The 21st century has seen a surge in concern regarding climate change, biodiversity degradation, and environmental pollution. This urgent need for action is coupled with a continuing imperative to increase food security and rural development. Various stakeholders’ relative importance to these concerns varies, and the development of integrated efforts gave rise to important concepts. One is Climate-Smart Agriculture, which emphasizes developing practices and policies to enhance adaptation and mitigation of climate change, a major priority for the Global North. It also emphasizes smart measures to improve productivity and reduce poverty, a priority of the Global South. The challenge of replacing non-renewable energy and resources with renewable resources, particularly reducing dependence and more effectively managing fossil fuels, gave rise to the concept of bioeconomy, which encompasses all economic activities derived from the production and consumption of biological goods and services. This approach leverages modern life and information technology sciences to optimize resource use while fostering rural development through new markets and innovations. Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries are important parts of the bioeconomy, but their range of output increases beyond food and fibers to include energy, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and carbon sequestration, among others. Finally, the concern about accumulating pollution gave rise to the notion of circularity, where residue products of production activities are reduced, recycled, and reused.
A smart Climate Circular Bioeconomy (CCB) integrates these concepts into policy frameworks that address key priorities in environmental sustainability and natural resources management. Several governments, such as the U.S. and the EU, have developed comprehensive biotechnology programs. The U.S. National Science Foundation has called for the establishment of bioeconomy research centers to address “one or more global challenges identified by the scientific community.” The circular bioeconomy is a major theme for future research and development funding by NSF. Even the World Economic Forum views the bioeconomy as necessary “for jobs, biodiversity and prosperity.”Given these institutional trends, CCB presents a significant opportunity for development on the Berkeley campus. The campus’s interdisciplinary strengths in agriculture, engineering, environmental sciences, and economics, combined with its proximity to California’s diverse agricultural regions and innovative biotechnology sector, position UC Berkeley to become a leader in this critical field.
CCB is a multidisciplinary effort, and to be successful, it needs to break a lot of the silos between schools and disciplines. It requires managing crops as feedstock to produce food, chemicals, medicines, and other products. This requires innovations in crop science, forestry, and other natural resource management disciplines, as well as biotechnology and nutrition, that are part of the Rausser College of Natural Resources (RCNR). More precise harvesting of feedstock and the conversion of residues to final products, with emphasis on circularity, pollution reduction, and environmental stewardship can benefit from the capacity of the colleges of engineering and chemistry. Building the bioeconomy sector will require modifying and designing supply chains and developing new institutions and policy arrangements, which can involve the social sciences, including RCNR, the Haas School of Business, and the Goldman School of Public Policy.
The strengths of Berkeley in the life sciences and public health can support developing new capabilities to enhance food security, utilizing food resources, and new knowledge about bioeconomy opportunities in oceans and extreme environments. Berkeley’s transdisciplinary strengths in the atmospheric and energy sciences across multiple departments could develop new capabilities of the bioeconomy to address the challenges of adaptation and mitigation to climate change. The Energy and Bioscience Institute is especially well-suited to coordinate multidisciplinary efforts in the CCB area, and the Innovative Genomics Institute can lead biotechnology efforts to develop new capabilities of natural resources to address climate change challenges and provide organisms with new traits essential for the bioeconomy. As Berkeley continues to foster entrepreneurship and innovation at the intersection of public research and private enterprise, the successful Bakar BioEnginuity Hub and the newly introduced Bakar ClimateEnginuity Hub provide crucial platforms for translating academic discoveries into commercial applications while facilitating partnerships between university researchers, industry leaders, and entrepreneurs in renewable energy and clean technology sectors.
Building the CCB also requires growing human capital and training professionals, which can lead to modifying educational programs, establishing new professional degree programs, and expanding extension programs. Berkeley should continue to approach the private sector and government, and especially donors, with a proposal to become a center for CCB research and outreach. The Richmond Station holds the potential to become an innovation center emphasizing the Climate Smart Circular Bioeconomy, where we have space to develop new initiatives, frequently with partners in the private sector, hold training activities, develop programs in aquaculture and marine bioecology, and experiment with new biotechnology machinery and products, including medicines and fuel. The CCB provides us with new opportunities, and we should pursue them.
Thanks to Gordon Rausser for his great insights.
