of ecosystem services, or through international development. When actors, such as primary producers in rural areas, perceive changes in their reality, whether due to technological advances or resource depletion, they are driven to adapt the institutional structure to better serve their interests and well-being (Park & Grundmann, 2023). Social innovation initiatives can be transformative to overcome this. By empowering primary producers through knowledge sharing, policy advocacy, collaborative initiatives, capacity building, better access to resources and digital solutions, we can enable them to proactively embrace change, overcome challenges and secure their interests and wellbeing in the evolving to an inclusive bioeconomy. Secondary production. In the context of bio-rural economies and social innovation initiatives, secondary production refers to the creation of value-added goods or services derived from the utilization of by-products, waste materials, or resources generated in the primary production processes. Secondary production builds on primary production by finding innovative ways to maximize the use of the by-products or residual materials generated in these primary processes. The goal is to create additional economic value, generate employment opportunities, and contribute to the overall well-being of rural communities. Governments and policy bodies. In order to create real social benefit, according to Steiner et al. public bodies should encourage the implementation of social innovation projects. Governmental actors should be aware that social innovation necessitates shifting power dynamics and turning hierarchical structures into more cooperative alliances (Steiner, Barraket, Calo, & Farmer, 2021). This group might include local and regional governments, environmental agencies, forestry departments, agricultural departments, agri-food / circular-food clusters in the frame of SCALE-UP project. They have significant role in fostering collaborations within rural bioeconomies. Their importance lies in creating an D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 18 environment where diverse stakeholders, including farmers, businesses, research institutions, and local communities, can come together to collectively drive social innovations. Policies that encourage collaboration facilitate the sharing of knowledge, resources, and best practices, leading to more effective and sustainable solutions in rural bioeconomic activities. Creating interface structures and fostering self-reflection in governmental practice and institutions, governance networking and communication between varied actors boost actors' interactions and improve the quality of actions (Galego, Moulaert, Brans, & Santinha, 2021), (Massey & Johnston-Miller, 2016). Research and academic institutions are other stakeholders of social innovation practices. Cunha and Benneworth explained the role of those establishments. Research and academic institutions create a framework that serves multiple purposes for social innovations. Firstly, it aids universities in identifying and supporting worthwhile social innovation initiatives through a robust measurement approach. Secondly, it enables the measurement of micro-practices and their alignment with higherlevel decision-making and policies, facilitating the identification of successful components. Lastly, as universities increasingly recognize their social engagement, they should demonstrate their social performance, considering the perspectives and expectations of both internal and external stakeholders. This necessitates a dialogue between universities and stakeholders, ensuring the effective implementation and scalability of social innovation efforts. In summary, research and academic institutions can use this adaptable framework to effectively measure and manage their involvement in social innovation, fostering collaboration with diverse stakeholders and adaptability to evolving contexts (Cunha & Benneworth, 2020). Industry associations work to expand markets for bio-based products and services. They can help rural businesses access new customers and distribution channels, promoting economic growth in these areas. They help rural businesses access funding opportunities, grants, and resources for research, development, and infrastructure improvement projects. Moreover, those associations create a network environment that can lead to cross-sector partnerships and the creation of innovative solutions that address rural development challenges. Industry associations are important for driving social innovations because they act as influential intermediaries between businesses, their members, and government bodies by representing the interest of their members. Environmental organizations do research that promotes policy formation, institutional capacity building, and create independent engagement with civil society to help people living more sustainable lives. They stand for and support regulations that promote responsible resource management, provide technical expertise to improve sustainable practices, educate and engage communities and businesses in the concept of environmental conservation. Moreover, they can monitor and evaluate various projects based on their know-how. Environmental organizations, through these functions, help to the creation of innovative and sustainable solutions that balance economic growth with environmental responsibility in rural areas. Community representatives play an important role in fostering social innovations because they act as the true voice of their communities, expressing issues and needs and ensuring that solutions are relevant with citizens at the centre. They encourage community involvement, motivate individuals to join in activities, and develop a feeling of collective responsibility. Furthermore, community representatives navigate and resolve problems within the society, setting the path for the successful implementation of creative ideas. Additionally, their capacity to discover local economic opportunities and encourage entrepreneurship brings economic growth, self-sufficiency, and sustainability. Their diverse contributions are critical in fostering social innovations by linking local projects with the specific needs and ambitions of the communities they represent. D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 19 4.2 Good Practices of Social Innovation for Rural Bioeconomies Guided by the social innovation definition outlined in this handbook, which underscores the provision of valuable and sustainable products or services meeting societal needs while fostering new relationships and collaborations, this subchapter seeks to shed light on effective strategies and successful social innovation initiatives within rural bioeconomies. In doing so, the objective is not only to inspire and educate readers but also to provide actionable insights, problem-solving approaches, and tangible models for implementation. Social innovation within rural bioeconomies often takes the form of community-driven initiatives that directly respond to local needs. One prevalent example involves the establishment of collaborative networks, such as community-supported agriculture or circular economy initiatives. These fosters direct connections between producers and consumers, minimize waste, and promote resource efficiency, thereby contributing to both societal well-being and environmental sustainability. Renewable energy cooperatives serve as another illustrative example of social innovation in rural settings. By enabling collective investment in and benefits from renewable energy projects, these cooperatives address local energy needs while nurturing a sense of community and collaboration among residents. Such initiatives underscore the dual impact of social innovation in meeting societal needs and forging new relationships within the community (Dall-Orsoletta, Cunha, Araújo, & Ferreira, 2022). Community-led initiatives, such as forest management programs, exemplify social innovation by actively involving local communities in sustainable practices. By ensuring responsible resource use and conservation efforts, these initiatives meet societal needs while engendering a sense of shared responsibility and environmental stewardship. In the forthcoming chapters, these general examples will be thoughtfully adapted for each SCALE-UP region, considering the unique characteristics of each local aspect. This approach ensures that social innovation proposals are not only contextually relevant but also exemplary for the specific needs and challenges of each region. The overarching goal is to cultivate a culture of continuous improvement, enabling the adaptation and replication of successful social innovation models to address the evolving dynamics of rural bioeconomies. 