D2.5 - Roadmap for BBTs implementation

Deliverable 2.5 1 Views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Executive Agency (REA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. © 2025 by BBioNets consortium is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. -\ Roberto Cagliero, Laura Mirra, Francesco Basset, Francesca Moino, Patrizia Borsotto CREA April 2025 Roadmap for BBTs implementation DELIVERABLE D2.5 Deliverable 2.5 2 Views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Executive Agency (REA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. © 2025 by BBioNets consortium is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Document information Document ID D2.5 Title Roadmap for BBTs implementation Work Package WP2 –Bio-Based Technologies and regional dynamics Due Date 30/04/2024 Delivery Date 28/04/2025 Dissemination Level PU-fully open Partner Responsible CREA Main Authors Roberto Cagliero, Laura Mirra, Francesco Basset, Francesca Moino, Patrizia Borsotto (CREA) Contributors - Peer reviewers Reviewer 1 Dimitrios Moustakis – AFS Reviewer 2 Małgorzata Wydra – IUNG Coordinator Carmen Girón Domínguez - MTU Document history Version Date Main Modifications Author(s) 0.1 14/03/2025 21/03/2025 Roberto Cagliero, Laura Mirra, Francesco Basset, Francesca Moino, Patrizia Borsotto (CREA) 0.2 24/03/2025 28/03/2025 MTU, IUNG, HUB-CR, Teagasc, CREA, CTA, AFS, TEPRO 1.0 28/04/2025 Final version ready for submission Roberto Cagliero, Laura Mirra, Francesco Basset, Francesca Moino, Patrizia Borsotto (CREA) Deliverable 2.5 3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 8 2 Methodology ........................................................................................... 9 2.1 The road travelled ................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1 Bio-Based Technology Inventory ................................................................................ 9 2.1.2 BBTs Assessment Tool ............................................................................................... 10 2.1.3 Regional Dynamics ................................................................................................... 11 2.2 The road to be taken ............................................................................................. 12 2.2.1 List of most suitable BBTs ......................................................................................... 13 2.2.2 Benchmarking phase ................................................................................................ 13 2.2.3 Define the regional BBT identity card ....................................................................... 14 2.2.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs .......................................................... 16 3 – Assessment results by the Italian region ............................................. 18 3.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Italian region ............................................ 18 3.2 Benchmarking with other countries ...................................................................... 19 3.3 Define the regional BBT identity card .................................................................... 20 3.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs ........................................................ 22 4 – Assessment results by the Irish region ................................................ 26 4.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Irish region ............................................... 26 4.2 Benchmarking with other countries ...................................................................... 27 4.3 Define the regional BBT identity card .................................................................... 29 4.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs ........................................................ 30 5 – Assessment results by the Spanish region ........................................... 36 5.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Spanish region .......................................... 36 5.2 Benchmarking with other countries ...................................................................... 37 5.3 Define the regional BBT identity card .................................................................... 39 5.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs ........................................................ 41 6 – Assessment results by the Polish Region ............................................. 45 6.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Polish Region ............................................ 45 6.2 Benchmarking with other countries ...................................................................... 46 6.3 Define the regional BBT identity card .................................................................... 48 6.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs ........................................................ 49 7 – Assessment results by the Greek region .............................................. 54 7.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Greek region ............................................ 54 7.2 Benchmarking with other countries ...................................................................... 55 7.3 Define the regional BBT identity card .................................................................... 57 7.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs ........................................................ 58 Deliverable 2.5 4 8 – Assessment results by the Czech Republic region ................................ 63 8.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Czech Republic region .............................. 63 8.2 Benchmarking with other countries ...................................................................... 64 8.3 Define the regional BBT identity card .................................................................... 66 8.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs ........................................................ 68 9 References ............................................................................................ 72 Appendix 1 BBTs Pivot analysis scheme ........................................................ 73 Italy ......................................... 73 Ireland ........................................................................................................................... 77 Spain ............................................................................................................................. 81 Poland ........................................................................................................................... 85 Greece ........................................................................................................................... 89 Czech Republic .............................................................................................................. 93 Annex 1 Vademecum Questionnaire ............................................................. 98 List of Figures Figure 1:.Example of roadmap. ............................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness 3-D plot interpretation (assessment chart). ..................... 11 Figure 3. Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness sustainability interpretation on one of the sides of the 2-D graph. .................................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4: Regional Dynamics ................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 5: The regional snake paths. ....................................................................................................... 14 Figure 6: Boxplot representation. ......................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: Techno-territorial synergy matrix (TTS). ................................................................................ 17 Figure 8: Snake paths from all represented regions (Italy in frames). .................................................. 20 Figure 9: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation .................................................... 21 Figure 10: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation ................................... 23 Figure 11: The Italian TTS matrix ........................................................................................................... 24 Figure 12: The Snake paths from all represented regions (Ireland in frames) ...................................... 28 Figure 13: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation .................................................. 29 Figure 14: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation ................................... 32 Figure 15: The Irish TTS matrix .............................................................................................................. 32 Figure 16: The Snake paths from all represented regions (Spain in frames). ....................................... 38 Figure 17: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation .................................................. 39 Figure 18: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation ................................... 42 Figure 19: The Spanish TTS matrix ........................................................................................................ 42 Figure 20: The snake paths from all represented regions (Poland in frames). ..................................... 47 Figure 21: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation .................................................. 48 Figure 22: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation ................................... 51 Figure 23: The Polish TTS matrix ........................................................................................................... 51 Figure 24: Snake paths from all represented regions (Greece in frame). ............................................. 56 Figure 25: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation .................................................. 57 Figure 26: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation ................................... 60 Deliverable 2.5 5 Figure 27: The Greek TTS matrix ........................................................................................................... 60 Figure 28: The snake paths from all represented regions (the Czech Republic in frame). ................... 65 Figure 29: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation .................................................. 66 Figure 30: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation ................................... 69 Figure 31: The Czech TTS matrix ........................................................................................................... 69 List of Tables Table 1: Example of Co-occurrence table. ............................................................................................. 13 Table 2: Example of SWA matrix ........................................................................................................... 16 Table 3: List of the top 20 BBTs. for the Italian region .......................................................................... 18 Table 4: Co-occurrence table for the Italian region .............................................................................. 19 Table 5: Italian SWA matrix ................................................................................................................... 22 Table 6: Italian DYN matrix .................................................................................................................... 23 Table 7: Italian 5 best BBTs ................................................................................................................... 24 Table 8: List of the top 20 BBTs for the Irish region. ............................................................................. 26 Table 9: Co-occurrence table for the Irish region. ................................................................................ 27 Table 10: Irish SWA matrix .................................................................................................................... 30 Table 11: Irish DYN matrix ..................................................................................................................... 31 Table 12: Irish 5 best BBTs ..................................................................................................................... 33 Table 13: List of the top 20 BBTs for the Spanish region ...................................................................... 36 Table 14: Co-occurrence table for the Spanish region. ......................................................................... 37 Table 15: Spanish SWA matrix ............................................................................................................... 40 Table 16: Spanish DYN matrix ............................................................................................................... 41 Table 17: Spanish 5 best BBTs ............................................................................................................... 43 Table 18: List of the top 20 BBTs for the Polish region. ........................................................................ 45 Table 19: Co-occurrence table. ............................................................................................................. 46 Table 20: Polish SWA matrix ................................................................................................................. 49 Table 21: Polish DYN matrix .................................................................................................................. 50 Table 22: Polish 5 best BBTs .................................................................................................................. 52 Table 23: List of the top 20 BBTs for the Greek region ......................................................................... 54 Table 24: Co-occurrence table for the Greek region. ............................................................................ 55 Table 25: Greek SWA matrix ................................................................................................................. 58 Table 26: Greek DYN matrix .................................................................................................................. 59 Table 27: Greek 5 best BBTs .................................................................................................................. 61 Table 28: List of the top 20 BBTs. .......................................................................................................... 63 Table 29: Co-occurrence table for Czech Republic region. ................................................................... 64 Table 30: Czech SWA matrix .................................................................................................................. 67 Table 31: Czech DYN matrix .................................................................................................................. 68 Table 32: Czech 5 best BBTs .................................................................................................................. 70 Deliverable 2.5 6 Table of Abbreviations Abbreviation Description BBT Bio-Based Technology CAP Common Agricultural Policy COST_adj Cost adjusted CZ Czech Republic D Deliverable DYN Regional dynamics matrix EFF_adj Effectiveness adjusted EL Greece ES Spain EU European Union FA Focus Area FAN Forest and Agriculture Networks IE Ireland IT Italy OG Operational Groups PL Poland R&D Research and Development RPFA Regional Partners for Forestry and Agriculture RR Represented Region SUST_adj Sustainability adjusted SWA Empirical evidence matrix TTS Techno-territorial synergy matrix WP Work Package Deliverable 2.5 7 Executive Summary This document, titled " Roadmap for BBTs implementation", outlines the roadmap that each Regional Partner for Forestry and Agriculture (RPFA) followed to define a list of Bio-Based Technologies (BBTs) and identify the most suitable ones. Based on activities T1.2 (Co-creation on regional needs and challenges regarding OG-identified/locally applied BBTs), T2.1 (BBioNets inventory and knowledge collection), T2.2 (BBT assessment tool) and T2.3 (High-level study of regional dynamics), CREA guided the RPFA to adapt the BBTs into simplified and synthetic groups of variables, depending on whether they measure the effectiveness, cost or sustainability of the BBT. Considering the identified needs and available Represented Region (RR) resources (technical, environmental, economic and social aspects), the ‘RR-specific’ scenarios (lists of BBTs best suited for RR) were shared with the respective Forest and Agriculture Network (FAN) for validation (T1.3 Validation and prioritization of BBTs per region), after weighting the adapted variables. After defining ‘RR-specific’ scenarios and re-calibrating the assessment tool, the list was drawn up to prepare its ‘Roadmap for BBT implementation’ (D2.5, M15). The primary objective of this Task has been therefore to define a list of possible BBTs that can be implemented in each FAN and in the light of the study of regional dynamics, identifying the 5 most suitable ones. Deliverable 2.5 8 1 Introduction The document on the implementation of the BBT roadmap provides an overview of the methodology to identify and implement the best suitable Bio-Based Technologies (BBTs) in the Inventory to the region. The Roadmap for BBTs implementation is presented in the context of the project, it interacts with other tasks such as the BBioNets knowledge inventory (T2.1), the BBT assessment tool (T2.2), the highlevel study on regional dynamics (T2.3), the workshops held to identify regional needs and challenges (T1.2), and for the validation and prioritisation of BBTs (T1.3). This report comprises three chapters along with references and is organised as follows: Chapter 1: Introduction which describes issues concerning deliverable scope, objectives, its function in the project, and it briefly presents the structure of deliverable. Chapter 2: Methodological chapter common to all 6 roadmaps, which illustrates both the road already travelled and the road to be taken. In particular, the road travelled is a critical summary of the inventory and assessment chart, to help the reader understand the part about the road ahead. Chapters 3,4,5,6,7,8: The result chapters present the assessment by each region (Italy, Ireland, Spain, Poland, Greece, the Czech Republic), which aims to demonstrate the actual roadmap for implementing BBTs considering the country's own characteristics in terms of biomass availability, framework, support funds, research and development. Each chapter concludes with the identification of the five most suitable BBTs for each region. The deliverable also includes, as an Appendix, the table of the inventory pivot analysis results. Figure 1:.Example of roadmap. Deliverable 2.5 9 2 Methodology 2.1 The road travelled In this part, the BBTs Inventory, to provide easy access to information about BBTs from the Operational Groups (OGs) of the EIPAGRI and EU-funded projects & initiatives, and the BBT Assessment Tool to offer sustainable alternatives to farmers and foresters are briefly presented. Additionally, in a third part, we also present the process of drawing the regional dynamics related to local biomass and bioindustry items. 2.1.1 Bio-Based Technology Inventory The construction of the inventory for BBTs is based on a structured framework that enables the systematic and coherent collection, analysis, and organization of information related to BBTs (D2.1 Methodological framework for knowledge compilation). This inventory is structured around six main dimensions, each comprising specific variables to ensure a comprehensive and detailed representation. The six dimensions are described below: 1. OG / Project Attributes: This dimension gathers information related to the general organization or project that develops or utilizes bio-based technologies. Variables include details such as the project/organization name, geographical location, sectoral context, and main objectives. 2. BBTs Attributes: This dimension documents the specific characteristics of the BBTs. Variables may include the type of technology, its level of innovation, raw materials used, and development status (e.g., concept, prototype, large-scale implementation). 3. BBTs Categorization: This dimension focuses on the classification of BBTs. Variables include categorization by application type (e.g., energy, materials, chemicals), the industrial sector involved, and the environmental benefits expected compared to traditional alternatives. 4. BBTs Implementation: This dimension describes the implementation modalities of BBTs. Variables may concern the level of adoption (pilot, regional, national), the complexity of implementation, and the main technical, logistical, or regulatory challenges faced. 5. BBTs Expected Effects: This dimension focuses on the expected effects resulting from the use of bio-based technologies. Variables include environmental benefits (e.g., CO₂ emission reduction), social benefits (e.g., creation of green jobs), and economic benefits (e.g., growth of the bioeconomy sector). 6. BBTs Costs: The final dimension addresses the costs associated with BBTs. Variables include initial investment costs, operational and maintenance costs, as well as long-term economic implications. Data collection for the inventory was conducted using 3 main approaches: 1. Review of National and European Databases: Each partner country conducted an in-depth review of existing national and European databases containing relevant information on bio-based technologies, projects, and stakeholders. This process ensured the collection of structured and reliable data. Deliverable 2.5 16 Table 2: Example of SWA matrix 2.2.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs This is the last step to identify the five main BBTs. To do this, it is necessary to look at the characteristics of the region and cross-references them with the identity card of the most suitable BBT for the region. 2.2.4.1 Regional dynamic matrix under common framework The matrix of regional dynamics (DYN) is created from the data collected in Task 2.3 through a synoptic reading and it is divided into macro-groups: • Biomass and technology: This group covers the physical characteristics of the land where biomass resources are found, including terrain, topography, and natural resources. It describes the biomass products that are produced or derived from the territory, including biofuels, biogas, or other bio-based material, as well as those from forests, including wood, leaves, or other materials that can be used for biomass, and also from agroindustry that can convert raw biomass into usable products like biofuels, bioplastics, etc. It also describes the abundance or availability of biomass resources in the area and how biomass resources are harvested, transported, and managed for processing and use. Additionally, the economic aspects are explored, focusing on demand, prices, and commercialization of biomass products. • Regulatory framework: This group outlines governmental strategies or national programs aimed at supporting biomass development and technology. Strong Factor Weak Factor Ambiguous Factor Reference sector Funding Partner (n°) Type partner Focus area Status Geographical scale Key words BBT categories Feedstock Outcome TRL Mobility Availability C sink Conditions Complexity Sust eco Sust socio Sust envi Value added Deliverable 2.5 17 • Support and financial policy: Financial or policy support from government entities, including grants, subsidies, or incentives as well as private companies, investors, or publicprivate partnerships. • Research and development: This group refers to the research and development infrastructure in place to innovate and improve biomass technologies and specifically focuses on research and development aimed at increasing the value or efficiency of biomass resources. 2.2.4.2 Techno-Territorial Synergy matrix We cross-referenced the results of regional dynamics with the matrix of empirical evidence (SWA) containing the factors characterizing the most suitable BBT. This process aimed to identify of the best BBT prototype in relation to the territory. The aim of this last phase is therefore to define how the characteristics of individual BBTs can be assessed in each region. To do this, we have constructed a matrix of coefficients highlighting the potential synergy between BBT factors and the specific conditions on the territory. We called this matrix the techno-territorial synergy matrix (TTS). Since it is neither feasible nor logical to correlate all BBT factors with every dimension of the territorial analysis, only the cells with concrete cross-references are highlighted in colour in the table below. Figure 7: Techno-territorial synergy matrix (TTS). Based on the data in the SWA, coefficients are entered in the coloured cross cell with DYN (Figure 7); the proposed coefficients vary from one (very low) to four (very high), depending on the relevance of the factor to the territory. A TSS matrix is then prepared for each BBT. To do this, the value found in the inventory for each factor of a BBT is multiplied by the corresponding coefficient of the TTS matrix. The value of the BBT factors can be treated in two ways: binary value (yes/no) and numeric value in relation to the coding already entered in the Inventory (e.g., in the Inventory the sustainability dimension is coded as follows: 1 level low - 3 level high). If an item has no relevance to the territory, or a clear assessment cannot be given, or the data has not been collected, the cell is estimated blank. In this light, some dimensions of the SWA (such as Conditions or Number of partners) were excluded from the TTS Matrix. Similarly, some factors derived from the Dynamics, such as climate, were also omitted. Once each BTT is assessed for its synergy with the specific territory and an overall BBT value is determined, we can conduct the final evaluation and extract the 5 best BBTs. Geographical scope Agriculture Forestry Primary sector Agroindustrial sector Management and logistics Bio-based industry Bio-products market Programmes Public support Private Support R&D system Reference sector Funding Type partner Focus area Geographical scale BBT categories Feedstock Outcome TRL Mobility Availability C sink Sust eco Sust socio Sust envi Value added Deliverable 2.5 18 3 – Assessment results by the Italian region 3.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Italian region The Assessment Tool made it possible to identify a ranking of BBTs for each region. The following table presents the Italian top 20 BBTs by ranking. In particular, the following table provides the outlines of various projects and initiatives related to sustainable agricultural practices and the utilization of byproducts and residues from farming and forestry. Table 3: List of the top 20 BBTs. for the Italian region Code BBTs Description BBTs IT53-ProBEST/BARK Agronomic use of bark and remnants DE22-MixBioPells/PLTIZ Pelletizing mixed biomass residues and waste from agriculture and forestry EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE Exploitation of olive leaves (rich in polyphenols and other bioactive ingredients) to produce herbal infusions and natural food additives EL87-Innovative Rice Residue Management Practices/RICE Rice residues returning to the soil as fertilisers IT36-Stabilized Litter/StbMn Dairy cows' manure is processed in a rotating drum separator with increased temperature to reduce the pathogens and the resulting solid fraction manure is used as cow bedding ES66-OleoValoriza/OLIVE Recovery of sludge from olive-mill ponds through a composting process. EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER Utilisation of olive residues for the production of compost and biochar IT54-ProBEST/ASHES Agronomic use of ashes AT42-Closing cycles/NTREC Use of farming residues and waste to produce compost or fertiliser ES63-BIOSUERO/WHEY Use of whey as a biofertiliser. ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 Use of olive trees residues to produce compost ES59-AGUACAVALUE/BYPRO Use of avocado by-products in animal nutrition EL78-HIPO-ENERGY/NUTRI Utilisation of the leaves of the Hippophae plant for the production of high nutrition additives for soft drinks EL84AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL Recovery of the nutrients contained in the residues (branches, leaves) of olive trees (and other productive trees) through composting EL79-ΑΕΙΦΟΡΙΚΑ ΚΗΠΕΥΤΙΚΑ/OREG Incorporation of non-commercial oregano into (greenhouse/outdoor) vegetable crops for the protection against soil fungi DE23-MixBioPells/PLTHP Pelletized mixed biomass is used in CHP plants to generate heat and electricity ES60-AGUACAVALUE/AVOCA Use of avocado by-products in animal nutrition, cosmeceuticals. ES58-AgriCarbón/AC Production of activated carbon using agricultural waste. EL5-BIO2CHP/B2CHP BIO2CHP is a container-sized power generator that converts solid organic residues into energy on-site. Source: BBioNets BioBased Technology Inventory (Operational Groups Inventory - BBioNets Platform) Deliverable 2.5 19 3.2 Benchmarking with other countries In this step, the aim is to analyse the top 20 BBTs macro-characterisations under the regional light, using comparison to the other regions. 3.2.1.1 Co-occurrence analysis The co-occurrence matrix is used to analyse the simultaneous presence of two or more BBTs in different Regions, setting the Italian region as a pivot, through the representation of a binary matrix. Table 4: Co-occurrence table for the Italian region Italy shows significant co-occurrence with Spain and Greece with multiple BBTs being implemented also in these countries, while the relationships with Ireland and Poland point out a lower relevance. Italy has no occurrence with the Czech Republic. EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL BBT is the only BBT that appears in five countries; two BBTs (EL80OLIHERB/OLIVE; EL5-BIO2CHP/B2CHP) are present in four countries, suggesting a strong interest in bioenergy. Five BBTs have only been chosen by Italy. Only 3 BBTs (IT53-ProBEST/BARK; IT36-Stabilized Litter/StbMn; IT54-ProBEST/ASHES) come from Italy; in relation to the other 17, the majority are from Mediterranean area and 3 of them from Continental Area. 3.2.1.2 Distribution of the top 20 BBTs The following figure presents the so called “snake” composed by the Top 20 BBTs in Italy in comparison to the other 6 regions. In the Italian case, the efficiency dimension seems very relevant, with the “snake” lying on the x-axis. Practically all of BBTs have a positive cost estimate (cost savings area), while the dimension of sustainability seems very variable. All BBTs are clustered and close together. Moreover, we can highlight not only the key characteristics of the top BBTs in relation to the three main dimensions but also how they are distributed across the four quadrants of the Cartesian graph. BBT codes Code IT IE ES PL EL CZ TOT IT53-ProBEST/BARK IT53 1 1 2 DE22-MixBioPells/PLTIZ DE22 11 EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE EL80 1 1 1 1 4 EL87-Innovative Rice Residue Management Practices/RICE EL87 111 3 IT36-Stabilized Litter/StbMn IT36 1 1 1 3 ES66-OleoValoriza/OLIVE ES66 111 3 EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER EL88 111 3 IT54-ProBEST/ASHES IT54 11 AT42-Closing cycles/NTREC AT42 11 ES63-BIOSUERO/WHEY ES63 111 3 ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 ES67 111 3 ES59-AGUACAVALUE/BYPRO ES59 1 1 1 3 EL78-HIPO-ENERGY/NUTRI EL78 1 1 2 EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL EL84 11111 5 EL79-ΑΕΙΦΟΡΙΚΑ ΚΗΠΕΥΤΙΚΑ/OREG EL79 11 DE23-MixBioPells/PLTHP DE23 11 ES60-AGUACAVALUE/AVOCA ES60 1 1 1 3 ES58-AgriCarbón/AC ES58 111 3 EL5-BIO2CHP/B2CHP EL5 1111 4 ES65-BIORUMIOLI/FEED ES65 111 3 Deliverable 2.5 20 Keeping in mind the interpretation framework proposed in the Assessment Tool, in the Italian chart shows most of the points in the fourth quadrant (low cost and high efficacy) with a distribution along the efficacy values, while they seem more grouped in relation to cost. Few BBTs find placement in the third quadrant and none in the other two quadrants. Figure 8: Snake paths from all represented regions (Italy in frames). 