Dr. Maria Proestou

Profil

• BIOPOLISTA - Bioökonomie-Policy-Implementation in Bioökonomie-Staaten

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: Bundesministerium für Forschung, Technologie und Raumfahrt Zeitraum: 03/2023 - 02/2028 Projektleitung: Dr. Nicolai Goritz, Dr. Maria Proestou, Dr. Maria Proestou

• Science & Startups Berlin

  PT

  2 Treffer55.7%
  • Zuwendung im Rahmen des Programms „exist – Existenzgründungen aus der Wissenschaft“ aus dem Bundeshaushalt, Einzelplan 09, Kapitel 02, Titel 68607, Haushaltsjahr 2026, sowie aus Mitteln des Europäischen Strukturfonds (hier Euro-päischer Sozialfonds Plus – ESF Plus) Förderperiode 2021-2027 – Kofinanzierung für das Vorhaben: „exist Women“
    T

    55.7%

• Groupe Sup De CO Montpellier Business School

  PT

  11 Treffer55.0%
  • ENFASYS - Encouraging Farmers Towards Sustainable Farming Systems Through Policy and Business Strategies
    P

    55.0%

• Conseil Europeen des jeunes agriculteurs

  PT

  11 Treffer55.0%
  • ENFASYS - Encouraging Farmers Towards Sustainable Farming Systems Through Policy and Business Strategies
    P

    55.0%

• Udruzenje Eko-Inovacija na Balkanu

  PT

  10 Treffer55.0%
  • ENFASYS - Encouraging Farmers Towards Sustainable Farming Systems Through Policy and Business Strategies
    P

    55.0%

• Teagasc – Agriculture and Food Development Authority

  PT

  11 Treffer55.0%
  • ENFASYS - Encouraging Farmers Towards Sustainable Farming Systems Through Policy and Business Strategies
    P

    55.0%

• GAIA Epicheirein Anonymi Etaireia Psifiakon Ypiresion

  PT

  11 Treffer55.0%
  • ENFASYS - Encouraging Farmers Towards Sustainable Farming Systems Through Policy and Business Strategies
    P

    55.0%

• Eigen Vermogen Van Het Instituut Voor Landbouw-, Visserij- en Voedingsonderzoek

  PT

  11 Treffer55.0%
  • ENFASYS - Encouraging Farmers Towards Sustainable Farming Systems Through Policy and Business Strategies
    P

    55.0%

• Centro de Investigacion Ecologica Y Aplicaciones Forestales Consorcio

  P

  4 Treffer54.1%
  • EU: CLEARING HOUSE – Collaborative Learning in Research, Information-Sharing and Governance on How Urban Forest-Based Solutions Support Sino-European Urban Futures
    P

    54.1%

• Union Internationale pour la Conservation de la Nature et de ses Ressources

  P

  4 Treffer54.1%
  • EU: CLEARING HOUSE – Collaborative Learning in Research, Information-Sharing and Governance on How Urban Forest-Based Solutions Support Sino-European Urban Futures
    P

    54.1%

• Shenzen Fairy Lake Botanical Garden

  P

  6 Treffer54.1%
  • EU: CLEARING HOUSE – Collaborative Learning in Research, Information-Sharing and Governance on How Urban Forest-Based Solutions Support Sino-European Urban Futures
    P

    54.1%

• A global analysis of bioeconomy visions in governmental bioeconomy strategies

  2023

  AMBIO · 34 Zitationen · DOI

  Against the background of climate change and scarce non-renewable resources, transforming the fossil-based toward a bio-based economy is considered crucial for sustainable development. Numerous countries have released governmental strategies outlining their bioeconomy visions. This study examines the bioeconomy visions presented in 78 policy documents from 50 countries worldwide, building on earlier vision typologies. Through qualitative content analysis, 227 distinct policy goals were identified and analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the salience of specific goals, overarching goal categories, and distinct bioeconomy visions: bioresource, biotechnology, and bioecology visions. The results reveal that goals and visions prioritize economic growth, while environmental considerations are less salient. The bioresource vision emerges as the globally dominant perspective, while the bioecology and biotechnology visions have lower salience. These findings deepen our comprehension of current bioeconomy policies and emphasize the need for critical research on bioeconomy visions and their implications for public policy.