4.2.1 Local bioeconomy and forest management cooperatives In many situations, private forest ownership is divided into small parts by inheritance and profitable management of that area is no longer possible; many forest heirs/owners are looking for prospective buyers as a way out and some of the potential investors have explicit deforestation ambitions. Cooperatives are useful tools for preventing deforestation managing the forest responsibly. The Remscheid Forest Cooperative is a best practice forest cooperative that has been operating successfully for several years (Wolff, 2019). Cooperatives bring together all local stakeholders to enhance the sustainable utilization of local resources, stimulate economic growth, and strengthen communities. Cooperatives play an essential role in rural development as means of job creation, food security, more equitable revenue distribution, and maybe poverty alleviation (Altman, 2015). Cooperatives are typically more concerned with local issues than national, regional, or international issues, because their primary priority is to address the individual and communal needs of its members (International Labour Organization, 2015). Sebastian Unrau (Unsplash) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 20 Cooperatives help to ensure that natural resources remain available by providing a forum for local people to find solutions to environmental change by defining their property and user rights, managing natural resources, and diversifying their economic activities to embrace green economic ventures. A good example comes from Indonesia, where forestry cooperatives promote sustainable usage of tropical hardwood and have gained Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) accreditation for the furniture industry, overcoming monopolies of wood purchasers and earning a sustainable life (Altman, 2015). 4.2.2 Forest education centres The primary focus of forest education is to develop the knowledge, skills, and shared values necessary for sustainable forest management and its contributions to environmental, social, and economic development on local and global scales. For nearly two decades, forest education has been largely absent from the global forest policy agenda. However recently, there has been a renewed interest in forest education, evidenced by increased activities from research organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Notably, forest education was included in the agenda of the 14th session of the United Nations Forum on Forests in May 2019. This indicates a growing recognition that forest education is a crucial part of the solution to various challenges, including deforestation, forest degradation, ecosystem protection, livelihood enhancement, biodiversity conservation, and climate change mitigation and adaptation (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2022). Forest education centers allow people to learn about sustainable forestry practices, forest ecosystems, and the bioeconomy. These centres could also offer workshops on woodworking and other forest-related skills. Forest education can be delivered to all members of society, including children, adults, farmers, teachers, public servants, and other professions. Furthermore, in its report on forest education, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation (FAO) (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2022) recommended concrete steps as: • Forest education should begin before primary school. • Forest-related issues should be covered in primary and secondary school curricula as separate subjects as well as integrated with other subjects. • Teachers should be given additional training in forest-related issues as well as instructional abilities. • Outdoor learning and the use of forests as learning spaces should be given systematic support. A relevant initiative is the Forest Schools project, funded by the European Union (EU). In the frame of the project several forest schools will be established (Forest Schools Project, 2023). Photo 3: Lesná škola Levice LESY Slovenskej republiky š.p. organizačná zložka OZ Podunajsko (Forest Schools) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 21 4.2.3 Forest innovation grants The financial dimension of innovation has practical value, and as a result, there is a need to incorporate the financial sector and its link with the entrepreneurial process into the theorization of innovation and entrepreneurship in the forestry sector (Callegari & Nybakk , 2022). In their research, D’Amato et al. highlights the importance of financial support and mentions citing a scarcity of investors and limited availability of private funds for ventures related to bio-based products in the forestry sector (D'Amato, Veijonaho, & Toppinen, 2020). Innovation grants encourage local entrepreneurs, researchers, and community groups to develop innovative products and technologies using forest byproducts. European Commission funding opportunities on forest research and innovation. However local grants, administered by organizations familiar with local challenges, provide targeted, context-specific support, more flexibility and adaptability to regional conditions. With reduced bureaucracy, quicker decision-making, and an emphasis on collaboration, local grants encourage community ownership and the development of tailored solutions. By investing in capacity building and considering cultural nuances, these grants contribute to sustainable initiatives that align closely with the needs and values of the local forest ecosystem. As an example, Global Forest Watch (GFW) is an online platform (Fig. 4) that provides data and tools for monitoring forests. Moreover, they provide grants and opportunities for the realization of relevant projects (Global Forest Watch, 2023). Figure 4: GFW online platform (Global Forest Watch, 2023) 4.2.4 Wood fuel network Wood fuel network can be a stimulator to SCALE-UP rural bioeconomies. However, underutilization of logging residues, such as branches and tops, which represent a valuable biomass resource stands against scaling-up. By creating a network that connects buyers and sellers, this social innovation enables the efficient utilization of these logging residues, contributing to diversified and sustainable Micheile Henderson (Unsplash) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 22 wood fuel sources. Moreover, it helps to mobilize all actors within the whole value chain and to communicate and exchange best practices for cost-effective deliveries of logging residues with high quality. The network serves as a collaborative platform, allowing stakeholders to make informed decisions, share best practices, and collectively work towards optimizing resource utilization. Additionally, it ensures the delivery of high-quality wood fuels through standardized practices, aligning with the broader goal of advancing bio-based products beyond traditional energy generation. The economic growth stimulated by such networks in rural areas creates opportunities for businesses involved in wood fuel production, transportation, and sales, fostering a resilient and advanced bioeconomy on the regional scale (SCALE-UP Project, 2023). InnovaWood is a network of forest and wood science and technology in European scale. It consists of 60 organisations in 28 countries, including research institutes, universities, and regional cluster organisations throughout the value chain from forestry and wood processing to construction, furniture and the circular economy (InnovaWood Project, 2023). Establishing a network in regional scale offers localized benefits for specific needs. It allows for optimized logistics, cultural fit and faster adaptation to changes. Figure 5: InnovaWood projects and initiatives (InnovaWood Project, 2023) 4.2.5 Collaborative platform Bringing together primary producers, research institutions, and industry associations facilitates the knowledge exchange and foster cross-sectoral partnerships. This kind of a platform would serve as a hub for sharing insights on efficient agricultural practices, innovative processing techniques, and sustainable bioeconomy technologies. During the establishment of collaborative platform some points need to be taken into account, such as the importance of considering initiative goals, adjusting methods over time, and recognizing the engagement power of small-scale events. Additionally, practitioners are advised to invest time and resources in extensive communication efforts to describe collaborative platforms accurately, engage the community, and involve relevant actors from both local and governmental sides (Temmerman, Veeckman, & Ballon, 2021). In the frame of SCALE-UP, collaborative platforms will be established for each region of the project. Within the platforms, specialized steering groups will be formed with the responsibility of interacting D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 23 with all regional bioeconomy stakeholders, guaranteeing efficient information sharing, arranging introductions between regional players, and supervising the execution of focused innovation support services. Each platform will have formal terms of reference that outline its goals and organizational structure (SCALE-UP Project, 2023). Besides the collaborative platforms developed in the framework of the SCALE-UP project, another relevant example is OpenTEAM a collaborative platform that focuses on regenerative agriculture. It integrates data from various sources, including farmers, researchers, and technology providers, to improve soil health and promote sustainable practices. It involves collaboration between farmers, scientists, and technology developers to enhance agricultural productivity while minimizing environmental impact (OpenTEAM, 2023). Another example is SmartAgriHubs, that is a European project that aims to foster digital innovation in agriculture. It involves a network of digital innovation hubs that collaborate to support the development and implementation of digital solutions in farming practices. The project encourages collaboration among farmers, technology developers, and researchers to enhance the digital transformation of rural agriculture (Smart Agri Hubs, 2023). 