For the past year, I have written about the importance of building a global bioeconomy hub at Berkeley. This week, we take an important step in that direction.
On March 4–5, Berkeley will host the Berkeley Bioeconomy Conference, bringing together participants from across the United States and around the world. This is not Berkeley’s first engagement with the bioeconomy. Over the years, the Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI) and others have organized events highlighting how advances in biology and related sciences can address climate change, energy independence, food security, and rural development. But today, momentum is stronger and more coordinated than ever.
In the past three years, support for a comprehensive bioeconomy initiative has grown significantly. We have launched the International Bioeconomy & Macroalgae Center (IBMC) and strengthened programs in forestry, biotechnology, waste management, biofuels, and circular systems. We have deepened collaboration with partners in California’s Central Valley and internationally. The upcoming conference builds on this foundation.
We are fortunate to have strong participation from campus leadership—including the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, and several deans—as well as state and national policymakers, including the Secretary of Natural Resources and the Undersecretary of Agriculture. Leaders who have held senior positions in the United States and European Union will join us, alongside distinguished scholars, entrepreneurs, and industry representatives. This mix of research, policy, and enterprise reflects what the bioeconomy requires: integration.
The conference begins by highlighting major research advances that form the intellectual backbone of the bioeconomy. First, biotechnology is expanding the productivity and resilience of biological systems. Researchers are enhancing photosynthesis, controlling plant diseases, engineering improved algae strains, and developing more resilient and productive trees. Second, innovations in feedstock processing allow biomass to be transformed into multiple high-value outputs—fuels, bioplastics, chemicals, advanced materials, and more. Integrated biorefineries exemplify this systems approach. Third, circular systems are reducing waste while generating value. Wood residues can become biofuels or biochar. Animal waste can be converted into protein and soil amendments. Macroalgae can be used to produce food, fuels, biomaterials, and biostimulants. These innovations demonstrate that the bioeconomy is not simply about replacing fossil resources; it is about redesigning production systems to be regenerative and efficient.
Importantly, the bioeconomy extends beyond biology. It depends on chemistry, artificial intelligence, mechanical engineering, forestry, urban planning, economics, and public policy. Technological innovation alone is insufficient. We also need institutions, incentives, financing mechanisms, and regulatory frameworks that support carbon sequestration, pollution reduction, entrepreneurship, and workforce development.
Berkeley is uniquely positioned to lead. But leadership requires commitment. We must train students across disciplines in bioeconomy systems thinking. We need faculty expertise spanning life sciences, engineering, economics, public policy, and supply chain analysis. We need facilities that enable experimentation, prototyping, and scaling.
A cross-campus major—or at least a minor—in bioeconomy studies would be a transformative step. Such a program would prepare students to think across the entire supply chain: from scientific discovery to feedstock production, to processing and product design, to waste recycling and circularity. Graduates would be trained in life-cycle analysis, technology adoption, regulation, market design, and decision science. Over time, one or more dedicated Ph.D. programs could further establish bioeconomy as a coherent academic field.
Infrastructure is equally important. Expanding facilities at the Richmond Field Station could anchor marine and blue bioeconomy activities, support circular materials research, and advance next-generation forest products. Physical space signals institutional seriousness.
The bioeconomy will not emerge from ideas alone—it requires action on the ground. At the conference, we will hear from scholars and practitioners building bioeconomy ecosystems in California’s Central Valley, elsewhere in the United States, and internationally. We will discuss extension systems, public–private partnerships, workforce development, and demonstration projects. We will examine how California, the United States, the European Union, and Canada are designing bioeconomy strategies and financial support mechanisms.
Just as importantly, we will explore the need for global intellectual collaboration. The bioeconomy is inherently international—its supply chains, environmental benefits, and policy challenges cross borders. Berkeley can play a central role in shaping global dialogue and standards.
This conference is a beginning, not an endpoint. There is enthusiasm and there is institutional support. I am confident the workshop will catalyze new campus initiatives. But ambition must be matched with resources. We will need sustained funding—from public agencies, private donors, and industry partners. Securing these resources requires clarity of mission, strategic planning, and a shared commitment. Berkeley’s efforts should also inspire replication elsewhere. A global bioeconomy will not be built by a single campus, but Berkeley can help define its intellectual architecture and operational blueprint.
This week’s conference is one step forward. If we align our research excellence, educational mission, institutional design, and policy engagement, Berkeley can become a true global hub—advancing the bioeconomy not only as an academic field, but as a practical pathway toward decarbonization, resilience, and inclusive growth.