• Resilience and policy design in the emerging bioeconomy – the RPD framework and the changing role of energy crop systems in Germany

  2020

  Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning · 24 Zitationen · DOI

  The resilience of social-ecological systems (SES) has become a major concern in environmental policy. The ongoing transition towards a bio-based economy essentially aims to address resilience challenges of the fossil-based economy. Its success depends on the resilience of the SES and bio-based production systems (BBPS) on which the bioeconomy rests. This paper introduces the Resilience Policy Design (RPD) framework to analyse and assess how bioeconomy policies address the resilience challenges of SES/BBPS. It combines resilience thinking and the ‘new’ policy design perspective, aiming at comparative research across countries, sectors and policy levels. It comprises five steps: determining relevant context conditions and the policy design space, characterizing bioeconomy policy mixes, identifying affected SES/BBPS and their resilience challenges, assessing the orientation of the policy mix towards different resilience capabilities (robustness, adaptability or transformability) and its resilience-enabling or -constraining elements, and overall assessment. An exemplary application focusing on energy maize in Germany finds a layered policy mix, addressing different resilience concerns over time. It demonstrates the inherently political nature of SES/BBPS resilience that requires inclusive, deliberative policy-making, the importance of policy feedback for adaptive and transformative governance with a long-term perspective, and the need for inter-/transdisciplinary collaboration to develop and assess resilience policies.

• Explaining low salience of environmental resilience challenges in bioeconomy strategies: A cross-regional comparative analysis

  2024

  Earth System Governance · 9 Zitationen · DOI

  Bioeconomy policies aim at fostering economic growth while solving the sustainability challenges of the fossil-based economy. However, these policies do little to discuss the resilience challenges of bioeconomies and the bio-based production systems on which they rest. Specifically, the environmental stresses that are likely to threaten the delivery of the bioeconomy's desired functions are barely addressed. This paper aims to understand why the salience of environmental resilience challenges is low in bioeconomy strategies. We conduct an exploratory comparative analysis of the policy design processes of six countries - Malaysia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy and Germany - building on expert interviews and a conceptual approach that emphasizes the importance of the policy design space. Our findings suggest that key factors in explaining the low salience of environmental resilience challenges are the predominantly economic motivation among leading authorities and the under-representation of environmental actors across policy design spaces.

• Policy learning and unlearning towards a transition to a sustainable bioeconomy: The case of Germany

  2025

  Journal of Environmental Management · 3 Zitationen · DOI

  During the last decades, numerous national governments have supported the bioeconomy and framed it as a sustainable socio-technical transition. However, scholars argue that the sustainability of the bioeconomy depends on the interpretation of the concept by policy makers and the resulting policies that guide the transition on the ground. This interpretation is certainly not set in stone. On the contrary, bioeconomy policy making most likely represents a vivid process, in which policy (un)learning leads to constant (re)adjustments. To identify potential policy learning or unlearning we analyze the objectives and visions of 95 policy mix elements that form the bioeconomy policy mix between 2010 and 2024 in Germany. Our results show that the German bioeconomy policy mix is overall bioresource-oriented. At the same time, environmental protection and circularity gain importance. The observed readjustment follows the mode of policy layering and could indicate notions of learning where modifications are made while the initial policy idea remains unchanged.