4.2.6 Bio-based packaging incentives Local government and policy bodies could introduce initiatives to encourage the adoption of bio-based packaging among agrifood producers. This could involve providing financial support for local businesses that transition to more environmentally friendly packaging solutions, thereby reducing plastic waste and promoting a circular economy. Potential incentives could be (Kędzia, et al., 2022): • Formation of a trade association of bioplastics processors (and/or compostable packaging manufacturers). • Education for all generations of society is founded on consensus and coherent communication. • The development of a high-quality law. • Increasing the awareness and qualifications of specialists who formulate legal restrictions in order to influence the increase in the share of biodegradable packaging in the food packaging market. • When creating legal regulations, take into account the views of business practitioners. • Open dialogue across the worlds of science, industry, and government. • Research and development initiatives carried out in collaboration between scientific and business units. • Optional solutions development as part of bottom-up actions of biodegradable packaging supply chain stakeholders (e.g., certification). An example is from Novamont, an Italian bioplastics company, produces Mater-Bi compostable bags made from agricultural byproducts, such as corn starch and plant oils. These bags are designed to be used for waste collection and composted in municipal composting facilities (Novamont, 2023). Agenlaku Indonesia (Unsplash) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 24 4.2.7 Educational campaigns and workshops Environmental education is a critical component in combating climate change (Frantz & Mayer, 2014). In order to foster a sense of environmental consciousness and engagement among farmers, campaigns and workshops could be organized in collaboration with academic institutions and NGOs. These efforts would raise awareness about sustainable agricultural practices and encourage local communities to actively participate in the region's bioeconomic development. Workshops provide spaces for community engagement, encouraging collaboration and the co-creation of solutions. Also, the aim of this initiatives is to bring about behavioral change by raising awareness about the environmental impact of individual and collective actions. European Commission regularly organizes events: workshops, online conferences, forums to increase awareness. One example is “Network to innovate: Social innovation” to create the opportunity to meet other actors in the field, exchange knowledge and possibly even form new partnerships (European Commission, Workshop „Network to innovate: Social innovation“, 2023). 4.2.8 Living labs Living Labs serve as open innovation intermediaries, providing structure and governance for citizen involvement. These labs are instrumental in social innovation, generating new socially negotiated meanings for products and services. The "social" aspect of the innovation process extends beyond end-user involvement, encompassing the collaborative and participatory nature of Living Lab operations, real or virtual meetings, direct engagement of end users in ideation, and the use of methodologies that maximize interaction with various stakeholders (Cossetta & Palumbo, 2014). Additionally, living lab facilitates the experimentation and testing of new agricultural products, encouraging diversification and niche crop production. This real-world testing contributes to refining and optimizing products before their introduction to the market, ensuring their viability and sustainability in the rural context. Community engagement, local empowerment, and educational initiatives further enhance the living lab's role in creating a resilient and sustainable rural bioeconomy. 4.2.9 Collaborative supply chains To connect primary producers, including farmers and producers, seamlessly with the construction and agri-food industries to increase efficiency and promote sustainable practices, collaboration is a key approach. The development of collaboration among local individuals must involve supply chain actors who, by experiencing the region and understanding its history and values, can assist establish a united image of the territory (Monda, Feola, Parante, Vesci, & Botti, 2023). Understanding the history and values of a region empowers supply chain actors to adopt sustainable and responsible practices. This can include environmentally friendly production methods, ethical sourcing of materials, and a commitment to social responsibility. Such practices contribute to the long-term well-being of the community and its natural environment. Those collaborations could play a significant role in connecting producers to markets and consumers. D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 25 By understanding the local context and needs, they can develop effective strategies for fostering bio-based products, assisting market access for rural producers and contributing to the overall growth of the bioeconomy. Unique Mānuka Factor exemplifies the successful implementation of collaborative supply chain. Mānuka honey producers, marketers, and academics in New Zealand collaborated to pioneer the science of Mānuka honey. They attempted to further understand the chemicals, advantages, and mechanisms that make our Mānuka honey truly extraordinary by enlisting professional scientists and establishing a global network of partners (Unique Mānuka Factor, 2023). Another example is from France, The Leggo Association. It brings together 4 regions (Brittany, Centre Val-de-Loire, Pays de Loire and Normandy), whose aim is to support the development of a legume industry (peas, field beans, lupins, lentils, chickpeas, soya and beans), from both a commercial and technical point of view. This approach is the result of a desire on the part of the farming community in Western France to develop plant protein production tailored to market needs: "Rather than going from farm to fork, our ambition is to start from the plate and work our way back to the field". Leggo centralises the commercial expectations of professional customers and passes them on to the member distribution and processing companies that serve these customers. Leggo channels the information and alerts its members, who can then, for example, speed up the development of new ranges of adapted products (Leggo Association, 2024). 4.2.10 Community-based research Community-based research approach perceives communities as co-investigators or co-authors not only subjects for research activities (Boyd, 2014). Community-based research involves community members in the decision-making process, ensuring that their perspectives and priorities are considered. This participatory approach not only leads to more inclusive and sustainable solutions but also fosters a sense of ownership and commitment among community members. Community-based participatory research is viewed as an equitable research method that is implemented within a social justice perspective (Wilson, 2019). It helps to engage local communities in participatory research projects to teach them systematic uses of bio-based materials. This engagement not only empowers the local population but also builds their capacity to take charge of their own development initiatives. Also, community-based research creates linkages between bio rural communities and external networks to resource usage, knowledge sharing, and opportunities that can contribute to the sustainable development and scalability of rural economies. A real-life example is the Agroecology Europe Initiative. They conduct research based on sustainable use of local renewable resources, local farmers’ knowledge and priorities, wise use of biodiversity to provide ecosystem services and resilience, and solutions that provide multiple benefits (environmental, economic, social) from local to global (Agroecology Europe, 2023). 