Fragmented policy hinders UK bioeconomy’s potential to generate £204B in revenue
BB-REG-NET report highlights how conflicting governmental perspectives limit development of sustainable bio-based materials sector.
The ‘Addressing the UK’s Polysemous Bioeconomy: A Call for Policy Cohesion’ report highlights how differing departmental priorities are creating contradictory policies that stifle innovation and limit economic growth in the sector.
It finds that the UK could generate upwards of £204 billion in annual revenue by transitioning to bio-based and biodegradable solutions, while saving greenhouse gas emissions. However, the report also warns that, without decisive action, the UK risks falling behind international competitors.
Calling on UK policymakers to improve policy cohesion across governmental departments, Dr Jen Vanderhoven, COO of the Bio-based and Biodegradable Industries Association (BBIA), commented: “True progress in the bioeconomy will only be achieved when diverse industries and departments come together with a common purpose. By embracing collaboration and aligning strategies, we can transform challenges into opportunities, paving the way for a sustainable, innovative, and globally competitive future."
The polysemous nature of the bioeconomy
With 56 different departments, agencies, and public bodies involved in regulating the bioeconomy, the sector has struggled to find a clear identity in government policy, says the report.
The three primary stakeholders, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA), the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology (DSIT), and the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero (DESNZ), each have different conceptual approaches, leading to disjointed efforts, inefficient resource allocation, and misused opportunity to maximise economic and environmental benefits.
According to the report, an ecology-focused bioeconomy is championed by Defra, which emphasises environmental boundaries and ecological protection. This is compared to a biotechnological perspective from BSIT, focused on scientific innovation, and a biomass approach from DESNZ, using biological raw materials for energy and manufacturing.
This has led to a stark contradiction in government approaches. While DSIT, via Innovate UK and UKRI, has invested over £450 million in bioeconomy R&D in the past five years (with an additional £517 million from private investors), other departments have simultaneously implemented regulations that create barriers for these innovations to enter the market.
Policy cohesion is ‘sorely needed’
The BB-REG-NET report identifies several specific policy conflicts that hinder UK bioeconomy development.
Department for Transport policies, including the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) and Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) mandate, create competition for biomass resources that could otherwise be used for bio-based materials and chemicals. This competition limits feedstock availability for non-fuel applications.
Defra’s recycling policies further disadvantage compostable materials, with the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme having labelled compostable packaging as ‘red’ through its Recycling Assessment Methodology (RAM). This means the adoption of compostable packaging will be subject to higher fees than conventional packaging.
The report also notes that technologies such as engineering biology have been advocated for by DSIT, but remain largely isolated from broader bioeconomy strategies.
Dr Adrian Higson, Managing Director of the NNFCC, explained: “The bioeconomy is complicated, but this complexity is its strength. Embracing the bioeconomy provides an opportunity to integrate the sustainable production of food, fuel and materials and drive regeneration in agriculture and industry.
“Grasping the opportunity requires collaboration and common thinking across Government, without which strategies and regulations will remain fragmented and the bioeconomy will miss the cohesive framework of policy it sorely needs."
International comparison shows UK falling behind
The report contrasts the UK's approach with more coordinated international efforts. The United States' BioPreferred Program, led by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, creates a federal procurement preference for certified biobased goods, stimulating market demand and encouraging private sector investment.
Similarly, France's policy on bio-based materials in construction, RE2020, mandates increased use of sustainable, renewable materials in buildings, creating a stable market for biobased industries and driving both investment and industrial scale-up.
Without developing a comprehensive and coordinated policy framework, the UK risks preventing high-potential technologies from scaling up as well as losing UK-based countries to places with more favourable regulatory and investment conditions.
“The strength of a nation's bioeconomy lies not in its diverse sectors, but in its ability to unify them under a shared vision. A cohesive policy framework is the key to unlocking the potential of bio-based solutions, fostering innovation, and ensuring that economic growth, sustainability, and resilience are not isolated ambitions but interconnected goals,” added Vanderhoven.