• Resilience Orientation in Bioeconomy Policies - A Global Comparative Analysis

  2025

  Circular Economy and Sustainability · 2 Zitationen · DOI

  Abstract Resilience and in particular resilience-oriented bioeconomy policies have become essential for dealing with long- and short-term stresses such as climate change, pandemics, and geopolitical conflicts. Meanwhile, concerns are growing about the resilience of the bioeconomy, but the scholarly attention given to the resilience orientation of bioeconomy policies worldwide has been limited. To fill this gap, we build on the concept of resilience, the Resilience Assessment Tool, and the new policy design approach to study whether bioeconomy policies enhance the resilience capacities of bio-based production systems, namely robustness, adaptability and transformability. Our systematic content analysis of 78 national bioeconomy policy documents from 50 countries shows that bioeconomic policies are characterized mainly by adaptability and transformability. Our descriptive statistical analyses indicate that these two resilience capacities and resilience orientation at large vary strongly and widely across documents. Our correlational analysis identifies political, economic, and environmental factors that begin to explain this strong cross-case variation. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the role of resilience in (bioeconomy) policy making and the strengths and weaknesses of bioeconomy policy designs with regard to the resilience capacities. In doing so, we aim to contribute to the design of inclusive and innovative policies that support sustainable solutions, ecological standards, and broad stakeholder involvement.

• Characterizing bioeconomy policy instruments:

  2025

  Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning · 2 Zitationen · DOI

  Over the past two decades, the concept of the bioeconomy has gained significant traction in policy making and research. While the visions and goals of bioeconomy policy strategies are well-researched, the policy instruments used to promote them have received little attention. Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a comprehensive analysis of bioeconomy-related policy instruments as articulated in 78 governmental bioeconomy policy documents from 50 countries around the world. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify the stated policy instruments and to assess the prevalence, density, choice of instrument type, balance, and calibration of the instrument mix across policy documents as a whole, but also disaggregated by substantive policy focus, time, country income groups, and individual strategies. We find that bioeconomy policies are dominated by economic and nodal instruments focused on promoting innovation, research and development, while regulatory instruments, particularly those addressing environmental issues, are rare within the strategies themselves. Moreover, while bioeconomy strategies contain a significant number of statements about instruments, they rarely specify their calibration. These patterns suggest that while bioeconomy strategies play important agenda-setting and signaling roles, their limited balance and calibration may constrain their ability to provide actionable policy guidance.

• Pathways to strong and weak resilience orientation in bioeconomy policies: A global configurational analysis of policy design space conditions

  2026

  Environmental Challenges · 1 Zitationen · DOI

  • Policy design spaces shape resilience concerns in bioeconomy policymaking globally. • fsQCA identifies pathways to strong and weak resilience orientations in policies. • Wealth and low corruption are core conditions for strong resilience orientation. • Permanent crops and oil dependence are linked to weak resilience orientation. • Climate change exposure has an ambiguous effect on resilience orientation. Governmental bioeconomy strategies around the globe promote the development of circular bioeconomies as pathway towards sustainable development. However, diverging bioeconomy visions emphasize either economic growth, sustainability, ecosystem biodiversity or biosphere compatibility. This article adopts a resilience perspective to explore how and why 78 bioeconomy strategies from 50 countries address the long-term viability of the bioeconomy. After assessing the strength of resilience orientations in these documents, the paper analyses how characteristics of the policy design space, which affect the willingness and capacity of bioeconomy policy designers, explain strong and weak resilience orientations. A fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) with five indicators for political, economic, land-use and environmental conditions confirms the assumption that high GDP and good governance are sufficient for strong resilience orientation, but only in connection with other factors. In contrast, low GDP combined with dependence on oil exports and specific land-use patterns explains many cases of weak resilience orientation.

• Resilience Challenge Salience in Bioeconomy Policies: A Global Analysis

  2023

  1 Zitationen · DOI

  The sustainability of social-ecological systems has become a major concern in environmental policy. To address the sustainability challenges of the fossil-based economy, more than 50 countries around the world have promulgated policies to promote the transformation towards a bio-based economy. The success of this transformation, in turn, depends on the resilience of the bio-based production systems on which the bioeconomy rests. However, the continued delivery of the desired functions of these systems is challenged by environmental, social, economic, and political short- and long-term stresses. Despite the importance of such resilience challenges for a sustainable bioeconomy transformation, the extent to which they are addressed in bioeconomy policies remains unclear and under-researched. To fill this gap, we investigate the salience of resilience challenges in bioeconomy policies using the Resilience Policy Design (RPD) framework. Specifically, we conduct a systematic content analysis of bioeconomy policy documents in 50 countries to identify and discuss the specific challenges and instruments directly aimed at addressing these challenges. Overall, our analysis contributes to a better understanding of the role and origins of resilience concerns in global bioeconomy policymaking.