4.2.11 Green building certifications When growing concerns about global warming and resource depletion became more visible and validated by research in the twenty-first century, the number and variety of green product standards and certifications increased (Vierra, 2016). Olubunmi et al. conducts a methodical examination of research on incentives for green building, identifying two main types: external and internal. Art Rachen (Unsplash) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 32 Institut für politische und ökologische Innovation GmbH; BTG Biomass Technology Group B.V., 2019). The move to a more circular economy necessitates citizens' active involvement (European Commission, Report on the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan, 2019). Awards or recognition programs to honour individuals, organizations, and communities that demonstrate commitment to circular bioeconomy principles are promising tools to engage locals. Circular bioeconomy awards can bring recognition to local businesses and initiatives that are contributing significantly to sustainable practices. Circularity awards are common in local and global level in different scales. One example is from Netherlands, on the national level. Professionals organise their own event on the circular economy, named as Circular Economy Week. They show how circular business works in practice, so that visitors can learn from it. Throughout the country, good examples are given, pioneers meet each other, and entrepreneurs are given concrete tools to get started with the circular economy. Within the week, circular awards are given to the most impactful circular projects, organisations and individuals (Week van de Circulaire Economie, 2023). Another example on the global scale is The Circulars, a circular economy awards program, highlighting more than 1.500 cases of circular excellence across 65 geographies and creating a steady drumbeat of support for transformative action on the international circular agenda (Circulars Awards Program, 2023). These kinds of initiatives are also applicable on the local, and regional scale. 4.2.21 Cross-sector collaboration Social innovation and collaboration strengthen one another in the sense that collaborative processes and approaches influence the impact of social innovation, in turn, social innovation develops new shapes and designs for collaboration (Borges, Soares, & Dandolini, 2016), (Sanzo, Álvarez,, Rey , & García , 2015). Cross sectoral collaborations could cover profit/non-profit collaborations as well as inter-sector interactions, such as agriculture, biotech, energy, and cosmetics, to explore synergies and develop innovative solutions. It encourages networking events and partnerships between different industry associations to drive social innovation. However, the process of cross-sector partnerships for social action is acknowledged as challenging. The development of partnerships is often non-linear, marked by adjustments, successes, and failures. Trust is identified as a key factor influencing collaboration intensity and effectiveness. Trust, consisting of capacity, honesty, and benevolence, leads to more successful collaboration, creating a virtuous circle of collaboration and innovation (Borges, Soares, & Dandolini, 2016). Taking this statement into account, it can be said that the local collaborations are easier to form and maintain, because of less bureaucracy, local cooperation benefit from flexibility, quick decision-making, and a simpler procedure. Local stakeholders' similar interests and aspirations, together with resource sharing and circular economy concepts, contribute to the efficiency and sustainability of joint projects. There are examples of cross-sector collaborations in Brazil. One of them is the “Portal Transparência” project that to make private enterprises aware of socially innovative concepts supported by third-sector institutions. The concept, organizational structure, and impact of third-sector efforts are examined in Photo 5: Award ceremony (Week van de Circulaire Economie, 2023) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 33 order to have a quality seal on these initiatives, establishing a trusting connection with organizations interested in working together (Borges, Soares, & Dandolini, 2016). 4.2.22 Agrotourism initiatives Ecotourism, agrotourism, and rural tourism are forms of tourism that rose in the last century and have grown to become increasingly major sections of the global tourism business. New forms of lifestyle, dynamic tourist behavior, and constantly changing customer preferences, together with growing concern about the environment, industrial heritage, and sustainable development, have all contributed to the growth of these niche market types of tourism (Maria-Irina, 2017). Those 3 types of tourism initiatives are applicable to rural areas. Based on the regional characteristics, the correct one can be selected. Agrotourism is a rather recent term that emerged in the late twentieth century, directly related to agricultural activities, potential customers are interested in farming, crafting, folklore, natural agricultural products and gastronomy (Leco, 2013). Agrotourism is a sort of rural tourism that takes place in a particularly specific environment, such as mixed livestock and tillage farms. Its significance comes from the fact that it provides the opportunity to supplement farm income with tourism income while also carrying out an activity that promotes environmental conservation. Despite the fact that rural tourism has experienced rapid growth in European nations such as Spain, agrotourism has yet to reach its full potential (Leco, 2013). There are many agrotourism farms operating in Europe where tourists can visit olive farms, bio-refineries, and other eco-friendly facilities to foster environmental awareness. As an example, Casa Cerro da Correia farm in Portugal offers a two day experience to its visitors (Casa Cerro da Correia, 2024). 5. Social Innovations for the SCALE-UP Regions The SCALE-UP project seeks to encourage and carry out cross-sectoral and cross-regional capacity building and knowledge exchange among stakeholders in order to strengthen interdisciplinary conversations and find novel solutions that cater to the particular needs of the project regions (Fig. 8), namely Northern Sweden (SE), Mazovia (PL), French Atlantic Arc (FR), Upper Austria (AT), Strumica (MK) and Andalusia (ES) (SCALE-UP Regions, 2024). Figure 8: Project Regions (SCALE-UP Regions, 2024) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 34 Uptake of the bioeconomy is only possible with rural actors’ contributions. Despite a large number of regionally accessible, underutilized biomass sources and a variety of promising recognition options, regional stakeholders are unable to fully realize the potential of the bioeconomy because they lack technical know-how, competitive networks, and market knowledge. This was one of the causes of emerge of the SCALE-UP project. To address this challenge, regional platforms are being set up. In the context of these platforms, specialized steering groups are being established with the primary purpose of engaging a diverse spectrum of stakeholders, including citizens, within the bioeconomy sector of each region. Their target is to foster a dynamic exchange of knowledge, facilitate meaningful connections among each local actor. One of the project objectives is to promote regional, rural, local/urban and consumer-based transitions towards a sustainable, regenerative, inclusive and just circular economy and bioeconomy across all regions of Europe. Citizen engagement is crucial in this transition. There are various reasons behind this view. First of all, citizen engagement empowers individuals and communities to actively participate in shaping their local economies. By involving citizens in decision-making processes, it ensures that transition strategies reflect diverse perspectives, addressing the specific needs and aspirations of various regions. This inclusivity fosters a sense of ownership, strengthening commitment to sustainable development goals. Their active involvement ensures that decisions made by policymakers and stakeholders align with the principles of sustainability, fairness, and circularity. Engaging citizens in transition processes cultivates a sense of shared purpose and cohesion, which increases the sense of belonging and trust. This collective effort enhances social capital, fostering collaboration and community-driven initiatives. Empowered citizens take active roles in driving change, elevating both their own well-being and that of their regions. Highlighting the importance of social innovation within this framework, the regional platforms are aiming to harness citizen engagement with progressive approaches. By fostering collaborative partnerships, knowledge sharing, and innovation support, social innovation is