A. Relevance and sustainability context
A.1 Policy relevance
The secondary input rate and the cascade factor relate to different policy implications that are not directly linked to specific quotas. However, it is one central element of the RED III (EU Renewable energy Directive) that explicitly formulate it as following: “In line with the principle of the cascading use of biomass, woody biomass should be used according to its highest economic and environmental added value in the following order of priorities: wood-based products, extending the service life of wood-based products, re-use, recycling, bioenergy and disposal. Where no other use for woody biomass is economically viable or environmentally appropriate, energy recovery helps to reduce energy generation from non-renewable sources.” (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202302413). To achieve the level playing field for material applications as well as to redirect and address long term carbon storage opportunities the indicator is an important measurement tool, to highlight status quo of circularity and carbon storage opportunities of wood products. The cascade principle is directly or indirectly included in the following policy strategies and regulations.
EU level:
- The Renewable Energy Directive (RED III)
- The EU Circular Economy Action Plan
- Waste Framework Directive
- The EU Deforestation Regulation
- The EU Bioeconomy Strategy
- Carbon Removals Certification Framework
National level:
- The Circular Economy Act (KrWG)
- The Waste Wood Ordinance (AltholzV)
- The National Bioeconomy Strategy
- The Charta for Wood 2.0
For the Charta of wood 2.0 and respective monitoring activities the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Regional Identity (BMLEH) is in charge.
The cascade factor expresses how often primary wood has been used by multiple utilisations of secondary material (waste and recycled wood) has been used (e. g. 2.0). The secondary input rate expresses the proportion of the secondary material (e. g. 50 %) and so it reflects the same data in a different perspective.
A.2 Sustainability and / or comparative evaluation options
The indicator focusses on the usage of secondary material for wood products. While the indicator is only available on a national level, the overall wood usage for material and energy purposes could be highlighted for the indicator and set it into perspective to usage of secondary materials. Another indicator for comparison reasons could be the circular material use rate, that evaluates total economy circularity.
As regards sustainability thresholds, the impact of circular wood usage in comparison to carbon cycles could be used to evaluate benchmarks in regards to the climate mitigation potential of the sector. Further the indicator could be used to explore a potential of future cascading usage of wood to elaborate thresholds for forest management and land usage of forestry products of the bioeconomy. Comparison vs. other member states and the EU are technically possible, if reporting by member states is improved. See the EU mandate report by the JRC (Joint Reseach Centre) regarding data quality lack.
The data/indicator requirements for the comparative benchmark indicators are not available in the same source and in the sense of same requirements. Available is the circular material use rate on the EU level and the carbon cycles and carbon contents of forest products.
B. Data availability
B.1 Stage of development
The method is established and documented as part of the national wood resource monitoring by Thünen.
B.2 Data sources
Data is based on Mantau (2024): https://www.fnr.de/fileadmin/Projekte/2024/Mediathek/Wood_Resource_Balances_2020_web.pdf
B.3 Coverage over time and replicability
The indicator is reported in a 5-year period from 1990-2020. It is updated regularity based on national wood resource monitoring (Thünen).
B.4 Coverage across scales and sectors; compatibility
Material uses:
- Sawmill
- Panel
- Pulp and secondary pulp industry
Energy uses:
- Wood energy products
- Small and large scale bioenergy plants
- Private households
C. Considerations for operationalization
C.1 Feasibility: Fit for monitoring
The indicator is methodologically sound and reliable, and fit for bioeconomy monitoring.
C.2 Institutions
The Institution of Mantau/Infro have been responsible for developing this method in the past and the monitoring will be continued by Thünen Institute in the future.
C.3 Future prospects
Indicator is ready. Monitoring from Mantau/Infro will be continued by Thünen (see above).
C.4 Costs, considerations and reproducibility
As the data is already reported and calculated and openly available, there will be no cost connected to data sharing.
C.5 Potential for automation
If automation can use the data as published in pdf format for the national level, the potential is strong. But, it depends on data publication in the future (wood resource monitoring). State of art no information about future data publication as responded by Thünen.
C.6 Presentation options and breakdown / sub-indicator needs
The indicator could be presented as a trend of % or a trend of the factor, for different sectors as well as for energy and material usage purposes.
C.7 Potential for scenario integration
Possibility to use cascading factors for estimations of future potentials of biogenic residues and wastes used in the wood sector. Further elaboration of carbon storage in the sector as well as implications of impact on circularity with regard to an increasing integration of wood based products in different sectors.
C.8 Interlinkages and alignment with other monitoring activities
The main challenges in the update and implementation of the indicator are related to the uncertainties in the estimates for EU-level production and consumption of woody biomass, where considerable discrepancies have been identified in the reported data (Camia et al. 2020; Avitabile et al. 2023). Interlinkages are strongly tied to the latest development of interactive Sankey diagrams for different material flows in the EU and the member states (https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/visualisation/interactive-sankey-diagrams-woody-biomass-flows-eu-member-states_en#dehttps://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/visualisation/interactive-sankey-diagrams-woody-biomass-flows-eu-member-states_en#de,2021) under named limitations. Based on the published dataset further derivation of cascade factor could be made on aggregated form.