• Resilience Orientation in National Bioeconomy Policies: A Global Comparative Analysis

  2023

  1 Zitationen · DOI

  Policies to promote the transition from carbon-based to bio-based economies are proliferating around the globe. Meanwhile, concerns are growing about the resilience of bioeconomy, but the attention given to resilience issues in bioeconomy policies has remained underexplored. To address this gap, we conduct a systematic content analysis of the resilience orientation in 78 bioeconomy policy documents across 50 countries. Our descriptive statistical analyses show that more than 60 per cent of the average policy text concerns resilience-related goals or instruments, driven particularly by adaptability and transformability considerations. Our explorative correlational analysis indicates that policy design spac-es characterized by political openness, economic wealth, high arable land shares, low export shares, and limited oil rents might be conducive to high resilience orientation. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the role of resilience concepts in global bioeconomy policy making.

• Assessing the neoliberal state in the bioeconomy: evidence from Germany

  2026

  Sustainability Science Practice and Policy · DOI

  The bioeconomy transformation has become an integral part of the global environmental agenda and its governance has become the subject of intense academic analysis and debate. A recurring theme in social science scholarship is the characterization of the bioeconomy as a neoliberal political project that seeks to commodify and marketize nature, while limiting social inclusion to ensure its success. While this literature has significantly advanced our critical understanding of the bioeconomy, it has been limited by ambiguous analytical criteria, conflicting findings, and a lack of systematic examination of the role and dimensions of the neoliberal state. To address these limitations, we develop a framework that identifies 13 analytical criteria of neoliberal states relevant for understanding the extent to which a state is neoliberal concerning bioeconomy matters. We apply these criteria to the case of the German bioeconomy and find mixed evidence of neoliberalism. Our study contributes to deepening our understanding of the nature of the state in bioeconomy matters, which is essential to achieving the bioeconomy transformation.

• Resilience Challenges in Bioeconomy Policies: A Global Comparative Analysis

  2026

  Environmental Management · DOI

  The sustainability of social-ecological systems has become a major concern in environmental policy and beyond, triggering many integrated cross-policy initiatives. An important example are bioeconomy strategies. Policies to promote a bio-based economy have been enacted in more than 50 countries around the world, often in response to the sustainability challenges posed by the fossil-based economy. However, the success and sustainability of the bioeconomy, in turn, depends on the resilience of the bio-based production systems on which it rests. Simultaneously, the continued delivery of the desired functions of these systems is potentially threatened by environmental, social, economic, and political short-term shocks and long-term stresses. Prudent bioeconomy policies would therefore identify potential disruptions and develop pro-active strategies to address them. However, little is known to what extent and which resilience challenges for a sustainable bioeconomy have been addressed in bioeconomy policies. To investigate the salience of resilience challenges in bioeconomy policies, we conducted a systematic content analysis of 78 national bioeconomy policy documents in 50 countries published between 2005 and 2020 to identify and discuss the specific challenges and the instruments directly aimed at addressing them. The results show that bioeconomy policy documents largely pay little attention to resilience challenges. If mentioned at all, challenges are mostly framed in economic terms, with few concrete instruments proposed to enhance resilience. Overall, the general neglect of resilience issues in global bioeconomy policymaking underscores the need for stronger foresight, cross-sector dialogue, and the explicit integration of resilience considerations into environmental management and bioeconomy policy design.

