The European Commission defines Bioeconomy as “delivering sustainable solutions based on biological resources”. Bioeconomy is an economic model centered on biomass utilization and cross-sectoral biotechnology applications. The conversion of biomass into products takes place in biorefineries. Bio-based economy and bioeconomy are often used interchangeably, although bioeconomy is the broader concept referring to entire economic system based on biological resources, while biobased economy focuses on replacing fossil resources with biological or renewable ones. The term “bioeconomy” has been around for over 50 years but has only gained momentum lately.
To clarify: the production of monoclonal antibodies, antibiotics, vitamins, as well as food, feed, and flavor and fragrance products via bioprocesses can all be considered “biobased,” since they rely on sugars and nutrients derived from plants or other biological sources for production. However, within the scope of the planned special issue of CHIMIA, the term is used more narrowly: the focus is on primary biobased raw materials such as wood and agricultural products that can serve as direct alternatives to fossil-based resources.
In the era before automobiles, feeding horses required nearly as much farmland as feeding people. Managing horse manure was a serious urban problem in cities such as Paris or London, even though only the wealthy owned horses. Today, the scale of resource use is vastly different: the world consumes close to 100 million barrels of oil every day. Instead of manure accumulating in city streets, it is now CO₂ emissions affecting the global climate that pose the major challenge. In this sense, the current fossil-based economy is increasingly seen as unsustainable. While there are multiple options to replace fossil resources in the energy sector including energy efficiency, renewable energy (biomass, wind, photovoltaics), hydropower, nuclear power or geothermal energy, the situation is more complex when it comes to replacing fossil carbon as a material basis for chemicals and materials.
Apart from recycling, only two fundamental alternatives exist: biomass and captured CO₂ as carbon feedstocks (CO₂ as a resource: SATW forum sheds light on ways to defossilise industry).
The primary sector, encompassing agriculture, silviculture, and aquaculture, serves as the backbone of a bioeconomy. However, in the past fifty years, the global amount of arable land per capita has declined by approximately 20%. In Switzerland, the Federal Statistical Office reported that between 1985 and 2018, agricultural land decreased by an area nearly twice the size of Lake Geneva. Additionally, while around 5 million cubic meters of timber are harvested annually, Switzerland’s wood consumption, at 11.2 million cubic meters, surpasses even the country’s annual regrowth. Although more wood grows back in Swiss forests than is harvested, the overall mass balance remains negative as domestic production cannot meet national demand.
The biomass sources with the greatest sustainable potential in Switzerland are wood biomass and animal manure, yet numbers indicate that ensuring a secure supply of raw materials for a bioeconomy is extremely challenging on a global scale, and probably impossible in Switzerland (read more: Does Switzerland need a bioeconomy strategy?), except for certain specialized materials. Consequently, it is unsurprising that Switzerland has not developed a national bioeconomy strategy, as the necessary biobased raw materials are largely unavailable.
What seems more feasible is a “tactical” approach, one that targets specific opportunities where Switzerland can either contribute to solving global challenges or leverage its domestic resources to develop high-value, specialized products. In this context, it is unsurprising that the proposal for a fossil-free industrial system in the Basel area (read more: BSS Volkswirtschaftliche Beratung) is based on a regional CO₂, H₂, O₂ cycle, where CO₂ rather than biomass is used as a primary raw material. Although a significant portion of bio-based waste is currently used for biogas production, the upcycling of agricultural waste and food industry side-streams is gaining momentum and proving to be increasingly economically viable.
Until about two centuries ago, Switzerland’s economy was largely self-sufficient, relying primarily on biobased raw materials. This began to change with the advent of fossil resources, which gradually replaced renewable inputs. Today, the daily Swiss oil consumption alone would correspond to a continuous line of barrels of oil stretching from Sion to Montreux. Around 15% of this fossil oil is used as a feedstock in the chemical industry, while the vast majority is consumed for energy. Nevertheless, a small number of companies continued to rely on biobased raw materials until relatively recently.
Cellulose Attisholz AG. For example, Cellulose Attisholz AG in Luterbach (SO) processed about 15% of the total amount of wood harvested in Switzerland until 2008. The plant though was closed in 2008 by its then-owner, the Norwegian company Borregaard and the site taken over by Biogen for the construction of a new facility for biopharmaceuticals.
HOVAG. Holzverzuckerungs AG renamed Emser Werke AG in 1960, was founded in 1936 to produce ethanol from wood, by acid hydrolysis of the wood to sugar, which in turn was used for an ethanol fermentation process (Scholler process). In Ems, 35,000 tons of glucose were produced annually from wood using the Scholler process until 1960.
Clariant. The Swiss chemical company Clariant has been operating a demonstration plant in Straubing (Germany) and an industrial plant in Craiova (Romania) for cellulosic ethanol. But the company has recently abandoned these activities.
Solvents, chemical building blocks, or biofuels derived from wood can hardly be produced sustainably in Switzerland and, above all, do not make economic sense. When considering a bioeconomy, the focus is on high-value molecules, for example as fragrances and flavorings, produced in small volumes. But here a examples of “biobased” companies active in such niches.
AVA Biochem AG developed a bio-based platform chemical 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (5-HMF).
Bloom biorenewables SA develops technologies for converting lignin and hemicellulose from wood and agricultural byproducts such as straw into high-quality chemicals.
Seprify formerly known as Impossible Materials developpes a cellulose-based white pigment as a sustainable alternative to titanium dioxide.
Weidmann Fiber Technology produces microfibrillated cellulose (MFC) made from wood, which can replace plastics in paints, cosmetics, and packaging. The company focuses on the use of wood fibers as a raw material source.
Tanovis develops products from advanced binders and coatings to bioactives and nutraceuticals using lignin as a sustainable raw material.
Switzerland possesses a strong chemical and pharmaceutical sector, backed by decades of expertise in biosynthesis, biocatalysis, and biotechnological process engineering, an important asset for developing viable bio-based business models. However, as noted above, the country’s domestic supply of agricultural and forestry raw materials is very limited. This constraint seems to highlight two main areas of opportunity:
As in any system, there are exceptions. According to the magazine Schweizer Bauer, Red Bull has become the leading buyer of subsidized Swiss sugar. This raises the question of whether more appropriate, and above all more value-generating alternatives for this subsidized resource could be identified.
A special issue of CHIMIA, provisionally entitled “What Could Bioeconomy Mean for Switzerland?”, is planned for publication in September 2027. This issue will examine the economic, ecological, and societal drivers shaping the transition from fossil-based to bio-based systems, and explore how the bioeconomy could support rural development, strengthen economic resilience, and foster innovation in Switzerland.
Key questions to be addressed include: What are Switzerland’s comparative advantages and unique value propositions within the bioeconomy? In which areas could the country make particularly meaningful contributions or even assume a leading role? What can realistically be produced domestically and what cannot? Which sectors appear most promising, and what strategic priorities and development pathways should be pursued?
If you are interested in contributing to CHIMIA Issue No. 9 (2027), please feel free to contact me or my colleagues of the editorial team, Michael Studer (BFH) Michael.studer1@bfh.ch and Roland Wohlgemuth (SKB) roland.wohlgemuth@sk-biotechnologie.ch.
Hans-Peter Meyer, SATW, Head Scientific Advisory Board SATW hanspeter.meyer@satw.ch
| Role | Title + Name |
|---|---|
| Text by | Hans-Peter Meyer |
| Team members | Michael Studer, Roland Wohlgemuth |