3.3 Define the regional BBT identity card 3.3.1.1 Identification of the key factors of BBTs - Plot box representation The following figure refers to a plot box graph that presents the distribution of the three variables brought back to a common range of variability (adjusted), i.e. efficiency, cost, sustainability, of the total 113 BBTs presented in the Inventory, according to the Italian ranking (Assessment Tool). From the chart we can highlight: Deliverable 2.5 21 • EFF_adj and COST_adj have a narrower IQR, meaning lower ability to differentiate between data points. • Sust_adj has the widest IQR, indicating greater data spread and lower selectivity. • EFF_adj and COST_adj are the most selective, while Sust_adj is the least selective. • EFF_adj and COST_adj appear to be more relevant for analytical purposes, as their compact distributions suggest higher precision and consistency. • Sust_adj shows more variability, which may be less useful for a focused analysis. Figure 9: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation 3.3.1.2 The representation of the most suitable regional BBT The following table shows the Italian SWA Matrix based on the first 20 Italian BBTs Pivot analysis scheme and individual plot tables can be found in Appendix 1. The matrix highlights the factors that characterize the ideal BBT for the Italian region. In particular, the ideal best Italian BBT should: • concern activities related to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities with a regional scope. • be supported through Rural Development Funds (Operational Groups support measure) and involving advisors, researchers, and processors. • use as feedstock Biomass Residues (permanent crop) with a high availability and supply agronomic input (fertilizer). • use a not so complex and mobile technology, related to crop residues and perennial plants and/or focused on recycled material (Escobar -Laibach, 2021). • ensure a high level of environmental sustainability, while on an economic and social level, sustainability may be less relevant. Deliverable 2.5 22 Table 5: Italian SWA matrix 3.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs 3.4.1.1 Regional dynamic matrix under common framework The following table is the matrix of regional dynamics (DYN) that was constructed representing a snapshot of the Italian rregion in terms of biomass and technologies, regulation framework, support and financial policies as well as research and development system. Strong Factor Weak Factor Ambiguous Factor Reference sector A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities (18) A2.1Silviculture and other forestry activities Funding Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (15) Partner (n°) Not clear Type partner advisor (14); researcher (35); processor (16) NGO; TRAINNING Focus area P1 (9) Strengthening the links between agriculture, food production and forestry and research and innovation; P5 (6) FA 3A: Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them into the agri-food chain Status Not clear Geographical scale Regional Key words Circular economy, incl. waste, byproducts and residues Forestry ; Outdoor horticulture and woody crops (incl. viticulture,olives, fruit, ornamentals) BBT categories Crop residues and perennial plants F1 (14); Waste or recycled material FC (9) Designer crops F2; Algae biomass F3 (2) Feedstock Biomass Residues (16) (permanent crop) Wastes (breeding by-products; olive oil) Outcame Agrononomic input (fertilizer) Breeding input (bedding litter for cows, TRL Not clear Mobility Mobile Availability 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently. C sink 1 - Low potential - low potential for carbon sequestration (10) 3 - High potential (1) Conditions Not clear Complexity Not clear Sust eco 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 economic benefits. (10) 1 - Low potential - Sust socio 1 - Low potential - doesn't bring any social benefits (10) Sust envi 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits. (10) 2 - Medium potential Value added Low (11) Very high (1) Deliverable 2.5 23 Table 6: Italian DYN matrix 3.4.1.2 Techno-Territorial Synergy matrix The cross-referencing of the DYN Matrix and SWA Matrix enables the assessment of relationship consistency among different items under a coefficient’s matrix (techno-territorial synergy matrix TTS). Applying those coefficients to the 20 selected BBTs could allow to estimate and identify the very best 5 BTTs in the given region. The following figure uses a Sankey chart to represent the links between regional dynamics and BBTs characteristics, used to estimate the techno-territorial synergy matrix. Figure 10: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation BIOMASS AND TECHNOLOGY REGIONAL DYNAMICS Geographical Scope 3 regions; Mainly mountain but also coast and plane Primary sector Agriculture --> arable land (43%), followed by permanent meadows and pastures (25%) and woodlands, permanent crops (woody) (8%). cereals (especially corn); wine grapes (90% of production is under quality certification); hazelnut groves; and olives; beef and dairy cattle Forestry --> pure broadleaved forests and pure coniferous forests. Timber (soft food, hardwood), pulpwood, biomass, panels, firewood Agroindustrial sector i) wine processing; ii) olive oil; iii) milk and milk products sector ; iv) cattle beef as well as “Piemontese” breed; v) colonial products processing (coffee and chocolate); vi) local production. Biomass availability Straw, pruning, lawn husks (agro)/hardwoods (forest)/ Arundo (energy crops) Management and logistics biomass sector has significant potential, but logistical challenges such as transportation, storage, and supply chain coordination must be addressed to fully realize its benefits. Bio-based industry the bio-based industry market is still in the development phase. the Italian bio-based industrial sector is characterized by a network of large, medium and small size companies which work together, leveraging on the sustainable production and efficient use of biomass. Bio-products market The introduction of sustainability certification for bio-based products lead to an increase in Italian demand for such certified productsProBio project REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Programmes National Bioeconomy Strategy; National Energy Strategy, National Plan for Energy and Climate, National Waste Management Programme; National Strategy for the Circular Economy SUPPORT AND FINANCIAL POLICIES Pubblic support National Recovery and Resilience Plan; National Research Plan 2021-2027; CAP stragic plan; Regional Smart Specialisation Strategy Private support Bank foundation (Intesa) R&D system R&D system associated with biomass valorization The Italian R&D system has a relavant national institutional structure. Deliverable 2.5 24 The details of the elaboration and the TTS matrix are presented in the follow figure Figure 11: The Italian TTS matrix The best BBTs for the Italian region are those related to the agricultural sector, rather than the forestry sector where there is currently less biomass availability, as well as those that can utilise biomass from agro-industry are of interest. From the TTS matrix, it emerges that the type of partnership plays a crucial role in the choice of BBTs as well as the possible output. The characteristics of the bio-based industry as well as market and logistical are also relevant aspects, as well as the sustainability dimensions. By contrast, private support, strategic agendas seem not to be key elements. These characters and data are applied, as coefficients, to each of the top 20 BBTs, and let us to identify the 5 BBTs most suitable for Italy and which could therefore be most easily implemented in the FAN area to foster bio-based innovation. The following table shows the list of the top 5 BBTs sorted by score. Table 7: Italian 5 best BBTs Code BBTs Description BBTs Needs / Problem statement Score EL78-HIPOENERGY/NUTRI Utilisation of the leaves of the Hippophae plant for the production of high nutrition additives for soft drinks "- management of Hippophae leaves, which are cultivated only for the harvesting of the fruitexisting studies highlight the nutritional value of the leaves" 4,75 EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE Exploitation of olive leaves (rich in polyphenols and other bioactive ingredients) to produce herbal infusions and natural food additives management of the significant quantities of olive leaves produced as by-products during cultivation (pruning), harvesting of olives and olive oil production (milling stage) 4,65 ES67OleoValoriza/OLIV2 Use of olive trees residues to produce compost The reuse and recovery of olive by-products are essential to reduce environmental pollution and contribute to increasing the efficiency of the agricultural and industrial sectors involved and reduce their production costs. 4,61 ES59AGUACAVALUE/BYPRO Use of avocado by-products in animal nutrition Promotes possible alternatives for the valorisation of avocado by-products by studying the characterisation of their nutritional profile, content of bioactive compounds, antioxidant potential and digestibility, obtaining products with high nutritional value and high digestibility, 4,56 EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER Utilisation of olive residues for the production of compost and biochar Management of waste and wastewater generated during the olive farming and olive oil production processes 4,47 Four of the five BBTs that have been deemed most suitable for implementation in Italy, particularly in the northwest region (Liguria, Piedmont, and Valle d'Aosta), meet the needs of a part of the territory particularly dedicated to olive production. Italy Geographical scope Agriculture Forestry Primary sector Agroindustrial sector Management and logistics Bio-based industry Bio-products market Programmes Pubblic support Private Support R&D system Reference sector Funding Type partner Focus area Geographical scale BBT categories Feedstock Outcame TRL Mobility Availability C sink Sust eco Sust socio Sust envi Value added Very high High Medium Low Nr Deliverable 2.5 25 The first two projects, EL78-HIPO-ENERGY/NUTRI and EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE, suggest the use of leaves (Hippophae and Olive) to create innovative products in the beverage sector, which could expand the offering of these products in the territory, and in herbal products and natural food additives. In this context, it is worth noting the characteristic of the Ingauna plain area (Liguria), where agricultural production is focused on aromatic plants, which could be integrated into this supply chain. This project ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 is important for environmental sustainability and economic efficiency, transforming the residues of olive trees into agronomic input, a useful compost, as well as to addresses waste and wastewater management. The pruning residues of olive trees, as well as other fruit trees, could be transformed under this BBT into compost for use in local productions. The production of wastewater from the olive oil industry is one of the available biomasses in Italy, and in this case, the proposed BBT could also be integrated, promoting sustainability aspects. The project ES59-AGUACAVALUE/BYPRO that focused on the valorisation of avocado by-products for animal nutrition is a promising idea that could be transferred in other typical production of the Italian territory, may be such as chestnut and hazelnut or apple, to improve the sustainability and efficiency of permanent crops production. Finally, it can be observed that the exercise of defining the top 5 most appropriate BTTs in relation to the specific characteristics of the territory appears only partially aligned with those of the BBTs Assessment Tool. In fact, only two of the 5 best BTTs fall within the top 10 estimated by the Assessment Tool. This, however, is not a paradox, but justifies and reinforces the roadmap definition exercise because it points out the real and concrete possibility of application that goes beyond the indications of the FAN members. The Italian members of the BBioNets project advisory board (Advisory Board - BBioNets) validated the “Region-specific prioritisation list of Bio-Based Technologies and practices”. According to one of them techniques linked to olive growing clearly prevail, probably because the territory under investigation includes Liguria, however these are techniques that have a general value and, to a certain extent, can also be used in other areas and in particular he believes that at least EL80OLIHERB/OLIVE, ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 and EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER could be implemented in the next 5 years in the Italian FAN area. The other one underlines that the BBTs more linked to production, such as a circular bioeconomy with very high added value from agricultural by-products, seem to be the most innovative; while those linked to energy seems less interested in Italian Region and someone could be more complicated to implement due to regulatory difficulties (e.g. ash). Deliverable 2.5 32 Figure 14: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation The details of the elaboration and the TTS matrix are presented in the following Figure 15. Figure 15: The Irish TTS matrix From Figure 15, we can conclude that an ideal BBT for the Irish region could be related to the agricultural sector, rather than the forestry sector utilizing biomass from agri-primary sector and industry. It emerges that the presence of farmers and players forming an R&D system could play a crucial role in the partnership composition. Agronomic and breeding input appears to be the first kind of outcome. The characteristics of the bio-based industry, the market and logistics, as well as the sustainability dimensions are also relevant aspects. On the other hand, private support and strategic agendas need to gain more relevance for the future of BBTs in Ireland. Ireland Geographical scope Agriculture Forestry Primary sector Agroindustrial sector Management and logistics Bio-based industry Bio-products market Programmes Public support Private Support R&D system Reference sector Funding Type partner Focus area Geographical scale BBT categories Feedstock Outcome TRL Mobility Availability C sink Sust eco Sust socio Sust envi Value added Very high High Medium Low Nr Deliverable 2.5 33 These characteristics and data are applied, as coefficients, to each of the top 20 BBTs, enabling the identification of the 5 BBTs most suitable for Ireland and thus most likely to be implemented effectively. The following Table 12 proposes the list of top 5 BBTs in Ireland, ranked by score. Table 12: Irish 5 best BBTs The "Roadmap for BBTs implementation" provides a strategic analysis for the future deployment of Bio-Based Technologies (BBTs) in Ireland using the BBTs Inventory, BBT Assessment Tool (prioritizing cost-effective BBTs in quadrant 4 of the assessment chart and ensuring high economic and environmental sustainability, particularly through enhanced carbon sink capacity), High-level study of regional dynamics study (which highlights abundant agricultural by-products but notes logistical and cost-related challenges) and Co-creation workshops with the Irish Forest and Agriculture Network (FAN). The outputs of this Roadmap for implementation prioritise BBTs identifying the top five most suitable for Ireland (wastes from agriculture primary production sector over forestry resources). The suggested road to be taken for a future implementation of BBTs in Ireland reveals significant insights from several analyses performed, such as co-occurrences, distribution, key factors, that leads towards a suggested identification of suitable BBTs for the Republic of Ireland. With regards to the co-occurrence analysis, Poland and Ireland share the highest number of prioritised BBTs, meaning aligned needs in the agriculture and farming sector, as well as similar resources. Italy, and Greece co-occurrence of prioritised BBTs follow Poland. The BBTs co-occurrent with Poland are those that use dairy cow slurry for different purposes and lignocellulosic materials such as grass, hemp, wood and straw. Similarly, BBTs that generate biochar, compost and on-site energy generation are also co-occurrent with Poland. This highlights potential collaborative areas with Poland in the future The conclusions extracted from the distribution of the top 20 BBTs in the 2-D plot graph, ("snake" diagram) shows that efficiency is a critical factor for Ireland when talking about BBTs, as well as performance and lower costs. Additionally, sustainability factor scores are generally high or moderate, but a few cases demonstrate low sustainability. These results are supported by the results of the key factors (“Box plot”) analysis which reveals that adjusted cost (COST_adj) is the most selective variable, significantly influencing decision-making of farmers and foresters, followed by sustainability (Sust_adj), which plays a crucial role in prioritizing BBTs, i.e., low sustainability could lead its exclusion. Adjusted efficiency (EFF_adj) is relevant but less selective for BBTs in Ireland. Region TTS Rank BBT Code Description BBT Needs / Problem statement Score IE 1 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO Anaerobic digestion of farm residues (wood, grass, straw) To valorize the lignocellulosic residues (meadow grass) from farms in a sustainable way. 6 IE 2 PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples developing fermented juice and compostable disposable packaging from apples With the growing awareness of the relationship between diet and health, there is a growing demand for fermented foods with microorganisms that have probiotic properties. There is no apple juice fermented with potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria on 5,87 IE 3 EL82-COMPOSTINNO/COMPO improvement of compost production from the processing of by-product-waste mixtures from various sources - lack of sufficient amounts of organic waste in the cultivation sites - distance of the sources of organic matter from the places of processing and final use 5,33 IE 4IE13-BBFB/CHAR Agricultural biomass such as rushes, gorse, bracken and hazel, is used to produce biochar in a mobile pyrolysis unit The unutilised biomass is left to decay which returns carbon dioxide to the atmosphere while also control of vegetation, by herbicides or mechanically, is essential on commonage land which is an annual expense on farmers. 5,33 IE 5 IT8-Mountain Carbon/MNTNC management of dairy cattle manure in the mountain areas using dryers and distribution of fertiliser output to areas with low nutrient level to help improve the management of the organic matter (OM) from dairy cattle manure in the mountain areas 5,29 Deliverable 2.5 34 This analysis of the distribution of BBTs combined with an analysis of the Strongest and Weakest BBTs to implement (SWA Matrix) leads to the identification of which types of BBTs would be ideal for Ireland in the future, accounting for the current biomass availability. It has been identified that the ideal implementation of BBTs are those focused on activities related to grass biorefinery, AD, energy onsite, hemp utilisation, management of dairy cattle for fertiliser generation and for animal bedding, as well as nutrient recovery through the utilisation of residual biomass (from agriculture and forestry, such as branches and leaves) for biochar generation and compost with a regional scope. Most of the knowledge generated EU-wide for the ideal BBTs for Ireland came from support through rural development funds (Operational Groups support measure) and involve advisors; researchers; and processors and/or retailers. Further analysis (Regional Dynamic Matrix and the Techno-Territorial Synergy Matrix), narrowed down the top 5 BBTs suitable for Ireland, one of them, already developed in Ireland: • DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO: Anaerobic digestion of farm residues (wood, grass, straw) to valorise lignocellulosic residues from farms in a sustainable way. • IT8-Mountain Carbon/MNTNC: management of dairy cattle manure in the mountain areas using dryers and distribution of fertiliser output to areas with low nutrient level, to help improve the management of the organic matter (OM) from dairy cattle manure in the mountain areas. • IE13-BBFB/CHAR: Use of agricultural biomass such as rushes, gorse, bracken and hazel, to produce biochar in a mobile pyrolysis unit. These unutilised biomasses are usually left to decay which returns CO2 to the atmosphere while also control of vegetation, by herbicides or mechanically, is essential on commonage land which is an annual expense on farmers and potential environmental impact. • PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples: developing fermented juice and compostable disposable packaging from apples. Fermenting foods with microorganisms that have probiotic properties while using the pulp resulting from pressing to create compostable disposable packaging. • EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO: improvement of compost production from the processing of by-product-waste mixtures from various sources with microbial biostimulators and biochar. These findings underscore the importance of efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability in Ireland's bio-based technology landscape. Ireland’s capacity, supported by operational groups, like the ones identified as top BBTs, and research systems, could reinforce Irish Circular Bioeconomy, however, logistical and market development for bio-based products still need strengthening. Notably, this roadmap positions Ireland to advance a circular bioeconomy by leveraging these BBTs to create sustainable solutions but scaling adoption will require enhanced logistics and private-sector collaboration to ensure a systemic shift toward circularity. By identifying key factors and establishing matrices, the report provides a roadmap for selecting and implementing the top BBTs that align with the region’s agricultural focus and R&D capabilities, promoting innovation and growth in the sector. The Irish members of the BBioNets project advisory board (Advisory Board - BBioNets) validated the “Region-specific prioritisation list of Bio-Based Technologies and practices”. Deliverable 2.5 35 According to both AB the BBTs list appear to be a “bit simpler which is hopefully more conducive to the primary products”. However, he recognises an interesting diversification of practices that could meet different needs. Therefore, a critical point is highlighted: the case of PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples could be verified under a real scalability of production in Ireland. On the other hand, the AB members suggest considering BBTs with a higher complexity as well as IE1-Biorefinery Glas/GLAS, but with the awareness that this type of project needs a high level of participation of different types of stakeholders and actors (farmers, advisors, R&D, technology providers, ...) and consequently a consistent governance. Regarding possible implementation in the next five years, the AB considers that possible funding obstacles should be considered, especially in the light of a new CAP framework. Deliverable 2.5 36 5 – Assessment results by the Spanish region 5.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Spanish region The BBT Assessment Tool allows to identify a ranking of BBTs for each region. The following table presents the Spanish top 20 BBTs. It provides the outlines of various projects and initiatives related to sustainable agricultural practices and the utilization of by-products and residues from farming and forestry. Table 13: List of the top 20 BBTs for the Spanish region Source: BBioNets BioBased Technology Inventory (Operational Groups Inventory - BBioNets Platform) Code BBT codes Description BBT Rank EL80 EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE exploitation of olive leaves (rich in polyphenols and other bioactive ingredients) to produce herbal infusions and natural food additives 1 EL88 EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER Utilisation of olive residues for the production of compost and biochar 2 EL5 EL5-BIO2CHP/B2CHP BIO2CHP is a container-sized power generator that converts solid organic residues into energy on-site. 3 DE4 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO Anaerobic digestion of farm residues (wood, grass, straw) 4 IT11 IT11-Clean-ER/CLINR small wood chipping machine for collecting wood biomass from mountain forests and their pyrolysis to obtain energy and biochar 5 EL84 EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL recovery of the nutrients contained in the residues (branches, leaves) of olive trees (and other productive trees) through composting 6 ES58 ES58-AgriCarbón/AC Production of activated carbon using agricultural waste. 7 ES64 ES64-Biochar/BIOCH Use of purnings for biochar production. 8 ES66 ES66-OleoValoriza/OLIVE Recovery of sludge from olive-mill ponds through a composting process. 9 ES67 ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 Use of olive trees residues to produce compost 10 IT6 IT6-Scarabeo/HMP2C Hemp stems are collected, their fibers are separated through maceration, fibers are fed to BSFL and the woody marrow is pyrolized 11 FI3 FI3-ForestChip4Farm/FC4FH farm-level heating plants (400-500kW) to use fresh forest-chips 12 ES65 ES65-BIORUMIOLI/FEED Use of olive pulp as feed for small ruminants. 13 EL87 EL87-Innovative Rice Residue Management Practices/RICE Rice residues returning to the soil as fertilisers 14 ES59 ES59-AGUACAVALUE/BYPRO Use of avocado by-products in animal nutrition 15 ES63 ES63-BIOSUERO/WHEY Use of whey as a biofertiliser. 16 IE1 IE1-Biorefinery Glas/GLAS Perennial ryegrass can be pressed to produce Press Cake, which can be used as cattle feed. Grass Protein and Grass Whey are byproducts that can be used as feed for chicken and pig, and as fertiliser, respectively. 17 PL74 PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples developing fermented juice and compostable disposable packaging from apples 18 PL90 PL90-Agroleśnictwo w Dolinie Zielawy/Zielawa Herbs Innovative model for production, processing and distribution of herbs 19 EL82 EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO improvement of compost production from the processing of by-productwaste mixtures from various sources 20 Deliverable 2.5 37 5.2 Benchmarking with other countries The aim of this part is to analyse the top 20 BBTs macro-characterisations under the regional light, using comparison to the other regions. 5.2.1.1 Co-occurrence analysis The co-occurrence matrix is used to analyse the simultaneous presence of two or more BBTs in different Regions, setting the Spanish region as a pivot, through the representation of a binary matrix. Table 14: Co-occurrence table for the Spanish region. The list of the top BBTs in Spain shows the highest level of co-occurrences among the 6 regions considered by the BBioNets project. Most projects involve at least one other country, with Greece, Italy, Poland and Ireland being frequent co-presents and the only Spain-exclusive project is PL90Zielawa Herbs. We can highlight a relevant level of co-occurrences firstly with Greece (13) and Italy (11); then with Poland (9) and Ireland (8). The BBTs that are characterised by the highest level of co-occurrence among the 6 regions are: DE4Lignocellulosic Biorefinery (IE, PL, EL, CZ) e EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL (IT, IE, PL, EL); EL5BIO2CHP/B2CHP (IE, PL, IT), EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE (IE, PL, EL), IT6-Scarabeo/HMP2C (IE, PL, EL) and EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO (IE, PL, EL). Seven BBTs are directly from Spain. BBT codes Code ES IT IE PL EL CZ TOT EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE EL80 1 1 1 1 4 EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER EL88 1 1 1 3 EL5-BIO2CHP/B2CHP EL5 1111 4 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO DE4 1 1111 5 IT11-Clean-ER/CLINR IT11 1 1 1 3 EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL EL84 11111 5 ES58-AgriCarbón/AC ES58 1 1 1 3 ES64-Biochar/BIOCH ES64 1 1 2 ES66-OleoValoriza/OLIVE ES66 1 1 1 3 ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 ES67 1 1 1 3 IT6-Scarabeo/HMP2C IT6 1 1 1 1 4 FI3-ForestChip4Farm/FC4FH FI3 1 1 2 ES65-BIORUMIOLI/FEED ES65 1 1 1 3 EL87-Innovative Rice Residue Management Practices/RICE EL87 1 1 1 3 ES59-AGUACAVALUE/BYPRO ES59 1 1 1 3 ES63-BIOSUERO/WHEY ES63 1 1 1 3 IE1-Biorefinery Glas/GLAS IE1 1 1 1 3 PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples PL74 1 1 1 3 PL90-Agroleśnictwo w Dolinie Zielawy/Zielawa Herbs PL90 11 EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO EL82 1 1 1 1 4 Deliverable 2.5 38 5.2.1.2 Distribution of the top 20 BBTs The following figure shows the arrangement of the Top 20 BBTs of Spain as ordered in the BBT Assessment Tool (the so-called “snake“) in direct comparison with the other five regions under observation here. Figure 16: The Snake paths from all represented regions (Spain in frames). Looking at the disposition of Spanish BBTs in comparison with those of other regions, it can be observed that all BBTs are clustered closely together and are spread across three quadrants: the first, third, and fourth. The effectiveness dimension appears to be particularly relevant. The snake-like pattern extends along the x-axis, covering both positive and negative values, indicating both positive and negative effectiveness in relative terms. Deliverable 2.5 39 When it comes to costs, two contrasting situations emerge: on one hand, conditions that allow cost savings; on the other, critical conditions with negative values. Sustainability seems to be a significant dimension, displaying consistent levels. 5.3 Define the regional BBT identity card 5.3.1.1 Identification of the key factors of BBTs - Plot box representation In the following figure is represented a plot box graph that presents the distribution of the three main variables used during the BBT assessment exercise and brought back to a common range of variability (adjusted), i.e. efficiency, cost, sustainability. In the Spanish case, we can highlight: • COST_adj shows the highest dispersion (from very high positive values to extreme negatives). This suggests that COST_adj strongly discriminates between observations, selecting only some with high scores and drastically lowering others. • Sust_adj has a distribution that significantly drops below zero, but without the extreme variability of COST_adj. • EFF_adj is more stable compared to the other two. • COST_adj is the most selective, even if COST_adj, with its extreme scores, may be more "distorting" in filtering • Sust_adj can be considered relevant as it has values more concentrated in the higher range, indicating that it rewards the best instances more clearly. Figure 17: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation 5.3.1.2 The representation of the most suitable regional BBT The Spanish SWA Matrix is presented in the following table. The SWA matrix is set on the base on the first 20 Spanish BBTs, processed under a pivot analyses. In Appendix 1 it is possible to consult individual pivot tables. The SWA matrix aims to highlight the most represented factors, characterising the cluster Deliverable 2.5 40 of the 20 BBTs. A second aim is to propose a kind of a hypothetical “best BBT” related to the Spanish region. Table 15: Spanish SWA matrix This Spanish ideal BBT should: • concern activities related to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities, using feedstock from biomass residues (permanent crops) with a high local availability; • be funded firstly by Rural development funds (Operational Groups support measure) and under a regional scale; • involve in the partnership firstly researchers and farmers; but also processors and advisors; • produce as outcome firstly agronomic input (Biochar & fertilizers); • use a mobile technology, easy to use and replicate, highly related to crop residues and waste or recycled material and biorefining process (Escobar -Laibach, 2021) • ensure a high level of environmental sustainability, with a relevant C sink ability, and in the light of economic and social issues. Strong Factor Weak Factor Ambiguous Factor Reference sector A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities (14) A2.1Silviculture and other forestry activities (1); A2.4Support services to forestry (1) A1.2Growing of perennial crops (4) Funding Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (15) Other EU research funds (1) Other rural… (3) Other public research funds (1) Partner (n°) n.r. Type partner Advisor (13) ; Researcher (32); Processor or retailer (14); Farmer (25) Forester (0) ; trainning bodies (0), ngo (1); public authority (3) Focus area Pirority 5: FA 5E: Fostering carbon conservation + FA 5D: Reducing greenhouse gas ; FA 1B: Strengthening the links (6) FA 1A: Fostering innovation (1); FA 2A: Improving the economic performance of all farms (1); FA 4B: Improving water management (1); FA 4A: Restoring, preserving biodiversity (1) Status n.r.: Completed (10); Ongoing (10) Geographical scale Local & regional (18) National (2) Key words Circular economy, incl. waste, byproducts and residues (10) Forestry, soil, climate change, agro-ecology, energy. BBT categories Crop residues and perennial plants F1 (16); Biorefineries C2 (12) Designer crops for optimised biomass content F2 (2); Algae biomass F3 (2) Feedstock Biomass residues (13) (Olive, avocado, forest resideues) Biomass ( mixed biomass, ryegrass) (3), waste (apple by-products, breeding by-products) (4) Outcome Agronomic input (10) (Biochar, fertilizer) Natural additives (3), breeding input (4) TRL n.r. Mobility Mobile (12) Availability 3 - High potential - (15) 2 – Medium potential (5) C sink 3 - High potential 2 – medium (6) ; 1 – Low (6) n.r. Conditions Complexity 2 -easy to use /replicate (9) 1 - very easy to use/replicate (3) Sust eco 3 - High potential n.r. Sust socio 2 - Medium potential (10) 3 - High potential (3) Sust envi 3 - High potential (17) 2 – médium (3) Value added Food/Feed = High (8) Deliverable 2.5 41 5.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs 5.4.1.1 Regional dynamic matrix under common framework The following matrix of regional dynamics (DYN) was constructed representing a snapshot of the Spanish Region in terms of biomass and technologies, regulation framework, support and financial policies as well as research and development system. Table 16: Spanish DYN matrix 5.4.1.2 Techno-Territorial Synergy matrix By cross-referencing the DNY matrix and SWA matrix, we can estimate the consistency of the relationships among the different items (BBTs factors and territorial characters) in a coefficient’s matrix (techno-territorial synergy matrix - TTS). Applying those coefficients to the top Spanish 20 projects led to estimate and identify the best 5 BBTs in the region. The following Sankey chart represents the directions and the relevance of the links between regional dynamics and BBTs characteristics, as sort from the TTS matrix (the following figure). BIOMASS AND TECHNOLOGY REGIONAL DYNAMICS Geographical Scope coast, mountain and forest Primary sector Agriculture--> in the agricultural sector, is mainly made up of small companies (96%); permanent crops 39,8%; annual crops 35,1%; Forestry--> the main forest formations are holm oak forest (23.5%), pine forest (14.8%) and cork oak groves (4.33%). In Andalusia, 74.4% of the forest land is private property, while the remaining 25.6% is public. wood (92%), scrub (8%) Agro-industrial sector The most important agroindustry in Andalusia are the oil and fat industries, with largest production of olive oil; the meat industry, the second most important in the Andalusian agri-food industry in terms of turnover; and the horticultural industry. Biomass availability wineries and breweries, pruning oil, rice mills, agricultural waste, slaughterhouses, manure, wood, scrub, Alfalfa, barley, cotton, maize, rapeseed, sugarbeet, wheat Management and logistics processing plants to produce biodiesel or bioethanol; seasonality and storing must be considered when designing logistics circuits Bio-based industry Biomass electricity generation; Biogas generation; Thermal use, Pellets manufacturing; Olive bone and chip production for thermal use; Biofuels Bio-products market Main target markets for bio-products: bioenergy and biofuels, chemical industry, pharmaceutical industry, agriculture and aquaculture, food and beverage industry, cosmetic industry, construction, and plastic industry REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Programmes Spanish Bioeconomy Strategy; Andalusian Circular Bioeconomy Strategy; Circular Economy Law SUPPORT AND FINANCIAL POLICIES Public support Ministry for Ecological Transition; Centre for Industrial Technological Development (CDTI); regional Ogs Private support Investment fund; Business Angels & Venture Capital R&D system R&D system associated with biomass valorisation In turnover terms, Andalusia is the third Spanish region that invest more in research and development in absolute terms and position itself as the 5th with respect to the regional GDP Deliverable 2.5 48 6.3 Define the regional BBT identity card 6.3.1.1 Identification of the key factors of BBTs - Plot box representation In the following figure is represented a plot box graph that presents the distribution of the three variables brought back to a common range of variability (adjusted), i.e. efficiency, cost, sustainability, of the total 113 BBTs presented in the Inventory, according to the Polish ranking (BBTs Assessment Tool). In the case of Poland, we can highlight: • EFF_adj and COST_adj have a narrower IQR, meaning lower variability and a higher ability to differentiate between data points. • Sust_adj has the widest IQR, indicating greater data spread and lower selectivity. • EFF_adj and COST_adj are the most selective, while Sust_adj is the least selective. • EFF_adj and COST_adj appear to be more relevant for analytical purposes, as their compact distributions suggest higher precision and consistency. • Sust_adj shows more variability, which may be less useful for a focused analysis. However, if variability is an important aspect of the study, this variable could still be significant. Figure 21: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation 6.3.1.2 The representation of the most suitable regional BBT The Polish SWA Matrix is presented in the following table. The SWA matrix is set on the base on the first 20 Polish BBTs information, processed under a pivot analyses. In Appendix 1 it is possible to consult individual pivot tables. The SWA matrix first aims to highlight the most represented factors, characterising the cluster of the 20 BBTS. The second aim is to illustrate a kind of a hypothetical “best BBT” related to the Polish Region. This BBT ideal type should: Deliverable 2.5 49 • concern activities related to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities, making resource from biomass residues and wastes with a high local availability; • be funded by Rural Development Funds (Operational Groups support measure) and involving advisors; researchers; farmers and processors; • have a regional scope; • produce as main outcome agronomic input and natural additives; • ensure a high level of environmental sustainability, with a relevant C sink ability; • have a medium focus of economic and social sustainability dimensions. Table 20: Polish SWA matrix 6.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs 6.4.1.1 Regional dynamic matrix under common framework The following matrix of regional dynamics (DYN) was constructed representing a snapshot of the Polish Region in terms of biomass and technologies, regulation framework, support and financial policies as well as research and development system. Strong Factor Weak Factor Ambiguous Factor Reference sector A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities (14) A2.1Silviculture and other forestry activities (0) Funding Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (16) Partner (n°) Not clear Type partner advisor(9); researcher(28); processor (16); farmer NGO (0); TRAINING (0), FORESTERS (0) Focus area Priority5 (8) FA 3A: Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them into the agri-food chain (2) Status Completed (13) Geographical scale Regional (15); National (lower representation) Key words Circular economy Energy; Outdoor horticulture and woody crops (incl. viticulture,olives, fruit, ornamentals); Fodder and feed; Agroecology BBT categories Crop residues and perennial plants F1 (13); Waste or recycled material FC (10); Biorefineries C2 (10) Conteggio di Algae biomass F3 (3); F2 (1) Feedstock Biomass residues (10); wastes(8) biomass (2) Outcome Agrononomic input (9) biofuels (1) TRL not clear (10 empty) Mobility Static (13) Mobile (6) Availability 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently (18) C sink 3 - High potential (14) 1 - Low potential - low potential for carbon sequestration Conditions Not clear Complexity 1 - very easy to use/replicate Not clear Sust eco high/medium potential (11), medium (7) Sust socio 2 - Medium potential -Expected to bring 2 or 1 social benefits. (13) Low Sust envi 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits.(15) Value added Food/Feed = High (16) Deliverable 2.5 50 Table 21: Polish DYN matrix 6.4.1.2 Techno-Territorial Synergy matrix Cross-referencing the DNY matrix and SWA matrix, we can estimate the consistency of the relationships among the different items (BBTs factors and territorial characters) in a coefficient’s matrix (techno-territorial synergy matrix TTS). Applying those coefficients to the top Poland 20 BBTs led to estimating and identifying the very best 5 BTTs. The following Sankey chart represents the directions and the relevance of the links between regional dynamics and BBTs characteristics, as sort from the TTS matrix (the following figure). BIOMASS AND TECHNOLOGY REGIONAL DYNAMICS Geographical Scope mountain, coast, forested hills Primary sector Agriculture--> the average size of agricultural land per farm in the country in 2023 was 11.42, indicating a medium size; arable crops ( cereals, vegetables, potatoes), grass, straw, cereals yields Forestry--> permanent woody crops ( conifers, deciduous); timber, slash, stump wood Agro-industrial sector fruit (apples, raspberries, blackcurrants, blueberries), meat (poultry, pork), dairy products and mushrooms. Biomass availability food industry side stream, animal by-product, straw, grass, cereals, cattle, pig, conifers, timbers Management and logistics need to avoid the movement of large masses of biomass over long distances, it is envisaged to create local biomass markets and logistics systems that minimize the costs of biomass procurement, transportation and storage; Bio-based industry agricultural biogas, thermal use, biofuels Bio-products market biogas production (especially agricultural biogas) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Programmes National Energy and Climate Plan for the years 2021-2030; National Smart Specialisation Strategy;Strategy for Sustainable Rural Development, Agriculture and Fisheries 2030;Energy Policy of Poland until 2040 SUPPORT AND FINANCIAL POLICIES Public support European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) Private support Venture Capital Market (e.g., bank loans) R&D system R&D system associated with biomass valorisation the Ministry of Agriculture manages 12 research institutes, five of which conduct research on field crops, including organic farming; there are 10 universities with agricultural faculties, 8 with forestry faculties and 2 with fisheries/aquaculture faculties. Deliverable 2.5 51 Figure 22: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation The details of the elaboration and the TTS matrix are presented in the follow Figure 23. Figure 23: The Polish TTS matrix From the figure above, we can point out that an ideal BBT in the Poland situation could be related to the agricultural sector, rather than the forestry and funded under Rural Development measures; it could make resource to biomass from agriculture first and ago-industry (less from forestry) and produce outcome to primary and agro-industry sector. The presence of farmers and actors from R&D Poland Geographical scope Agriculture Forestry Primary sector Agroindustrial sector Management and logistics Bio-based industry Bio-products market Programmes Public support Private Support R&D system Reference sector Funding Type partner Focus area Geographical scale BBT categories Feedstock Outcome TRL Mobility Availability C sink Sust eco Sust socio Sust envi Value added Very high High Medium Low Nr Deliverable 2.5 52 system could play a crucial role. The characteristics of the bio-based industry as well as market and logistical aspects are also items to consider, as well as the sustainability dimensions. Using the coefficients set in TTS matrix, each of the top 20 BBTS has been estimated in the light to identify the 5 Best BBTs for Poland conditions. The following table 7 proposes the list of the Polish top 5 BBTS ordered by score. Table 22: Polish 5 best BBTs Four of the five BBTs identified as the most suitable for Poland address the needs reported by Polish stakeholders. These are: anaerobic digestion to valorize lignocellulosic farm residues (wood, grass, straw) (DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO), development of fermented apple juice and compostable disposable packaging from fruit waste (PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples), improvement of compost production from by-products and waste (EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO), and slurry management dedicated for pig farming (ES51-GO IMECO/PgSLR). The fifth suggested BBT, exploitation of olive leaves to produce herbal infusions and natural food (EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE) seems much less suitable for Poland, as olive production is not popular in this country. The first BBT, DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO, can be used by both farmers and foresters (or orchard owners), as it addresses the problem of lignocellulosic biomass. It offers an interesting solution as it aims to solve the problem of agricultural and forestry residues with a farm-based biorefinery, as well as for production of feed protein and biomaterials without competing with food production, which is a fully circular solution. The second most suitable BBT, PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples, is a Polish OG solution addressing typical needs of this European region – leading apple producer in EU - utilisation of abundant apple processing waste (e.g. apple pomace) as well as offering a value added product of fermented apple juice with probiotic properties, respond to the needs of conscious consumers. What is crucial, utilisation of waste for production of disposable and compostable packaging addresses the "zero waste" principle promoted by the BBioNets initiative. The third BBT solution, EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO, may also be an interesting composting technology for Polish farmers, offering a solution for the production of organic fertilizer of high added value through enrichment of the final product with microbial biostimulators and biochar. It is in line Region TTS Rank BBT Code Description BBT Needs / Problem statement Score PL 1 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO Anaerobic digestion of farm residues (wood, grass, straw) To valorize the lignocellulosic residues (meadow grass) from farms in a sustainable way. 6 PL 2 PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples developing fermented juice and compostable disposable packaging from apples With the growing awareness of the relationship between diet and health, there is a growing demand for fermented foods with microorganisms that have probiotic properties. 5,87 PL 3EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE exploitation of olive leaves (rich in polyphenols and other bioactive ingredients) to produce herbal infusions and natural food management of the significant quantities of olive leaves produced as by-products during cultivation (pruning), harvesting of olives and olive oil production (milling stage) 5,6 PL 4 EL82-COMPOSTINNO/COMPO improvement of compost production from the processing of by-product-waste mixtures from various sources - lack of sufficient amounts of organic waste in the cultivation sites - distance of the sources of organic matter from the places of processing and final use 5,33 PL 5ES51-GO IMECO/PgSLR slurry management and treatment system slurry management and treatment system for ensuring the product generated in pig farms is more competitive and has a lower environmental impact 5,33 Deliverable 2.5 53 with the EU regulations on sustainable use of fertilisers and limiting the nutrient loss from both organic and mineral fertilisers. ES51-GO IMECO/PgSLR, the fourth suggested BBT solution, addresses the problem of slurry management, which is one of the major needs expressed by Polish farmers. It offers slurry management and treatment system for pig farming, ensuring better quality of product and lower environmental impact, promoting efficiency in nutrient recycling and mitigating climate change. Although the fifth BBT, EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE, offers a promising solution for managing significant quantities of olive leaves, pruning residues, harvesting of olives and olive oil production (milling stage), it does not directly address the needs of Polish farmers and foresters. However, this BBT could serve as a potential inspiration for developing a technology more suitable for Polish context regarding exploitation of leaves or other plant residues rich in polyphenols and bioactive ingredients. Such extraction technology could be adjusted and utilised e.g. by hemp or berry producers (both represented by OGs in Polish FAN), the former one with growing popularity in the region and the latter having already numerous plantations in Poland. The Polish member of the BBioNets project advisory board (Advisory Board - BBioNets) validated the “Region-specific prioritisation list of Bio-Based Technologies and practices” with some relevant suggestion According to the AB member, the selected BBTs align with key EU priorities, particularly those set during the Polish presidency, which emphasize strengthening security across multiple dimensions. Energy and food security are both crucial, making innovations in animal production especially important. For example, the IE1-Biorefinery Glas is supported, while EL81-BioAnimalChar has potential but low economic readiness. Regenerative processes that safely recycle waste and improve soil quality are considered a high priority. Technologies that enhance animal welfare (e.g., IT36-Stabilized Litter) and manage difficult logistics (e.g., IT8-Mountain Carbon) are also highlighted. The third focus is energy security, following the bioeconomy cascade; DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery is promising if affordable, along with IT6Scarabeo and EL5-BIO2CHP. Polish AB member highlights a deep reflection on BBTs related to niche relevance (eg. PL74-Polish Apples/PolishApples, EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE), while he strongly arguments a focus on technologies able to develop direct benefits to Polish livestock competitiveness and environmental impact (eg IE1Biorefinery Glas/GLAS and IT36-Stabilized Litter/StbMn). Implementation within 5 years is feasible, driven by the dual need for sustainable protein sources and soil regeneration. Deliverable 2.5 54 7 – Assessment results by the Greek region 7.1 Description of the Top 20 BBTs for the Greek region The BBT Assessment Tool made it possible to identify a ranking of BBTs for each region. The Table 23 presents the Greek top 20 BBTs by ranking. It provides the outlines of various projects and initiatives related to sustainable agricultural practices and the utilization of by-products and residues from agriculture and forestry. Table 23: List of the top 20 BBTs for the Greek region Source: BBioNets BioBased Technology Inventory (Operational Groups Inventory - BBioNets Platform) Code BBT codes Description BBT Rank ES66 ES66-OleoValoriza/OLIVE Recovery of sludge from olive-mill ponds through a composting process. 1 EL84 EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL recovery of the nutrients contained in the residues (branches, leaves) of olive trees (and other productive trees) through composting 2 EL88 EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER Utilisation of olive residues for the production of compost and biochar 3 DE4 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO Anaerobic digestion of farm residues (wood, grass, straw) 4 EL82 EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO improvement of compost production from the processing of by-productwaste mixtures from various sources 5 EL87 EL87-Innovative Rice Residue Management Practices/RICE Rice residues returning to the soil as fertilisers 6 ES63 ES63-BIOSUERO/WHEY Use of whey as a biofertiliser. 7 EL80 EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE exploitation of olive leaves (rich in polyphenols and other bioactive ingredients) to produce herbal infusions and natural food additives 8 CZ109 CZ109-TH-Compost_biochar/COMP Composting process (intensification of organic matter decomposition) by addition of biochar. 9 ES65 ES65-BIORUMIOLI/FEED Use of olive pulp as feed for small ruminants. 10 ES58 ES58-AgriCarbón/AC Production of activated carbon using agricultural waste. 11 EL83 EL83-Compo - Laventer/COLAV composting system for the optimization of distilled lavender straws utilization, and the maximization of aromatic and forage crops yields 12 EL78 EL78-HIPO-ENERGY/NUTRI utilisation of the leaves of the Hippophae plant for the production of high nutrition additives for soft drinks 13 ES60 ES60-AGUACAVALUE/AVOCA Use of avocado by-products in animal nutrition, cosmeceuticals. 14 PL100 PL100-Polski Ocet Owocowy/Vinegar Production of fruit vinegar 15 ES26 ES26-Bioferti+/BFTZ+ Converting cattle manure and other organic waste to bio-fertiliser 16 IT6 IT6-Scarabeo/HMP2C Hemp stems are collected, their fibers are separated through maceration, fibers are fed to BSFL and the woody marrow is pyrolized 17 ES64 ES64-Biochar/BIOCH Use of purnings for biochar production. 18 CZ107 CZ107-QK-torrefaction/WWTP Fertiliser production using sewage sludge. 19 ES67 ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 Use of olive trees residues to produce compost 20 Deliverable 2.5 55 7.2 Benchmarking with other countries The aim of this part is to analyse the top 20 BBTs macro-characterisations under the regional light, using comparison to the other regions. 7.2.1.1 Co-occurrence analysis The co-occurrence matrix is used to analyse the simultaneous presence of two or more BBTs in different regions, setting the Greek region as a pivot, through the representation of a binary matrix. Table 24: Co-occurrence table for the Greek region. Table 24 shows some strong cross-regional presences: 5 occurrences in the case of EL84AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL and DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO); 4 occurrences for IT6Scarabeo/HMP2C, EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE, EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO. On the other hand, only one BBT is exclusively reported in Greece (EL83-Compo - Laventer/COLAV). We can highlight significant co-occurrence with Italy and Spain, with multiple common BBTs implemented in the so-called Mediterranean area; we can see also some overlapping with Ireland and Poland, while the cross-presence with the Czech Republic point out low evidence. It is worth to signal that a consistent part of the 20 BBTs are directly from Greece (7). 7.2.1.2 Distribution of the top 20 BBTs In The following figure we can appreciate the arrangement of the Top 20 BBTs of Greece as ordered in the BBT Assessment Tool and this arrangement is placed in direct comparison with the other five regions under observation here. BBT codes Code EL IT IE ES PL CZ TOT ES66-OleoValoriza/OLIVE ES66 1 1 1 3 EL84-AGROSCHOOLBUS.BIO/RESOL EL84 11111 5 EL88-ΕΛΑΙΩΝΑΣ/OLFER EL88 1 1 1 3 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO DE4 1 1111 5 EL82-COMPOST-INNO/COMPO EL82 1 1 1 1 4 EL87-Innovative Rice Residue Management Practices/RICE EL87 1 1 1 3 ES63-BIOSUERO/WHEY ES63 1 1 1 3 EL80-OLIHERB/OLIVE EL80 1 1 1 1 4 CZ109-TH-Compost_biochar/COMP CZ109 1 1 1 3 ES65-BIORUMIOLI/FEED ES65 1 1 1 3 ES58-AgriCarbón/AC ES58 1 1 1 3 EL83-Compo - Laventer/COLAV EL83 11 EL78-HIPO-ENERGY/NUTRI EL78 1 1 2 ES60-AGUACAVALUE/AVOCA ES60 1 1 1 3 PL100-Polski Ocet Owocowy/Vinegar PL100 1 1 2 ES26-Bioferti+/BFTZ+ ES26 111 3 IT6-Scarabeo/HMP2C IT6 1 1 1 1 4 ES64-Biochar/BIOCH ES64 1 1 2 CZ107-QK-torrefaction/WWTP CZ107 1 1 1 3 ES67-OleoValoriza/OLIV2 ES67 1 1 1 3 Deliverable 2.5 56 Figure 24: Snake paths from all represented regions (Greece in frame). In the Greek case, the efficiency dimension seems very relevant, with the “snake distribution” lying on the x-axis. The efficiency values exhibit a relatively wide distribution, with certain cases significantly exceeding the average. This suggests variability in performance across different BBTs, both in positive and negative sing, in a relative sense within the set of all BBTs. Regarding cost, the Greek BBTs show on the one hand limited cost situations (fourth quadrant, i.e. a cost-saving condition), and on the other hand an opposite situation, where costs can be high (first and second quadrants). Sustainability is predominantly high or moderate, with most BBTs indicating positive values. Nonetheless, a few cases show very low sustainability. The clustering of BBTs suggests consistency among most cases, with points closely grouped together. However, a "satellite cluster" case stands apart from the main one. Deliverable 2.5 57 Overall, the data suggests that while efficiency and sustainability are generally favourable, we can estimate certain outliers in cost and sustainability. 7.3 Define the regional BBT identity card 7.3.1.1 Identification of the key factors of BBTs - Plot box representation The following figure refers to a plot box graph that presents the distribution of the three variables brought back to a common range of variability (adjusted), i.e. efficiency, cost, sustainability, of the total 113 BBTs presented in the Inventory, according to the Greek ranking (BBT Assessment Tool). From the chart we can highlight: • EFF_adj and COST_adj have a narrower IQR, meaning lower variability and a higher ability to differentiate between data points. • EFF_adj appears to be the most selective and relevant variable, while the relevant negative values indicate high-cost reduction, which could be a key decision-making factor. • If selection is based on extreme filtering, EFF_adj will likely have the biggest impact. • Sust_adj is the most stable but least impactful in selections. • This means that for good levels of eff_adj and cost_adj, a lower level of sust_adj could be accepted Figure 25: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation 7.3.1.2 The representation of the most suitable regional BBT Table 25 refers the Greek SWA Matrix on the base on the first 20 Greek BBTs pivot analysis, and in Appendix 1 it is possible to consult individual pivot tables. The SWA matrix intends to present the most Deliverable 2.5 64 8.2 Benchmarking with other countries The aim of this part is to analyse the top 20 BBTs macro-characterisations under the regional light, using comparison to the other regions. 8.2.1.1 Co-occurrence analysis The co-occurrence matrix is used to analyse the simultaneous presence of two or more BBTs in different Regions, setting the Czech region as a pivot, through the representation of a binary matrix. Table 29: Co-occurrence table for Czech Republic region. Most projects involve 3 or fewer countries or less, 1 project (DE4 – Lignocellulosic) shows 5 countries involved. Ireland, Spain, Greece have the highest number of co-occurrences with Poland (3 each). 14 BBTs are exclusively selected for the Czech Republic. The Czech projects are 6, but we can also count several projects from the central part of Europe (Hungary, Poland, Germany and France), while few BBTs are from Mediterranean or Atlantic countries. 8.2.1.2 Distribution of the top 20 BBTs The following figure shows the arrangement of the Top 20 BBTs of the Czech Republic as ordered in the BBT Assessment Tool (the so-called “snake “) in direct comparison with the other five regions under observation here. BBT codes Code CZ IT IE ES PL EL TOT FR12-SeCoPPA /ALFLF FR12 11 EE9-Hay Biosyngas/HAYBG EE9 11 HU7-REFERTIL/3RZRO HU7 11 FI3-ForestChip4Farm/FC4FH FI3 1 1 2 CZ103-TJ-Grow_media/GROW CZ103 11 CZ109-TH-Compost_biochar/COMP CZ109 1 1 1 3 FI10-Wood2Biogas/Wd2BG FI10 11 ES39-INCREdible/RESIN ES39 11 CZ106-TH-soil_organisms/SOIL CZ106 11 CZ107-QK-torrefaction/WWTP CZ107 1 1 1 3 IT11-Clean-ER/CLINR IT11 1 1 1 3 CZ105-QK-potato-growing/TATER CZ105 11 CZ112-FW-fertiliser_applications/PREAG CZ112 11 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO DE4 1 1111 5 IE13-BBFB/CHAR IE13 1 1 2 FR17-Pyrogreen/PYROG FR17 11 PL75-Dishes from the Mill/Dishes from the Mill PL75 11 PL101-Biała Wrona/Biała Wrona PL101 11 PL92-Modern Deer Farming/Modern Deer Farming PL92 11 IT2-FABER/FABER IT2 11 Deliverable 2.5 65 Figure 28: The snake paths from all represented regions (the Czech Republic in frame). Most BBTs are clustered and closely together. The sustainability dimension seems very relevant, with generalized big size of the bubbles that compose the s -called snake. A cluster of BBTs are found around the origin, split in 3 and 4 quadrants, where the Y axe as a pivot; it means that effectiveness plays however a relevant role. The dimension of effectiveness seems very variable. Practically, all of the BBTs have a positive cost estimate (cost savings area) and some fall into quadrant 3 as they do not have a high level of effectiveness. Deliverable 2.5 66 8.3 Define the regional BBT identity card 8.3.1.1 Identification of the key factors of BBTs - Plot box representation In the following figure is represented a plot box graph that presents the distribution of the three variables brought back to a common range of variability (adjusted), i.e. efficiency, cost, sustainability, of the total 113 BBTs presented in the Inventory, according to the Czech ranking (BBTs Assessment Tool). Under the Czech Republic, we can highlight: • EFF_adj appears to have a fairly wide range, with both positive and negative values, but with thinner IQR. • The distribution of COST_adj contains both negative and highly positive values (outliner), indicating strong dispersion. • Sust_adj Sustainability appears to have many values between -2.5 and 1.5, suggesting a more compact range compared to the other two. • EFF_adj seems to be the variable that best discriminates internal variability without being overly influenced by extremes. Figure 29: Cost-Sustainability-Effectiveness plot -box interpretation 8.3.1.2 The representation of the most suitable regional BBT The Czech SWA Matrix is presented in the following table. The SWA matrix is set on the base on the first 20 Czech BBTs, processed under a pivot analysis. Individual pivot tables can be found in Appendix 1. The SWA matrix aims to highlight the most represented factors, characterising the cluster of the 20 BBTS. A second aim is to propose a kind of a hypothetical “best BBT” related to the Czech region. This Czech ideal BBT should: Deliverable 2.5 67 • concern activities related to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities, making resource from biomass residues and wastes with a high local availability; • be funded by Rural Development Funds (Operational Groups support measure) and under a regional geographical scale; • involve firstly advisors; researchers; farmers and processors, but also other kind of players; • have a mature Technology Readiness Level (TRL) • produce as main outcome agronomic input; • use a technology highly related to crop residues and waste or recycled material and biorefining process (Escobar -Laibach, 2021) • ensure a high level of environmental sustainability, with a relevant C sink ability, and in the light of economic and social issues. Table 30: Czech SWA matrix Strong Factor Weak Factor Ambiguous Factor NACE Priority_1: A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities (8) Priority_2 A2.1Silviculture and other forestry activities, A2.3Gathering of wild growing nonwood products (2) FUNDING Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (10) other (7) NUM PARTNER nr TYPE PARTNER Advisor (12) ; Researcher (37); Processor or retailer (21), Farmer (14); other (19) FOCUS AREA Priority_5 (10) FA 3A: STATUS Completed (14) SCOPE Local & regional (11) KEY WORD Circular economy, incl. waste, by-products and residues Forestry BBT CATEGORIES Crop residues and perennial plants F1 (18); Biorefineries C2 (15); Microbial assisted processing C1 (3) FEEDSTOCK Biomass residues (9) (alfa-alfa, forest residues) OUTCOME Agronomic input (9) (Biochar, fertilzers) Breeding input (3) TRL TRL 7/8/9 (11) nr MOBILIT Y Static (14) VALUE CHAIN 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently. (19) C SINK 3 - High potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock and product level). (14) CONDITIONS nr COMPLEXITY 2 -easy to use /replicate nr SUST ECO 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant economic benefits. (13) SUST SOCIO nr SUST ENVI 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits. (19) VALUE ADDED Food/Feed = High (13) Deliverable 2.5 68 8.4 Towards the identification of the first 5 BBTs 8.4.1.1 Regional dynamic matrix under common framework The following matrix of regional dynamics (DYN) was constructed representing a snapshot of the Czech Region in terms of biomass and technologies, regulation framework, support and financial policies as well as research and development system. Table 31: Czech DYN matrix 8.4.1.2 Techno-Territorial Synergy matrix Cross-referencing the DYN matrix and SWA matrix, we can estimate the consistency of the relationships among the different items (BBTs factors and territorial characters) in a coefficient’s matrix (techno-territorial synergy matrix TTS). Applying those coefficients to the top Czech 20 projects led to estimate and identify the best 5. The following Sankey chart represents the directions and the relevance of the links