• Characterizing bioeconomy policy instruments:

  2025

  Figshare · DOI

  Over the past two decades, the concept of the bioeconomy has gained significant traction in policy making and research. While the visions and goals of bioeconomy policy strategies are well-researched, the policy instruments used to promote them have received little attention. Addressing this research gap, this paper presents a comprehensive analysis of bioeconomy-related policy instruments as articulated in 78 governmental bioeconomy policy documents from 50 countries around the world. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify the stated policy instruments and to assess the prevalence, density, choice of instrument type, balance, and calibration of the instrument mix across policy documents as a whole, but also disaggregated by substantive policy focus, time, country income groups, and individual strategies. We find that bioeconomy policies are dominated by economic and nodal instruments focused on promoting innovation, research and development, while regulatory instruments, particularly those addressing environmental issues, are rare within the strategies themselves. Moreover, while bioeconomy strategies contain a significant number of statements about instruments, they rarely specify their calibration. These patterns suggest that while bioeconomy strategies play important agenda-setting and signaling roles, their limited balance and calibration may constrain their ability to provide actionable policy guidance.

• Understanding societies beyond economics

  2016

  edoc Publication server (Humboldt University of Berlin) · DOI

  Die gegenwärtige Politik betrachtet Windenergieanlagen als ein entscheidendes Mittel für die Gestaltung einer nachhaltigen Zukunft. Dennoch lehnen die BewohnerInnen der griechischen Insel Amorgos Anträge zum Bau von Windenergieanlagen ab. In der vorliegenden Untersuchung analysiere ich, wie die InselbewohnerInnen die Option der Windenergie beurteilen. Die Analyse basiert auf einem interdisziplinären theoretischen Ansatz und einem neu entwickelten analytischen Rahmenwerk, dem Institutions - Habits - Intuitions (IHI) framework. Qualitative Forschungsmethoden, insbesondere persönliche Befragungen und teilnehmende Beobachtungen, sind wesentliche Elemente der Datenerhebung und erlauben mir, mich umfassend in den amorgianischen Kontext zu vertiefen. Die Forschungsergebnisse zeigen, dass der Beurteilungsprozess auf dem Zusammenwirken von Kosten-Nutzen Kalkulationen, der Infragestellung der Thematik der Windenergie und intuitivem Handeln basiert. Die Option der Windenergie erschüttert die herkömmlichen Interaktionen der InselbewohnerInnen, die die lokale Tourismuswirtschaft und Gemeindeverwaltung bestimmen. Die Kombination pre-formeller Institutionen, eingefahrener Gepflogenheiten und intuitives Agierens aufgrund bisheriger Erfahrungen bringt die amorgianische Gesellschaft dazu, Windenergieprojekte abzulehnen. Die Analyse beruht auf der Anwendung von Ansätzen der Sozialpsychologie und der Institutionenökonomik. Damit wird u.a. die gängige Annahme, der Mensch sei a priori ein Investor hinterfragt und die Absicht verfolgt, die Kluft zwischen Wirtschaftswissenschaften und ‘realer Welt’ zu verringern. Die Insel von Amorgos ist ein beispielhafter Mikrokosmos in und für Griechenland als Ganzes. Energiepolitische Strategien und die lokalen und nationalen Beurteilungsprozesse dieser sind dabei nur zu verstehen, wenn die mit dem Neoliberalismus zusammenhängende, tiefgreifende sozio-ökonomische Krise Griechenlands in den Blick genommen wird.

Aus HU-FIS sind keine Kooperationen für diese Person gemeldet.

Name

Dr. Maria Proestou

Titel

Dr.

Fakultät

Lebenswissenschaftliche Fakultät

Institut

Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institut für Agrar- und Gartenbauwissenschaften

Arbeitsgruppe

NWG BIOPOLISTA - Bioökonomie-Policy-Implementation in Bioökonomiestaaten

Telefon

+49 30 2093-46313

HU-FIS-Profil

Quelle ↗

Zuletzt gescrapt

26.4.2026, 01:10:39