Select your language

A. Relevance and sustainability context

A.1 Policy relevance

Indicates size and development of public funding for the Bioeconomy, which has an important role for activities /goals of the Bioeconomy Strategy and to drive bioeconomy development.

A.2 Sustainability and / or comparative evaluation options

The data can be compared to total economy, comparison with other countries are not possible, as such data most likely is not freely accessible or efforts would be too high.

B. Data availability

B.1 Stage of development

The indicator is well established.

B.2 Data sources

BMFTR; https://www.datenportal.bmftr.bund.de/portal/1.1.5

B.3 Coverage over time and replicability

Available since 2009

B.4 Coverage across scales and sectors; compatibility

Only available for bioeconomy in total.

C. Considerations for operationalization

C.1 Feasibility: Fit for monitoring

The indicator is feasible to collect and to interpret

C.2 Institutions

BMFTR

C.3 Future prospects

n.a.

C.4 Costs, considerations and reproducibility

Freely available

C.5 Potential for automation

Not relevant

C.6 Presentation options and breakdown / sub-indicator needs

no

C.7 Potential for scenario integration

Public R&D could be a scenario variable for (public funded) innovation activities

C.8 Interlinkages and alignment with other monitoring activities

Not known

Further Comments:

Via the “Förderkatalog” the project based R&D could be analysed in more detail, regarding funded institutions, project cooperations, structural data (e.g. average size or duration of funding)

Legend

Tier

Tier I describes the 30 core, priority indicators defined by the project that are highly relevant to represent a specific thematic area and which together with other Tier I indicators forms a systemic perspective of the various risks, opportunities and trade-offs within the Bioeconomy.

Tier II describes explanatory indicators that are of high priority and help to provide more specific information on trends within specific thematic areas.

Stage of development

Established:
Indicators which are already reported in other official monitoring systems

Semi-established:
Indicators which are developed by e.g. federal research institutes as part of long-term and regularly updated initiatives

New
Indicators not previously reported in an official capacity, but well established through research projects

Developing
Indicators under development with some reporting in new state-of-the research projects, but not subject to multiple years of revision and replication

Future
Indicator gaps requiring research for possible future integration

Robustness

Very robust:
methodologically sound, reliable, and fit for bioeconomy monitoring

Robust:
fit, but with acceptable uncertainty and/or potential challenges

Sufficient:
possibly fit, but with foreseeable challenges

Weak:
currently unfit, but short-term potential

Insufficient:
currently unfit, but with long-term potential