between regional dynamics and BBTs characteristics, as sort from the TTS matrix (the following figure). BIOMASS AND TECHNOLOGY REGIONAL DYNAMICS Agriculture largest category (7.0%); medium-sized category (31.9%); smallest category (60.0%). cereals, green harvested crops (maize and other forage crops), sugar and starchy crops and oil crops. Cereals per grain, wheat, corn on the green, barley Forestry coniferous trees (52.7%), spruce (31.8%), followed by beech (18.1%), oak (15.6%) and pine (8.1%). wood species Agroindustrial sector foodstuff or beverage production; coniferous; stemwood Biomass availability Cereal grains, agricultural biomass, manure from livestock sector, straw, residues from stemwood (primary and secondary), sawdust, bark and black liquor Management and logistics of biomass resources transport and storage problems: many biomasses related industries fall under the authority of different ministries, regional authorities, or private organisations, since their exploits are bordering with many different jurisdictions. Bio-based industry using biological textile waste as a source for material; conversion of waste frying oils into bacterial bioplastics; heating pellets. Bio-products target market bio-based textiles; biotechnology sector; Bioplastics manufacturing; furniture REGULATORY FRAMEWORK National Strategy/Programme The State Environmental Policy of the Czech Republic (SEP) SUPPORT AND FINANCIAL POLICIES Public Ministry of Agriculture Applied Research Program 2017-2025 ; National Agency for Agricultural Research (NAZV) Private donor organisation ( The International Visegrad Fund) R&D system R&D system associated with biomass valorization The Czech Republic has an active participation of Research Institutes and SMEs specialising in agriculture research under the scope of bioeconomy. There are a number of Associations of likeventured SMEs and organisations, creating a valuable network of collaboration between specialists. Deliverable 2.5 69 Figure 30: Pairing BBTs and Dynamic matrix in a Sankey chart representation The details of the elaboration and the TTS matrix are presented in the follow Figure 31. Figure 31: The Czech TTS matrix From Figure 31, we can point out that an ideal BBT in the Czech Republic situation could be related to the agricultural sector, rather than forestry, and supported by Rural Development measures; the more relevant partners are farmers, players from R&D system, and agro-industry. It could refer to biomass from agriculture firstly and ago-industry (less from forestry) as feedstock. The outcomes are focused on primary and agro-industry sector. The characteristics of the bio-based industry as well as market and logistical aspects are to be considered as relevant, as well as the environmental sustainability. Czech Republic Geographical scope Agriculture Forestry Primary sector Agroindustrial sector Management and logistics Bio-based industry Bio-products market Programmes Public support Private Support R&D system Reference sector Funding Type partner Focus area Geographical scale BBT categories Feedstock Outcome TRL Mobility Availability C sink Sust eco Sust socio Sust envi Value added Very high High Medium Low Nr Deliverable 2.5 70 Using the coefficients set in TTS matrix, each of the Czech top 20 BBTS have been estimated in the light to identify the 5 Best BBTs. The following table 32 proposes the list of the top 5 BBTS ordered by score. Table 32: Czech 5 best BBTs The five selected BBTSs for the Czech Republic focus on key challenges related to soil health, water resource conservation, sustainable agricultural practices, and efficient biomass utilization. These innovations offer practical solutions for improving resource efficiency and environmental sustainability in the region. The first two projects, CZ106-TH-soil_organisms/SOIL and CZ105-QK-potato-growing/TATER, address soil management and sustainable crop production. The activation of biochar and digestate in the first project enhances soil fertility and carbon sequestration, while the second project offers an alternative approach to plant protection and fertilization, reducing the impact on water resources without compromising agricultural productivity. The DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO project contributes to circular bioeconomy efforts by transforming lignocellulosic residues such as meadow grass, wood, and straw into valuable bioproducts. Its integration into farm operations supports sustainable waste management and renewable energy generation. The IT2-FABER/FABER project focuses on biochar production from forest biomass, providing an effective solution for managing forestry residues while contributing to climate change mitigation through carbon sequestration and improved soil health. Given the significant forested areas in the Czech Republic, this approach aligns well with regional resource management strategies. The FR12-SeCoPPA/ALFLF project enhances the efficiency of alfalfa drying using renewable energy sources. By utilizing solar power, wood residues, and electricity, this innovation improves feed production while making use of farm by-products such as manure and shredded wood, supporting sustainability in livestock farming. The selection of these BBTs reflects a strong emphasis on practical application, regional adaptability, and environmental benefits. The selected BBTs are complementary to the characteristics of the Czech Republic mostly in terms of available biomass or through the compatibility of a technology or methodology to the needs and implementation capacity of the region. So, while their ranking may not Region TTS Rank BBT Code Description BBT Needs / Problem statement Score CZ 1 CZ106-TH-soil_organisms/ SOIL Method and design of equipment for the treatment (activation) of mainly biochar and also digestate. Efficient use of processed field by-products. 7 CZ 2 CZ105-QK-potato-growing/ TATER The innovation will be based on a replacement of plant protection products and fertilisers by sustainable procedures of growing. The issue of protecting water resources while maintaining the competitiveness of agricultural production in their vicinity is quite complex. 6,83 CZ 3 DE4-Lignocellulosic Biorefinery/LIGNO Anaerobic digestion of farm residues (wood, grass, straw) To valorize the lignocellulosic residues (meadow grass) from farms in a sustainable way. 6,06 CZ 4IT2-FABER/FABER Use of forest biomass for biochar production Forest biomass and its management to address climate change and GHG emissions. 5,94 CZ 5FR12-SeCoPPA /ALFLF Alfalfa is dried and granulated using a dryer powered by solar energy, wood residues and electricity challenges in efficiently drying alfalfa for animal feed, and a need to utilize manure and shredded wood from hedgerows 5,88 Deliverable 2.5 71 fully align with conventional assessment models, their relevance to the specific conditions and needs of the Czech Republic highlights their potential for effective implementation in the bioeconomy sector. The Czech Republic members of the BBioNets project advisory board (Advisory Board - BBioNets) validated the “Region-specific prioritisation list of Bio-Based Technologies and practices”. According to AB the list of top 20 most suitable BBTs content many important projects for the region such as FR17-Pyrogreen/PYROG, HU7-REFERTIL/3RZRO, CZ103-TJ-Grow_media/GROW, but they are agreeing with the best top 5 BBTs. About possible implementation over the next five years, the AB believes that it could be possible. Deliverable 2.5 72 9 References Ait Sair, A.; Kansou, K.; Michaud, F.; Cathala, B. Multicriteria Definition of Small-Scale Biorefineries Based on a Statistical Classification. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7310.https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137310 BE-Rural (2019) ‘D2.1: Report on new technology options Small-scale technology options for regional bioeconomies’ https://be-rural.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/BE-Rural_D2.1_Small scale_technology_options.pdf CREA (2024) DELIVERABLE D2.1 Methodological framework for knowledge compilation, BBioNets project CTA (2024) DELIVERABLE D2.4 High-level study of regional dynamics for the use of Bio based Technologies (BBTs), BBioNets project De Buck V, Sbarciog M., Polanska M. and Van Impe JF (2022) ‘Assessing the Local Biowaste Potential of Rural and Developed Areas Using GIS-Data and Clustering Techniques: Towards a Decision Support Tool.’ Front. Chem. Eng. 4:825045. https://doi.org/10.3389/fceng.2022.825045 Escobar E., Laibach N, (2021) Sustainability check for bio-based technologies: A review of processbased and life cycle approaches, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 135, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110213 European commission. (2012) ‘A European strategy for Key Enabling Technologies – a bridge to growth and jobs.’ p. 1–18. EUR-Lex - 52012DC0341 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) European Commission. (2018). ‘Re-finding Industry Defining Innovation Report of the independent High-Level Group on industrial technologies Research and Innovation.’ https://doi.org/10.2777/475890 Laibach, N., Börner, J., & Bröring, S. (2019). ‘Exploring the future of the bioeconomy: An expert-based scoping study examining key enabling technology fields with potential to foster the transition toward a bio-based economy.’, Technology in Society Vlol. 58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.03.001 MTU (2024), DELIVERABLE D2.2 BBTs Assessment Tool – v1, BBioNets project Deliverable 2.5 73 Appendix 1 BBTs Pivot analysis scheme Italy Reference sector Italy Top 20 BBTs A1.2Growing of perennial crops 1 A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities 17 A2.1Silviculture and other forestry activities 2 Total 20 Funding Italy Top 20 BBTs Other EU research funds 3 Other rural development funds 2 Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (in the sense of Art 56 of Reg.1305/2013) 15 Total 20 Num. Partner Italy Top 20 BBTs 3 1 4 4 5 2 6 7 7 2 8 1 10 1 11 2 Total 20 Type of partner Italy Top 20 BBTs Farmer 21 Advisor 14 Researcher 35 NGO (env, climate,…) 3 Processor or retailer 16 Focus Area Italy Top 20 BBTs FA 1A: Fostering innovation, cooperation and the development of the knowledge base in rural areas 1 FA 1B: Strengthening the links between agriculture, food production and forestry and research and innovation 6 FA 2A: Improving the economic performance of all farms and facilitating farm restructuring and modernisation 3 FA 3A: Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them into the agri-food chain 1 FA 4B: Improving water management; 1 FA 4C: Preventing soil erosion and improving soil management. 2 Deliverable 2.5 80 2 -easy to use /replicate 7 3 -complex application 4 (blank) 6 Total 20 Sust Eco Ireland Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 economic benefits. 7 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant economic benefits. 9 (blank) 4 Total 20 Sust Socio Ireland Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - doesn't bring any social benefits. 1 2 - Medium potential -Expected to bring 2 or 1 social benefits. 13 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant social benefits. 2 (blank) 4 Total 20 Sust Envi Ireland Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 environmental benefits. 2 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits. 14 (blank) 4 Total 20 Value added Ireland Top 20 BBTs Energy & Heat = Very low 7 Food/Feed = High 13 Total 20 Value chain Ireland Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Significant availability of feedstocks available by 2035. 3 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently. 17 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 81 Spain Reference sector Spain Top 20 BBTs A1.2Growing of perennial crops 4 A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities 14 A2.1Silviculture and other forestry activities 1 A2.4Support services to forestry 1 Total 20 Funding Spain Top 20 BBTs Other EU research funds 1 Other rural development funds 3 Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (in the sense of Art 56 of Reg.1305/2013) 15 Other public (national, regional) research funds 1 Total 20 Num. Partner Spain Top 20 BBTs 3 2 4 3 5 4 6 3 7 2 8 4 1 1 (blank) 1 Total 20 Type of partner Spain Top 20 BBTs Farmer 21 Advisor 13 Researcher 32 NGO (env, climate,…) 1 Processor or retailer 14 Public Authority + LAG 3 Other 9 Focus Area Spain Top 20 BBTs FA 1A: Fostering innovation, cooperation and the development of the knowledge base in rural areas 1 FA 1B: Strengthening the links between agriculture, food production and forestry and research and innovation 6 FA 2A: Improving the economic performance of all farms and facilitating farm restructuring and modernisation 1 FA 3A: Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them into the agri-food chain 0 FA 4A: Restoring, preserving and enhancing biodiversity 1 Deliverable 2.5 82 FA 4B: Improving water management. 1 FA 4C: Preventing soil erosion and improving soil management. 2 FA 5C: Facilitating the supply and use of renewable sources of energy 2 FA 5D: Reducing greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from agriculture; 3 FA 5E: Fostering carbon conservation and sequestration in agriculture and forestry 3 Total 20 Status Spain Top 20 BBTs Completed 10 Ongoing 10 Total 20 Geographical scale Spain Top 20 BBTs Local 3 National 2 Regional 15 Total 20 Key Word Spain Top 20 BBTs Circular economy, incl. waste, by-products and residues 10 Energy 1 Outdoor horticulture and woody crops (incl. viticulture,olives, fruit, ornamentals) 3 Plant nutrients 1 Soil 2 Climate change (incl. GHG reduction, adaptation andmitigation, and other air related issues) 1 Food security, safety, quality, processing and nutrition 1 Agro-ecology 1 Total 20 BBT categories Spain Top 20 BBTs Crop residues and perennial plants F1 16 Designer crops for optimised biomass content F2 2 Algae biomass F3 2 Waste or recycled material FC 8 Microbial assisted processing C1 5 Biorefineries C2 12 Feedstock Spain Top 20 BBTs Biomass 3 Biomass residues 13 Wastes 4 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 83 Outcome Spain Top 20 BBTs Agronomic input 10 Biochar 3 Biostimulants 1 Compost 1 Fertilizer 4 Organic effluent compost. 1 Biocarburant 1 Activiated carbon for water treatment 1 Biofuels 2 heat production 1 Syngas 1 Breeding input 4 feed and biomaterials 1 Feed 1 food, feed and biomaterials 2 Natural additives 3 fermented apple juice 1 dried fruit tea and spices 1 herbal infusions and natural food additives 1 Total 20 TRL Spain Top 20 BBTs TRL 3 – experimental proof of concept 1 TRL 4 – technology validated in lab 2 TRL 5 – technology validated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) 3 TRL 6 – technology demonstrated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) 2 TRL 7 – system prototype demonstration in operational environment 4 TRL 8 – system complete and qualified 1 TRL 9 – actual system proven in operational environment (competitive manufacturing in the case of key enabling technologies; or in space) 1 (blank) 6 Total 20 Mobility Spain Top 20 BBTs Mobile 12 Static 8 Total 20 C SINK Spain Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - low potential for carbon sequestration 6 2 - Medium potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock or product level only. 6 3 - High potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock and product level). 8 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 84 Complexity Spain Top 20 BBTs 1 - very easy to use/replicate 3 2 -easy to use /replicate 9 3 -complex application 6 (blank) 2 Total 20 Sust Eco Spain Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 economic benefits. 10 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant economic benefits. 10 Total 20 Sust Socio Spain Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - doesn't bring any social benefits. 7 2 - Medium potential -Expected to bring 2 or 1 social benefits. 10 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant social benefits. 3 Total 20 Sust Envi Spain Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 environmental benefits. 3 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits. 17 Total 20 Value added Spain Top 20 BBTs Bioplastics & Polymers = Intermediate 2 Bulk Chemicals & Fuels = Low 4 Energy & Heat = Very low 5 Fine chemicals = Very high 1 Food/Feed = High 8 Totale complessivo 20 Value chain Spain Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Significant availability of feedstocks available by 2035. 