Cascading of woody biomass: The tricky path from principle to policy to practice

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document explores the 'cascading' principle, which suggests natural resources should be used for their most valuable purposes for as long as possible before energy recovery. It analyzes the tension in the EU between the bioenergy sector, the forest industry, and environmental NGOs, while critiquing historical 'designated eligibility' approaches to implementation.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The cascading principle, first presented by Sirkin and Ten Houten in 1994, posits that to maximize resource efficiency and reduce environmental stress, resources should be used and recycled for as long as possible, and allocated to the most valuable purposes possible at each stage.
  • The expansion of wood-based bioenergy in the EU has faced criticism from environmental groups, who argue it increases risks of deforestation and biodiversity loss, particularly regarding wood pellets supplied from the southeastern United States.
  • The European forest industry argues that financial incentives for bioenergy divert wood products, such as sawmill residues and low-quality roundwood, away from industrial utilization, creating an uneven playing field between material and energy use.
  • Cascading has been integrated into several EU policy frameworks since 2012, including the EU Bioeconomy Strategy, the EU Forest Strategy, the EU Circular Economy package, and the directive on indirect land use change (iLUC).
  • The 'designated eligibility' approach to implementing cascading—either by specifying eligible wood assortments in law or deciding on a case-by-case basis—is problematic because it shifts resource allocation power from open markets to restricted interest groups and ignores market and cost structures.

Cite the original document

APA
Olsson, O. (2017). Cascading of woody biomass: The tricky path from principle to policy to practice. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2017-Cascading-woody-biomass.pdf
Chicago
Olsson, Olle. Cascading of woody biomass: The tricky path from principle to policy to practice. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2017. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2017-Cascading-woody-biomass.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Olsson |first1=Olle |title=Cascading of woody biomass: The tricky path from principle to policy to practice |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=2017 |url=https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2017-Cascading-woody-biomass.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{olsson2017cascading, author = {Olsson, Olle}, title = {{Cascading of woody biomass: The tricky path from principle to policy to practice}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2017}, url = {https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2017-Cascading-woody-biomass.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated