Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Forest Bioeconomy from the Perspectives of Different EU Countries and Its Potential for Measuring Sustainability

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60460709%3A41320%2F23%3A96994" target="_blank" >RIV/60460709:41320/23:96994 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f14010033" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f14010033</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f14010033" target="_blank" >10.3390/f14010033</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Forest Bioeconomy from the Perspectives of Different EU Countries and Its Potential for Measuring Sustainability

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    The globally accepted concept of a bioeconomy includes the field of forestry; however, the concept of a forest bioeconomy (FBE) does not appear to be defined uniformly. The concepts of bioeconomy and sustainable development are interlinked. In many countries, the bioeconomy is often the subject of efforts to quantify it from the state level, and therefore, the question arises as to whether the data regarding the financial support of an FBE in individual countries can be considered mutually comparable, with the aim of including them, for example, among the criteria for measuring sustainability (e.g., indicators of sustainable development-SDI). This option has political implications for political representation, taking the form of a comparable indicator in the approaches of individual states. This article analytically compares FBEs and our understanding of them in selected countries: Czechia, Slovakia, Finland, Italy, and Germany. Czechia financially supports various areas of forestry through European funds (Rural Development Programme, RDP CZ). In this article, we assess this support from the point of view of the perceptions of the FBE in the studied states, with an emphasis on the view of Czechia. First, an FBE analysis of the selected official and supporting documents of the studied countries was performed. The total financial data from the supported projects from the RDP CZ were subsequently assigned to these areas. Thus, the idea of financial support for the FBE through the RDP CZ from the perspectives of the selected countries was born. The differences in the perception of the FBE according to the description derived from the analysis were also confirmed by the different financial quantifications (hypothetical) of these different views. The obtained results demonstrate an incomparable state of perception of the FBE among the selected countries. For these reasons, it is currently inappropriate to use the level of FBE financial support to measure sustainability.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Forest Bioeconomy from the Perspectives of Different EU Countries and Its Potential for Measuring Sustainability

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    The globally accepted concept of a bioeconomy includes the field of forestry; however, the concept of a forest bioeconomy (FBE) does not appear to be defined uniformly. The concepts of bioeconomy and sustainable development are interlinked. In many countries, the bioeconomy is often the subject of efforts to quantify it from the state level, and therefore, the question arises as to whether the data regarding the financial support of an FBE in individual countries can be considered mutually comparable, with the aim of including them, for example, among the criteria for measuring sustainability (e.g., indicators of sustainable development-SDI). This option has political implications for political representation, taking the form of a comparable indicator in the approaches of individual states. This article analytically compares FBEs and our understanding of them in selected countries: Czechia, Slovakia, Finland, Italy, and Germany. Czechia financially supports various areas of forestry through European funds (Rural Development Programme, RDP CZ). In this article, we assess this support from the point of view of the perceptions of the FBE in the studied states, with an emphasis on the view of Czechia. First, an FBE analysis of the selected official and supporting documents of the studied countries was performed. The total financial data from the supported projects from the RDP CZ were subsequently assigned to these areas. Thus, the idea of financial support for the FBE through the RDP CZ from the perspectives of the selected countries was born. The differences in the perception of the FBE according to the description derived from the analysis were also confirmed by the different financial quantifications (hypothetical) of these different views. The obtained results demonstrate an incomparable state of perception of the FBE among the selected countries. For these reasons, it is currently inappropriate to use the level of FBE financial support to measure sustainability.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    40102 - Forestry

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    Výsledek vznikl pri realizaci vícero projektů. Více informací v záložce Projekty.

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2023

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    FORESTS

  • ISSN

    1999-4907

  • e-ISSN

    1999-4907

  • Svazek periodika

    14

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    1

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    CZ - Česká republika

  • Počet stran výsledku

    20

  • Strana od-do

    1-20

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    000915258500001

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-85146811112