Robledo-Abad Carmenza, Althaus Hans-Jörg, Berndes Göran, Bolwig Simon, Corbera Esteve, Creutzig Felix, Garcia-Ulloa John, Geddes Anna, Gregg Jay S, Haberl Helmut, Hanger Susanne, Harper Richard J, Hunsberger Carol, Larsen Rasmus K, Lauk Christian, Leitner Stefan, Lilliestam Johan, Lotze-Campen Hermann, Muys Bart, Nordborg Maria, Ölund Maria, Orlowsky Boris, Popp Alexander, Portugal-Pereira Joana, Reinhard Jürgen, Scheiffle Lena, Smith Pete
Department of Environmental Systems Science USYS Td Lab ETH Zürich Universitätstrasse 228092 Zurich Switzerland; Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation Maulbeerstr. 10CH-3001 Bern Switzerland.
Foundation for Global Sustainability (ffgs) Reitergasse 118004 Zürich Switzerland; Lifecycle Consulting Althaus Bruechstr. 1328706 Meilen Switzerland.
Glob Change Biol Bioenergy. 2017 Mar;9(3):541-556. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12338. Epub 2016 Mar 23.
The possibility of using bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure has sparked a discussion of whether and how bioenergy production contributes to sustainable development. We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature to illuminate this relationship and found a limited scientific basis for policymaking. Our results indicate that knowledge on the sustainable development impacts of bioenergy production is concentrated in a few well-studied countries, focuses on environmental and economic impacts, and mostly relates to dedicated agricultural biomass plantations. The scope and methodological approaches in studies differ widely and only a small share of the studies sufficiently reports on context and/or baseline conditions, which makes it difficult to get a general understanding of the attribution of impacts. Nevertheless, we identified regional patterns of positive or negative impacts for all categories - environmental, economic, institutional, social and technological. In general, economic and technological impacts were more frequently reported as positive, while social and environmental impacts were more frequently reported as negative (with the exception of impacts on direct substitution of GHG emission from fossil fuel). More focused and transparent research is needed to validate these patterns and develop a strong science underpinning for establishing policies and governance agreements that prevent/mitigate negative and promote positive impacts from bioenergy production.
将生物能源用作缓解气候变化措施的可能性引发了一场关于生物能源生产是否以及如何促进可持续发展的讨论。我们对科学文献进行了系统综述,以阐明这种关系,并发现政策制定的科学依据有限。我们的结果表明,关于生物能源生产对可持续发展影响的知识集中在少数几个经过充分研究的国家,侧重于环境和经济影响,并且大多与专门的农业生物质种植园有关。研究中的范围和方法差异很大,只有一小部分研究充分报告了背景和/或基线条件,这使得难以对影响的归因有一个总体认识。尽管如此,我们确定了所有类别(环境、经济、制度、社会和技术)的正面或负面影响的区域模式。总体而言,经济和技术影响更常被报告为正面,而社会和环境影响更常被报告为负面(化石燃料温室气体排放直接替代的影响除外)。需要更有针对性和透明度更高的研究来验证这些模式,并为制定防止/减轻负面影响并促进生物能源生产正面影响的政策和治理协议建立坚实的科学基础。