Which visions of Bioeconomy are most common in the new research field of Circular Bioeconomy? Evidences from a bibliometric analysis

Since its first appearance in literature around 2015, the innovative concept of circular bioeconomy (CBE) has raised in popularity being identified as strategic solution for facing the present and upcoming environmental challenges and for bringing about a sustainable decisive shift in current linear economic systems. In this regard, an eloquent example of the centrality acquired by the notion of CBE can be observed in the renewed ecological narrative promoted by the European Commission and sculpted in two pivotal documents, the Updated Bioeconomy Strategy (2018) and the European Green Deal (2019), in which CBE is interpreted as a central framework to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. Nonetheless, despite its growing echo in both academic and political debate, we cannot deny that we are dealing with an extremely controversial and nebulous phenomenon that poses enormous challenges, especially from a theoretical point of view. In particular, the unsolved ambiguity that surrounds the relationship between its two building blocks, bioeconomy and circular economy, results in an obvious difficulty of drawing clear and understandable boundaries (Karagouni, 2018) and increases the risk of spreading another “chameleon of notions that adapts repeatedly to changing requirements” and different contexts (Gawel et al. 2019) contributing to the adoption of inconsistent and conflicting strategies and policy measures (Vogelpohl and Töller, 2021). Therefore, the need for systematic categorization is more than evident to unlock the full potential of the paradigm and ensure its scientific stature trying to avoid the shallowness of the “buzzword effect” by investigating the dynamics intrinsic to recent history of this emerging concept. This study aims to make a first step in this direction moving from the following research question: which visions of Bioeconomy are most common in the new research field of Circular Bioeconomy? To provide a comprehensive response, we will first perform a bibliometric network analysis for assessing trend and patterns within a sample of papers selected according to specific and predefined inclusion criteria to better reflect the fragmented composition of the research field. Secondly, through screening and coding the selected papers, we intend to conduct a content analysis, in the form of conceptual analysis, with the goal of understanding the distribution in the sample of the three visions of the bioeconomy identified by Bugge et al. in 2016. Finally, in the light of the results of the content analysis, we will carry out a systematic literature review trying to answer the proposed research question and draw the conclusions. Following this methodological structure, we are also interested in verifying which bioeconomy narratives has the most connections with circular economy vision and how these connections are declined especially in terms of weak or strong sustainability. With this work we expect to contribute to a better and deeper understanding of the emerging paradigm of CBE and its role in the global challenges by exploring, from an innovative perspective, the debated relationship between its building blocks. We also aim to contribute to clarifying the interaction of CBE with other popular and partially overlapping conceptualizations, first and foremost green economy.