envisioned to be included in these platforms to act as a catalyst. The overarching goal is to create an environment where regional stakeholders, including private enterprises, government bodies, civil society organizations, and researchers, actively contribute to the development and expansion of innovative and sustainable biobased value chains with the inclusion of citizens. This environment is unique to each region as each has its own specific characteristics. In this context, this chapter will be devoted to an examination of each region under the concept of social innovation, briefly describing and considering the characteristics of each region. Based on this review and the stakeholder mapping, assessment/impact guidelines described in the previous sections, the aspects to be developed for each region will be examined and potential social innovations -that have been explained in the previous chapterare proposed. In the bigger picture, the aim is that other regions with similar geographical and characteristic features can also benefit from these social innovation solutions. D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 35 5.1 Northern Sweden Northern Sweden is characterized by expansive woodland resources. The total land area for the region is 221.800 km2 of which 67% is forest land (148.920 km2). The total growing forest stock is 1.314 million m3 and the annual growth is 45 million m3. The protected productive forest amounts to 42.990 km2, approximately 20%. Additional to this there are voluntarily set aside areas made by private forest owners. These forests are actively supervised and transformed into lumber, paper, and pulp. As a result of these endeavours, substantial amounts of timber, industrial outputs, and forestryrelated byproducts are accessible, primarily utilized for producing district heating and energy. While sawn timber, pulp and paper products have historically dominated, the use of forest biomass for energy purposes has surged. Forestry operates as a co-production system, generating various products simultaneously. Forest industry activities produce substantial by-products, like sawdust and bark, primarily used for power and heat in Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants. Logging residues (LR) represent an untapped potential due to higher costs of harvesting, transport, and storing compared to market prices for sawdust and bark. Sawdust, with its unique qualities, is highly desirable for energy production and biorefining. Bark, a by-product of debarking logs in sawmills and pulp mills, constitutes approximately 10% of round wood input. Despite its challenging properties, including high ash content, bark is utilized for heat and electricity generation in CHPs near urban areas. Logging residues, characterized by a bulky and heterogeneous nature, pose challenges in mobilization, handling, and refinement. Pre-treatment and mixing with other assortments can enhance the acceptability of logging residues in certain applications (SCALE-UP Project, 2023). The SCALE-UP project aims to further enhance the bioeconomy in Northern Sweden by facilitating the exchange of information, networking, study visits, and other relevant activities for the region. The initiative will strive to reinforce and broaden existing networks involving educational institutions, local areas, municipalities, and industries. A particular emphasis of the initiative is to encourage methods for adding value to byproducts of the forestry industry (such as sawdust and bark) and to mobilize the currently underused biomass resources like leftover logging materials. Being involved in innovation cluster and coordinating the work between municipalities and other actors, SCALE-UP partner BioFuel Region has the capacity to foster collaboration in the region. By collaborative networks, reenforcing local public to involve those collaborations and raising a knowledge-share environment serve to the development of social innovation. Similarly, emphasizing the value of forestry byproducts creates ways to new job opportunities, especially in rural areas where employment opportunities might be limited. This can contribute to the social and economic well-being of local communities. The stakeholders for Northern Sweden have been defined: Photo 6: Northern Sweden (BioFuel Region) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 36 • Primary Producers: Forest owners, logging companies. • Secondary Producers: Timber processors and manufacturers, woodchip suppliers, wood pellet manufacturers, pulp and paper mill companies. • Government and Policy Bodies: Local and regional governments, environmental agencies, forestry departments. • Research and Academic Institutions: Universities, research institutes, forestry research centres. • Industry Associations: Bioeconomy associations, forest industry associations, renewable energy associations. • Environmental Organizations: Conservation groups, sustainability NGOs. • Community Representatives: Local communities, indigenous groups, rural development organizations. One of the aims of this region is to expand the networks among stakeholders and especially include forest owners more in the processes. In Northern Sweden, most of the forests are privately owned, therefore it is not enough to coordinate only with municipalities and/or governmental organizations. More citizen inclusion is necessary because the citizens own the forests. This initiative reflects one of the social innovation targets, target (C), of Ludvig et al., named as “participation and collective action: Engagement of civil society, forest owners, and forestry actors”. The focus of this target is collective activities of multiple stakeholders with a common goal. Participation and collective action addressing engagement of civil society, rural areas owners and actors, comprises social innovation characteristics such as new stakeholder involvement models and participation from civil society in rural bioeconomies (Ludvig, Zivojinovic, & Hujala, Social Innovation as a Prospect for the Forest Bioeconomy: Selected Examples from Europe, 2019). Considering the stakeholders, resource availabilities and regional targets, the following social innovations are proposed to be implemented in Northern Sweden: • Local bioeconomy cooperatives • Forest education centres • Forest innovation grants • Wood fuel network Photo 7: Northern Sweden (BioFuel Region) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 37 5.2 Mazovia (Poland) Characterized by the production of new functional agri-food products, production of new bio-based packaging, production of fertilisers based on waste from fruits, grains and vegetables and other processing activities, Mazovia targets short and collective actions to scale up its regional development. The long-term plan for Mazovia includes its development into a region where biomass utilization is prominently integrated into a closed-loop economy framework. This development will be guided by sustainable principles, fostering innovative bioeconomy technologies and related industries to enhance overall efficiency. The region aims to achieve economic competitiveness while nurturing a society attuned to environmental consciousness (POWER4BIO Project, 2024). In the frame of SCALE-UP project, Radom region in Mazovia is particularly under the spotlight. Radom region serves as a nice example of a fruitful harmony of agricultural prosperity and bioeconomic progress. Recognized for its abundant apple and pepper cultivation, this area has become a hub of agricultural productivity, boosting the local economy and fostering innovative social advancements. The thriving apple and pepper production not only generates significant revenue but also promotes sustainability by diversifying crops and reducing the environmental impact caused by monoculture practices. This bioeconomic approach has encouraged the adoption of modern agricultural techniques, increasing productivity while minimizing resource usage. Reflecting the region's dedication to its agricultural heritage and its adept incorporation of bioeconomic principles, SCALE-UP partner UNIMOS creates matchmaking opportunities where brings farmers and policy bodies together. This would not only drive economic growth but also creates an environment for meaningful social transformation. SCALE-UP focus for this region has various aspects, including creating novel functional agri-food products, developing bio-based packaging alternatives, producing fertilizers derived from agricultural waste like fruits, grains, and vegetables, and engaging in other related processing activities. Photo 8: Mazovia (Unimos Alliance) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 38 Biocircularity is another important issue that is being addressed in the frame of the project. The Biocircular Apple Farm initiative is positioned to benefit from the SCALE-UP project's innovation support program, leveraging its interdisciplinary approach and commitment to biocircular