5 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently. 15 Deliverable 2.5 85 Poland Reference sector Poland Top 20 BBTs A1.1Growing of non-perennial crops 1 A1.2Growing of perennial crops 3 A1.4Animal production 2 A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities 14 Total 20 Funding Poland Top 20 BBTs Other EU research funds 1 Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (in the sense of Art 56 of Reg.1305/2013) 16 Other public (national, regional) research funds 3 Total 20 Num. Partner Poland Top 20 BBTs 1 2 2 1 3 2 4 2 5 3 6 5 7 1 8 1 9 1 (blank) 2 Total 20 Type of partner Poland Top 20 BBTs Farmer 20 Forester 0 Advisor 9 Researcher 28 NGO (env, climate,) 1 Processor or retailer 16 Public Authority + LAG 0 Other 6 Focus Area Poland Top 20 BBTs FA 1A: Fostering innovation, cooperation and the development of the knowledge base in rural areas 1 FA 1B: Strengthening the links between agriculture, food production and forestry and research and innovation 4 FA 2A: Improving the economic performance of all farms and facilitating farm restructuring and modernisation 4 Deliverable 2.5 86 FA 3A: Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them into the agri-food chain 2 FA 5C: Facilitating the supply and use of renewable sources of energy 1 FA 5D: Reducing greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from agriculture. 3 FA 5E: Fostering carbon conservation and sequestration in agriculture and forestry 5 Total 20 Status Poland Top 20 BBTs Completed 13 Ongoing 7 Total 20 Geographical scale Poland Top 20 BBTs Local 2 National 5 Regional 13 Total 20 Key Word Poland Top 20 BBTs Circular economy, incl. waste, by-products and residues 9 Energy 1 Outdoor horticulture and woody crops (incl. viticulture, olives, fruit, ornamentals) 1 Plant nutrients 3 Climate change (incl. GHG reduction, adaptation and mitigation, and other air related issues) 2 Food security, safety, quality, processing and nutrition 2 Agro-ecology 1 Fodder and feed 1 Total 20 BBT categories Poland Top 20 BBTs Crop residues and perennial plants F1 13 Designer crops for optimised biomass content F2 3 Algae biomass F3 1 Waste or recycled material FC 10 Microbial assisted processing C1 7 Biorefineries C2 10 Feedstock Poland Top 20 BBTs Biomass 4 Biomass residues 9 Wastes 7 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 87 Outcome Poland Top 20 BBTs Agronomic input 9 Biochar 2 Compost 1 Fertilizer 6 Biofuels 1 Syngas 1 Breeding input 4 feed and biomaterials 1 bedding litter for cows 1 food, feed and biomaterials 2 Natural additives 6 fruit vinegar 1 puree 1 Feed for animals; cosmetics and nutraceuticals 1 fermented apple juice 1 feed supplement 1 herbal infusions and natural food additives 1 Total 20 TRL Poland Top 20 BBTs TRL 3 – experimental proof of concept 2 TRL 4 – technology validated in lab 1 TRL 6 – technology demonstrated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) 2 TRL 7 – system prototype demonstration in operational environment 2 TRL 8 – system complete and qualified 1 TRL 9 – actual system proven in operational environment (competitive manufacturing in the case of key enabling technologies; or in space) 2 (blank) 10 Total 20 Mobility Poland Top 20 BBTs Mobile 6 Static 13 (blank) 1 Total 20 C SINK Poland Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - low potential for carbon sequestration 4 2 - Medium potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock or product level only. 2 3 - High potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock and product level). 14 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 88 Complexity Poland Top 20 BBTs 1 - very easy to use/replicate 1 2 -easy to use /replicate 7 3 -complex application 6 (blank) 6 Total 20 Sust Eco Poland Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - doesn't bring any economic benefits. 0 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 economic benefits. 7 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant economic benefits. 11 (blank) 2 Total 20 Sust Socio Poland Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - doesn't bring any social benefits. 3 2 - Medium potential -Expected to bring 2 or 1 social benefits. 13 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant social benefits. 2 (blank) 2 Total 20 Sust Envi Poland Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 environmental benefits. 3 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits. 15 (blank) 2 Total 20 Value added Poland Top 20 BBTs Bioplastics & Polymers = Intermediate 0 Energy & Heat = Very low 4 Food/Feed = High 16 Totale complessivo 20 Value chain Poland Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Significant availability of feedstocks available by 2035. 2 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently. 18 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 89 Greece Reference sector Greece Top 20 BBTs A1.2Growing of perennial crops 4 A1.6Support activities to agriculture and post-harvest crop activities 16 Total 20 Funding Greece Top 20 BBTs Other EU research funds 3 Other rural development funds 3 Rural development 2014-2020 for Operational Groups (in the sense of Art 56 of Reg.1305/2013) 14 Total 20 Num. Partner Greece Top 20 BBTs 1 2 2 1 3 2 4 5 5 3 6 3 7 2 8 2 Total 20 Type of partner Greece Top 20 BBTs Farmer 21 Advisor 14 Researcher 30 NGO (env, climate,) 1 Processor or retailer 9 Public Authority + LAG 3 Other 3 Focus Area Greece Top 20 BBTs FA 1A: Fostering innovation, cooperation and the development of the knowledge base in rural areas 1 FA 1B: Strengthening the links between agriculture, food production and forestry and research and innovation 5 FA 2A: Improving the economic performance of all farms and facilitating farm restructuring and modernisation 4 FA 3A: Improving competitiveness of primary producers by better integrating them into the agri-food chain 2 Deliverable 2.5 96 Mobility Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs Mobile 5 Static 14 (blank) 1 Total 20 C SINK Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock or product level only. 6 3 - High potential - strong potential for carbon sequestration at the feedstock and product level). 14 Total 20 Complexity Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs 1 - very easy to use/replicate 4 2 -easy to use /replicate 5 3 -complex application 6 (blank) 5 Total 20 Sust Eco Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Expected to bring 2 or 1 economic benefits. 6 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant economic benefits. 13 (blank) 1 Total 20 Sust Socio Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs 1 - Low potential - doesn't bring any social benefits. 6 2 - Medium potential -Expected to bring 2 or 1 social benefits. 7 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant social benefits. 6 (blank) 1 Total 20 Sust Envi Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs 3 - High potential - Expected to bring at least 3 significant environmental benefits. 19 (blank) 1 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 97 Value added Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs Bioplastics & Polymers = Intermediate 2 Energy & Heat = Very low 5 Food/Feed = High 13 Totale complessivo 20 Value chain Czech Republic Top 20 BBTs 2 - Medium potential - Significant availability of feedstocks available by 2035. 1 3 - High potential - Significant arisings of feedstocks available currently. 19 Total 20 Deliverable 2.5 98 Annex 1 Vademecum Questionnaire VADEMECUM QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ECONOMIC ITEMS INTERVIEW UNDER INVENTORY GATHERING Task 2.1 "BBioNets inventory and knowledge collection" Objective definition To analyse the regional dynamics of the bioeconomy and assess the cost-effectiveness of different Biobased technologies for farmers and foresters in the task 2.2. This vademecum aims to address a specific critical issue regarding the collection of economic information within the Inventory prepared in T2.1. The target is then to determine the economic variables to be used in the assessment model. The current proposal aims to collect some economic variables related to BBT startup or management (e.g., investment cost or ROI). However, based on the practice and feedback gathered so far, collecting these items and then filling in the relevant fields of the inventory could prove critical. With this in mind, the working team proposes several routes to proceed in estimating the economic magnitudes of a BBT from the perspective of the assessment model proposed in Task 2.4. Stakeholder engagement First identify the target stakeholders to be interviewed, based on the type of information to be gathered. Interview methodology Preferred methodology include: 1. Face-to-face interviews (CAPI or online platform), 2. telephone interview (CATI) 3. Google format (CAWI) Communications to participants Contact interviewees in advance to schedule an appointment. At this stage, provide the questionnaire to respondents in advance, allowing them time to prepare relevant materials for the interview (e.g., costs). Deliverable 2.5 99 Background The following table provides meta explanations of the economic variables already included in the Inventory format, along with newly proposed variables aimed at addressing existing information gaps. Economic variables New variables proposed Equipment maintenance cost Investment cost Operating costs Return on investment Supply Value: price that the biobased technology owner (bioproduct manufacturer) would pay to buy or take off hands a tonne of biomass produced/generated from the farmer/forester. Subrogation value. price of the bioproduct that the bio-based technology owner would manufacture and replace a current product (example, price of the biofertilizer that will replace the current fertiliser). Conducting the interview 1. Choosing the approach From the first contact to scheduling an appointment, one can gauge the type of information the respondent may possess and, accordingly, assess their level of helpfulness. Based on this feedback, the interviewer can improve or change (adjust?) the interview strategy. Does the respondent seem to have a clear vison of BBT and costs?  Does the respondent seem to know more about the GO project than the BBT?  Does the respondent seem to have a possible market knowledge of the BBT?  Does the respondent seem to have knowledge of similar BBT? We want to highlight that the main route is the gathering all the inventory variables, also using the questions already in place (see Box). BOX - questions already in place 2.1.6 How much does equipment maintenance cost (€/year)? (range, e.g., €1,000 to €5,000) 2.1.7 How much was the investment cost (M€)? ≤1 M€ = very low; - 1 - 5 M€ = low; - 5 - 9 M€ = intermediate; - 9 - 50 M€ = high; - ≥ 50 M€ = very high 2.1.8 What are the operating costs (€)? (range of values, e.g., €1,000 to €5,000) 2.1.9 What is the return on investment (€) and in how many years could it be achieved? (range of values e.g., from €1,000 to €5,000) However, the collection of economic information from actors in the field is often incomplete and difficult, if not critical. Nevertheless, it is crucial to address the gap in economic information. This becomes peculiarly relevant in the assessment model. In this light, we propose, if the main route is not possible to take, to get to quantify some economic aspects related to the adoption of a BBT in each Deliverable 2.5 100 case. The multicriteria mechanism will allow later in the assessment model to handle this information albeit of a different nature. We propose two types of estimation routes: the first one have the goal to provide a value to the cost of investment and the ROI (Forward routes); the second types are focused on the assessment of lateral information, as well as the price of feedstock or the price of a substitutional products. Here the possible routes to fill the info gap are presented. Possible Routes to fill the info gaps Forward routes - To facilitate the capture of information, provide anchor investment cost (proxy) (e.g similar investments) - To assign a weight to BBT within the total OG investments (e.g., 1 to 3). - To submit for confirmation a BBT cost estimate made by the work team (ex-ante estimation) Lateral routes - Supply Value: estimate the price that the biobased technology owner would pay to buy the Bio inputs. - Subrogation value. price of a replacement product (e.g., price of a biofertilizer vs current fertiliser). Not all routes have the same reliability and consistency. The team compared the reliability of these routes and prioritized them. The prioritization value was estimated by a simplified dot voting procedure, following Cagliero et al. 2023 and Amrhein, 2019. During the preparation of CAP Strategic Plan 2023-27, Italy developed a specific, highly participative process for assigning different levels of priority to the identified territorial needs, starting from a Cumulative Voting (CV) approach. Cumulative Voting is a simple and transparent method for prioritising a list of items and, according to the literature, offers several advantages. In the procedure, Deliverable 2.5 101 participants use a limited number of votes1, to bias the indication, and without knowing the votes of other participants, to avoid some known biases. The results from the voting phase are: 2. Preparing materials Depending on the route chosen, some materials need to be prepared. E.g, if confirmation of an estimate made by the team is sought, the estimate must be made and checked. In the case of surrogate pricing, it is best to know similar BBTs and have an idea of the market for comparable solutions. In the case, for example, of weighing route, it is necessary to get all the information about the GO, budget, and activities, to help the respondent in the estimation. 3. Examples of interview questions Filling directly the Inventory. Do you have a cash flow of intervention? Could you provide a value for the investment made, even a range? Can you estimate the ROI of the intervention, even a range? Surrogate pricing route Are similar products available in the market? Do you know of similar BBT experiences? Do you have an idea of similar products prices? Proxy route Are similar BBTs available on the market? Do you know of similar BBT experiences? Do you know prices of similar BBT or similar investments? Supply pricing route Is information on the feedstock market price available? Do you know your potential needs of rough materials? Is it possible to make an estimate of transaction costs? Ex ante estimation route Do you know of similar experiences? Is the BBT now in place? Weighting route Do you know the overall GO budget? 1 N Dot = (T/2*T)/P where T is the number of issues or topics, in the present analysis the number of territorial needs, P is the number of participants and N is the number of dots required for each person. In our case, we have 5 items and 5 respondents, with each 2 votes. Proxy Ex ante estimation Surrogate pricing Supply pricing Weighting Deliverable 2.5 102 Can you confirm a cost estimate in this range? How much might this specific BBT weight on the project? Can we make a cost estimate, in even percentage terms? Deliverable 2.5 103 Document information Title BBioNets – Creation and promotion of Forest and Agriculture Networks to boost Bio-Based Technologies adoption and Value Chain development (GA No 101133904) Start – end date 1/11/2023 – 31/10/2026 (36 months) Project type Coordination and Support Action Programme Horizon Europe – Cluster 6 Funding 1,998,636.20 € Coordinator Munster Technological University Ms. Carmen Girón Domínguez ([email protected]) Project overview BBioNets constitutes a thematic network that relies on, promotes, and further advances the work carried out by EIPAGRI Operational Groups (OGs) with respect to management and/or processing of agricultural and forest biomass with Bio-Based Technologies (BBTs) . The project has set up 6 regional Forest and Agriculture Networks – FANs (IE, ES, IT, EL, PL, CZ) that identify local needs, prioritise specific BBTs and share BBT knowledge ready for practice to farmers and foresters, boosting the (re)definition of value chains, stimulating crossfertilisation beyond borders, and bringing Europe to the forefront of farming, forestry and bioeconomy with economically viable and sustainable practices. Consortium @bbionets-eu.bsky.social P4081TB12bA#y1 [email protected] P4054TB19bA#y1 www.bbionets.eu P408 T 0bA#y /bbionets-eu P408 T bA#y /bbionets.eu P408 T bA#y @bbionets_eu P4083T 3bA#y @bbionets_eu P4083T 4bA#y @BBioNetsE U