principles. This project envisions the apple farm not just as a traditional agricultural space but as a hub for fostering innovation, particularly in the realms of bioeconomy and social innovation. Within the framework of the SCALE-UP project's innovation support program, the Biocircular Apple Farm serves as a testing ground for novel concepts and solutions across various dimensions, including technology, society, education, and culture. With that, cross-industry perspective is also underlined. This cross-industry collaboration not only enhances the farm's innovative potential but also fosters knowledge exchange and synergies between agriculture and other sectors. According to this focus, the following stakeholders are determined: • Primary Producers: Farmers, apple producers. • Secondary Producers: Apple juice producers, bio-based packaging companies. • Government and Policy Bodies: Local and regional governments, environmental agencies, agricultural departments. • Research and Academic Institutions: Universities, research institutes, farming research centres, agricultural research centres. • Industry Associations: Agricultural associations, farming industry associations, renewable energy associations. • Environmental Organizations: Conservation groups, sustainability NGOs. • Community Representatives: Local communities, indigenous groups, rural development organizations. In the light of the specific characteristics and aspirations of the Radom region in Mazovia, following social innovation solutions are proposed to enhance its bioeconomic development within the framework of the SCALE-UP project: • Collaborative platform • Bio-based packaging incentives • Educational campaigns and workshops • Living labs Photo 9: Mazovia (Unimos Alliance) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 39 5.3 French Atlantic Arc (Pays de la Loire/ Normandy/ Brittany/ NewAquitaine) French Atlantic Arc region (Pays de la Loire/ Normandy/ Brittany/ New-Aquitaine) has expertise on the development of four fibre plants linked to the resources available in the rural areas of the Atlantic Arc: hemp, flax, straw, miscanthus. These plants have primary uses such as livestock breeding, human food or animal feed, but their uses are diversifying, particularly for industrial purposes (chemicals, textiles, construction). Following contacts with stakeholders in the fibrous plant sector, it was agreed that the project would work on the use of these plants as bio-based construction materials, an important issue in the decarbonization of the construction sector. Bio-based materials are materials derived entirely or partially from renewable organic matter (biomass). The nature of these bio-based materials is varied: wood, cellulose wadding, recycled textiles, cereal husks, cork, thatch, meadow grass. These fibres can be used as raw materials in bio-based building materials in varying proportions, which is one the focuses of the SCALE-UP project for the region. Part of the population shows a keen awareness of the importance of bio-based construction, prioritizing the use of environmentally friendly materials that contribute to sustainable practices. At the same time, local authorities are actively pursuing strategies to increase the integration of bio-based materials into architectural projects. More and more local authorities work to improve the share of bio-based material in construction. Large structures such as the Normandy Union for Social Housing (UHSN) and social landlords are engaged in this topic and introduce bio-based material in new building construction projects, despite the cost associated with the production and processing of the bio-based material increases the global cost of the construction project. This cohesive effort in the region underlines the harmonious combination of environmentally conscious values, proactive administrative initiatives and a committed farming community contributing to the advancement of bio-based building practices. These strengths can be further developed through social innovation initiatives. There are initiatives in this respect in the region. The public High school of Aizenay built with straw insulation by the company PROFIBRES, under a public procurement by the Pays de la Loire regional council. PROFIBRES has a partnership with the agricultural cooperative CAVAC to make sure the supply of biomass takes place within 50 km around the location of the construction site (Aizenay, 2024). The region is also good at diversifying market opportunities through downstream conversion stages. It capitalizes on its strengths with defibrillation industrial units and on-farm processing facilities. These capabilities are aligned with environmental strategies for water management, GHG mitigation, biodiversity enhancement and climate adaptation. Growing demand for local products and the region's commitment to non-displaced productions strengthen its bioeconomic landscape. David Taljat (Pexels) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 40 The project’s main target for this region is to develop plant fibres for bio-based building materials (i.e. insulation) and other markets. Specified challenges are the limited network and lack of coordination of all economic players. Based on that information the following stakeholders are determined: • Primary Producers: Farmers, hemp/flax/miscanthus producers, agri-food industry, building industry. • Secondary Producers: Food processing companies, biofuel producers, biobuilding material producers. • Government and Policy Bodies: Local and regional governments, environmental agencies, agricultural departments, agri-food clusters. • Research and Academic Institutions: Universities, research institutes, farming research centres, agricultural research centres. • Industry Associations: Agricultural associations, farming industry associations, renewable energy associations. • Environmental Organizations: Conservation groups, sustainability NGOs. • Community Representatives: Local communities, indigenous groups, rural development organizations, cooperatives. Awareness is high in the region and local authorities as well as local communities are open to improvements. This is understood from the farmers’ undertaking approach towards bio-based buildings. Another pro is the political will to re-industrialising France, this would ease bureaucratic processes. Also, the demand for local products is increasing, which creates environment for social innovation. However, the economic crisis is increasing the cost of materials, which may slow down the development of the sector. Considering the cost of bio-based building renovation/construction, it is important to look at the overall cost of the building, not just the cost of the raw materials: biobased buildings are energy-efficient. If we also take into account the building's life-cycle costs, the balance is often equivalent or even cheaper. it is important to consider this point, which reflects the target (B) of Ludvig et al., named as “Sustainable rural development: Addressing rural/regional economy”. This target focuses on economic revenue and soft values such as strengthening of social stability and identity with the income to the region. Institutional innovations are strategic key points for this type of social innovations (Ludvig, Zivojinovic, & Hujala, Social Innovation as a Prospect for the Forest Bioeconomy: Selected Examples from Europe, 2019) Based on the needs, stakeholders, the backdrop and the social innovation target category, the following social innovation ideas have been found relevant to the region: • Collaborative supply chains • Community-based research • Green building certifications Nadège Petit (Pexels) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 41 5.4 Upper Austria Upper Austria is quite rich in terms of potential biomass products: forestry, agriculture and side streams from food processing like bakery products, dairy products, oils and oil press cakes and brewery wastes are sources for potential bioeconomy innovations. Bakery products industry in this region faces high amount of avoidable food waste. This waste primarily consists of biomass streams, including dough, bio waste, and old bakery products. To address this issue, there is a focus on utilizing these biomass streams as inputs for biogas plants to promote regional autonomy in energy production. The dairy industry generates numerous dairy products, including valuable side streams like whey protein. Efforts are ongoing to reuse dairy waste for biofuels, biogas and fermentation. The third value chain, centred in oils and oil press cakes, focuses on press cakes oil utilization and using regionally available oils in Austria. Biodegradable food packaging options are being discussed; however, there is a challenge due to oil extraction residues, reused materials are not suitable as feed. The last value chain, brewery, is utilized as a material in biogas plants due to its easily accessible sugars. Apple orchards are also perceived as a potential value chain to be utilized in the frame of the project. In the frame of the project, foreseen scale up options are to extract raw materials for bio-based packaging, cosmetic industry and fertiliser production; to produce novel fibres and nutraceuticals and dietary supplements. However, the need of the region is to raise public awareness against food waste. Food regulations and policies are also not effective enough. The stakeholder groups of the region are as follows: • Primary Producers: Agriculture and forestry producers. • Secondary Producers: Bakeries, dairy industry, oil industry, brewery industry, feed industry. • Government and Policy Bodies: Local and regional governments, environmental agencies, agricultural departments, circular food clusters. • Research and Academic Institutions: Universities, research institutes, waste utilization research centres. • Industry Associations: Brewery associations, bakery associations, biomass energy associations. Brian de Karma (Pexels) Andy Li (Unsplash) D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 48 Circulars Awards Program. (2023). Retrieved from The Circulars : https://thecirculars.org/awardsprogram Cohesion Data. (2023). Cohesion Policy and Sustainable Urban Development. Retrieved from https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/stories/s/Sustainable-Urban-development-2021-2027/iw5ndss9/ Copernicus Climate Service. (2022). European State of the Climate 2022. EU. Retrieved from https://climate.copernicus.eu/ Cossetta, A., & Palumbo, M. (2014). The Co-production of Social Innovation : The Case of Living Lab. Smart City, 221–235. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-31906160-3_11 Cunha, J., & Benneworth, P. (2019). How to measure the impact of social innovation initiatives? International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 59-75. Cunha, J., & Benneworth, P. (2020). How to measure the impact of social innovation initiatives? International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 59-75. Dall-Orsoletta, A., Cunha, J., Araújo, M., & Ferreira, P. (2022). A systematic review of social innovation and community energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102625 D'Amato, D., Veijonaho, S., & Toppinen, A. (2020). Towards sustainability? Forest-based circular bioeconomy business models in Finnish SMEs. Forest Policy and Economics. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.12.004 Data, B. O. (2023). Retrieved from Berlin Open Data: https://daten.berlin.de/ Edwards-Schachter, M., & Wallace, M. (2017). ‘Shaken, but not stirred’: Sixty years of defining social innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 64-79. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy-diagram ENER2CROWD. (2024). Retrieved from https://www.ener2crowd.com/en/projects/details/274fotovoltaico-10 Esparcia, J. (2014). Innovation and networks in rural areas. An analysis from European innovative projects. Journal of Rural Studies, 1-14. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.12.004 Esteves, A., Franks, D., & Vanclay, F. (2012). Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 34-42. European Comission. (2010). This is European Social Innovation. Belgium: European Union. Retrieved from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/edce0817-ba24-459e-8fe8763b38498f02 European Comission. (2023). Social Innovation. Retrieved from https://single-marketeconomy.ec.europa.eu/industry/strategy/innovation/social_en European Commission. (2019). Report on the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan. Retrieved from https://commission.europa.eu/publications/report-implementation-circulareconomy-action-plan-1_en D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 49 European Commission. (2023). All Environment Events. Retrieved from Environment: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/all-environment-events_en European Commission. (2023). Rural development. Retrieved from Agriculture and rural development: https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy/rural-development_en European Commission. (2023). Workshop „Network to innovate: Social innovation“. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/event/workshop-%E2%80%9Enetwork-innovate-socialinnovation%E2%80%9C.html European Commission. (2024). Empowering Renewable and Citizen Energy Communities. Retrieved from https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/project/LIFE22-CET-POWER-E-COM101120998/empowering-renewable-and-citizen-energy-communities European Commission, D.-G. f. (2018). A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment. European Union. (2023). Second Pillar of the Cap: Rural Development Policy. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/erpl-app-public/factsheets/pdf/en/FTU_3.2.6.pdf Fighting Fossil Fuels and Winning. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/fighting-fossil-fuels-and-winning-susquehannavalley Fix My Street. (2023). Retrieved from Fix My Street: https://www.fixmystreet.com/ Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2022). Global assessment of forest education. Retrieved from https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/cc2196en Forest Schools Project. (2023). Forest Schools. Retrieved from https://forestschools.eu/en/ Frantz, C., & Mayer, F. (2014). The importance of connection to nature in assessing environmental education programs. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 85-89. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.001 Frost & Sullivan. (2015). Social Innovation in Energy Whitepaper. In Partnership with Hitachi, Ltd. Galego, D., Moulaert, F., Brans, M., & Santinha, G. (2021). Social innovation & governance: a scoping review. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research , 265-290. Geography of France. (2024). Retrieved from ThoughtCo.: https://www.thoughtco.com/geography-offrance-1434598 Gerdes, H., Kiresiewa, Z., Tarpey, J., Wolkerstorfer, G., Dauwa, L., Pammer, K., . . . Mihajloska, E. (2023). Conceptual framework for the design and implementation of participatory activities in the SCALE-UP regions. Global Forest Watch. (2023). Grants & Fellowships. Retrieved from https://www.globalforestwatch.org/grants-and-fellowships/projects/ Harnmeijer, J. (2018). Community renewables in the UK – a clash ofcultures. Int. J. Technology Intelligence and Planning, 12. Harvard Real Colegio Complutense. (2024). International Campuses of Excellence. Retrieved from https://rcc.harvard.edu/campus-international-excellence D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 50 Hewitt, R., Bradley, N., Baggio Compagnucci, A., Barlagne, C., Ceglarz, A., Cremades, R., . . . Slee, B. (2019). Social Innovation in Community Energy in Europe: A Review of the Evidence. Frontiers in Energy Research, 7. Hiteva, R., & Sovacool, B. (2017). Harnessing social innovation for energy justice: A business model perspective. Energy Policy, 631-639. Howaldt, J., Schröder, A., Butzin, A., & Rehfeld, D. (2017). Towards a general theory and typology of Social Innovation. Hyunjin Park, P. G. (2022). What does an inclusive bioeconomy mean for primary producers? An analysis of European bioeconomy strategies. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning , 225-241. InnovaWood Project. (2023). Retrieved from InnovaWood Project International Labour Organization. (2015). Cooperatives and the Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1247ilo.pdf Invesdor. (2024). Retrieved from https://www.invesdor.com/?utm_source=opc#/?r=%2Frounds%2Fb302c814-eb76-4163-930ccdcbfb891d92 Jalonen, H., Jäppinen, T., & Bugarszki, Z. (2019). Co-creation of Social Innovation. Jump, A. C. (2021). The Power of People. Retrieved from https://takethejump.org/latest/jump-launchesresearch-the-power-of-people Kędzia, G., Ocicka, B., Pluta-Zaremba, A., Raźniewska, M., Turek, J., & Wieteska-Rosiak, B. (2022). Social Innovations for Improving Compostable Packaging Waste Management in CE: A Multi-Solution Perspective. Energies. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/en15239119 Leco, F. (2013). Rural Tourists and Their Attitudes and Motivations Towards the Practice of Environmental Activities such as Agrotourism. Int. J. Environ. Res., 255-264. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297380845_Rural_tourist_and_their_attitudes_and_ motivations_towards_the_practice_of_environmental_activities_such_as_agrotourism Leggo Association. (2024). Retrieved from LEGGO association Ludvig, A., Weiss , G., Sarkki, S., Nijnik , M., & Živojinović , I. (2018). Mapping European and forest related policies supporting social innovation for rural settings. Forest Policy and Economics, 97. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.09.015 Ludvig, A., Zivojinovic, I., & Hujala, T. (2019). Social Innovation as a Prospect for the Forest Bioeconomy: Selected Examples from Europe. Forests. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/f10100878 Ludvig, A., Zivojinovic, I., & Hujala, T. (2019). Social Innovation as a Prospect for the Forest Bioeconomy: Selected Examples from Europe. Forests. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/f10100878 Lukesch, R., Ludvig, A., Slee, B., Weiss, G., & Živojinović , I. (2020). Social Innovation, Societal Change, and the Role of Policies. Sustainability. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187407 Maria-Irina, A. (2017). Ecotourism, agro-tourism and rural tourism in the European Union. CACTUS 2017 - Contemporary Approaches and Challenges of Tourism Sustainability. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320272966_Ecotourism_agrotourism_and_rural_tourism_in_the_European_Union D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 51 Massey, A., & Johnston-Miller, K. (2016). Governance: public governance to social innovation? Policy & Politics, 663-675. Mikkonen, I., Gynther, L., Matschoss, K., Koukoufikis, G., Murauskaite-Bull, I., & Uihlein, A. (2020). Social Innovations for the Energy Transitions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Monda, A., Feola, R., Parante, R., Vesci, M., & Botti, A. (2023). Rural development and digital technologies: a collaborative framework for policy-making. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. Retrieved from https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/TG12-2022-0162/full/html Nicholls, A., & Edmiston , D. (2018). Social Innovation Policy in the European Union. Policy Design in the European Union, 161-190. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-31964849-1_8 Nordic Co-operation. (2024). Retrieved from Facts about Sweden: https://www.norden.org/en/information/facts-about-sweden nova-Institut für politische und ökologische Innovation GmbH; BTG Biomass Technology Group B.V. (2019). Concept of bio-based and circular economy. RoadToBio EU Project. Retrieved from https://roadtobio.eu/uploads/publications/deliverables/RoadToBio_D25_Biobased_and_circular _economy.pdf Novamont. (2023). Mater-Bi. Retrieved from https://www.novamont.com/eng/mater-bi Ocean Clean Up. (2024). Retrieved from https://theoceancleanup.com/ Olio. (2023). Retrieved from Olio: https://olioapp.com/en/ Olubunmi, O., Xia, P., & Skitmore, M. (2016). Green building incentives: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 1611-1621. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.028 Ooms, M., Huygen, A., & Rhomberg, W. (2017). Social Innovation in Energy Supply: Summary Report. Ooms, M., Huygen, A., & Rhomberg, W. (n.d.). Social Innovation in Energy Supply: Summary Report. OpenTEAM. (2023). Open Technology Ecosystem for Agricultural Management. Retrieved from https://openteam.community/ Otto, I., Donges, J., Cremades, R., Bhowmik, A., Hewitt, R., Lucht, W., . . . Schellnhuber, H. (2020). Social tipping dynamics for stabilizing Earth’s climate by 2050. PNAS, 2354-2365. doi:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900577117 Park, H., & Grundmann, P. (2023). What does an inclusive bioeconomy mean for primary producers? An analysis of European bioeconomy strategies. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 225241. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2022.2094353 Patwa, N., Sivarajah, U., Seetharaman, A., Sarkar, S., Maiti, K., & Hingorani, K. (2021). Towards a circular economy: An emerging economies context. Journal of Business Research, 725-735. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.015 Poland. (2024). Retrieved from Country Reports: https://www.countryreports.org/country/Poland/geography.htm Polman, N., Slee, B., Kluvánková, T., Dijkshoorn, M., Nijnik, M., Gezik, V., & Soma, K. (2017). Classification of Social Innovations for Marginalized Rural Areas. Retrieved from http://www.simra- D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 52 h2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/D2.1-Classification-of-SI-for-MRAs-in-the-targetregion.pdf POWER4BIO Project. (2024). Assumptions and review of the bioeconomy development strategy for Mazovia. Retrieved from https://power4bio.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/6_Assumptionsand-review-of-the-bioeconomy-development-strategy-for-Mazovia.pdf Sanzo, M., Álvarez,, L., Rey , M., & García , N. (2015). Business–nonprofit partnerships: a new form of collaboration in a corporate responsibility and social innovation context. Service Business, 611636. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11628-014-0242-1 Sarkki, S., Parpan, T., Melnykovych, M., Zahvoyska, L., Derbal, J., Voloshy, N., & Nijnik , M. (2019). Beyond participation! Social innovations facilitating movement from authoritative state to participatory forest governance in Ukraine. Landscape Ecology. SCALE-UP Project. (2023). Overview of Regionally Suitable Solutions. SCALE-UP Project. (2024). Retrieved from https://www.scaleup-bioeconomy.eu/en/home/ SCALE-UP Regions. (2024). Retrieved from https://www.scaleup-bioeconomy.eu/en/regional-platforms/ See Click Fix 311 CRM. (2023). Retrieved from See Click Fix: https://seeclickfix.com/ Seminarbäuerinnen. (2024). Retrieved from Seminarbäuerinnen: https://www.seminar-baeuerinnen.at/ Smart Agri Hubs. (2023). Smart Agri Hubs. Retrieved from https://www.smartagrihubs.eu/ SocialRES. (2023). Retrieved from https://socialres.eu/ Steffens, N., Haslam, S., Schuh, S., Jetten, J., & Van Dick, R. (2016). A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Identification and Health in Organizational Contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Review. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316656701 Steiner, A. A., Barraket, J., Calo, F., & Farmer, J. (2021). The role of governments and public policies in social innovation processes. Education Knowledge and Economy , 157-164. Still I Rise. (2024). Retrieved from https://www.stillirisengo.org/en/ Suárez-Eiroa, B., Emilio, F., Méndez-Martínez, G., & Soto-Oñate, D. (2019). Operational principles of circular economy for sustainable development: Linking theory and practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, 952-961. Temmerman, L., Veeckman, C., & Ballon, P. (2021). Collaborative governance platform for social innovation in Brussels. Social Enterprise Journal. doi:doi/10.1108/SEJ-12-2019-0101/full/html The Circular Classroom. (2023). Retrieved from The Circular Classroom: https://circularclassroom.com/ The Climate Reality Project. (2023). Retrieved from The Climate Reality Project: https://www.climaterealityproject.org/ The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community. (2023). Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation. Retrieved from https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf Therace, A., Hubert, A., & Dro, I. (2011). Empowering people, driving change – Social innovation in the European Union. European Commission, Bureau of European Policy Advisers. D5.1 Handbook of social innovation in rural bioeconomies 53 Too Good To Go. (2023). Retrieved from Too Good To Go: https://www.toogoodtogo.com/de Trainings. (2024). Retrieved from SCALE-UP Project: https://www.scaleup-bioeconomy.eu/en/trainings/ Unique Mānuka Factor. (2023). New Zealand’s Unique Mānuka Honey. Retrieved from https://www.umf.org.nz/nz-manuka-honey/the-history-of-manuka-honey/ Valuewaste Communication Campaigns. (2023). Retrieved from Valuewaste: https://valuewaste.eu/communication-campaigns/ van der Have, R., & Rubalcaba, L. (2016). Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies? Research Policy, 45. Vierra, S. (2016). Green Building Standards and Certification Systems. Vierra Design & Education Services, LLC. Retrieved from https://globalgbc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/034_green-buildingstandards-and-certification-system.pdf Wang, W. (2022). Toward Economic Growth and Value Creation Through Social Entrepreneurship: Modelling the Mediating Role of Innovation. Front Psychol. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.914700 Week van de Circulaire Economie. (2023). Retrieved from https://deweekvandecirculaireeconomie.nl/ WELCOME TO THE CIRCULAR CLASSROOM! (2023). Retrieved from The Circular Classroom: https://circularclassroom.com/ Wilson, E. (2019). Community-Based Participatory Action Research. In P. Liamputtong, Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences (pp. 285-298). doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_87 Wolff, M. (2019). Forest cooperatives as a model for the future. (Panterito, Interviewer) Retrieved from https://panterito.org/en/forest-cooperatives-as-a-model-for-the-future/ World Green Building Council. (2023). Sustainable Building Certifications. Retrieved from https://worldgbc.org/sustainable-building-certifications/ Zamri , G., Azizal, N., Nakamura, S., Okada, K., Nordin, N., Othma, N., . . . Hara, H. (2020). Delivery, impact and approach of household food waste reduction campaigns. Journal of Cleaner Production. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118969