This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.

Dr. Nicolas Befort
Department of Finance, Neoma Business School, Reims, France

Basic Info

Basic Info is private.

Research Keywords & Expertise

0 Institutions
0 bioeconomy
0 ecological economics
0 innovation economics
0 Economics of the ecological transition

Honors and Awards

The user has no records in this section


Career Timeline

The user has no records in this section.


Short Biography

The user biography is not available.
Following
Followers
Co Authors
The list of users this user is following is empty.
Following: 0 users

Feed

Journal article
Published: 23 October 2020 in Ecological Economics
Reads 0
Downloads 0

This paper introduces the difference between “drop-in innovation” and “functional innovation”. The former aims to maintain the existing paradigm, while the latter aims to fulfill equivalent functionalities favouring low-tech and degrowth options, instead of promising sustainability without changes thanks to technological change. Moving beyond the debate regarding the nature of eco-innovations, a social ecological economics of eco-innovation promises is developed to determine the potential contribution of eco-innovations to the transition towards a post-growth economy. This framework is applied to the case of bioplastics showing how they may depart from the productivism paradigm.

ACS Style

N. Befort. The promises of drop-in vs. functional innovations: The case of bioplastics. Ecological Economics 2020, 181, 106886 .

AMA Style

N. Befort. The promises of drop-in vs. functional innovations: The case of bioplastics. Ecological Economics. 2020; 181 ():106886.

Chicago/Turabian Style

N. Befort. 2020. "The promises of drop-in vs. functional innovations: The case of bioplastics." Ecological Economics 181, no. : 106886.

Journal article
Published: 01 July 2020 in Natures Sciences Sociétés
Reads 0
Downloads 0

La définition d’une bioéconomie fondée sur l’usage des ressources renouvelables passe aujourd’hui par un intense travail institutionnel de construction de « visions du futur ». Elles portent sur la problématisation des formes de l’industrie envisagée, de ses rapports au « reste du monde » et sur la régulation du changement. Elles sont des grands récits à vocation performative portant sur les promesses technico-économiques et la nécessité de participer à d’inévitables ruptures schumpétériennes. Une façon de les discuter est d’explorer dans l’Histoire des moments identiques. Nous en avons retenu deux : (1) Les années 1920-1930 aux États-Unis, où certains acteurs s’allient pour donner naissance à une chemurgy créant des produits industriels sur substrat agricole. (2) Les années 1976-1980, où la crise de la chimie à base de pétrole conduit à envisager un renouveau à partir d’une chimie des sucres.

ACS Style

Nicolas Béfort; Martino Nieddu. Bioéconomie : un retour historique sur deux problématisations de l’usage des ressources renouvelables. Natures Sciences Sociétés 2020, 28, 216 -225.

AMA Style

Nicolas Béfort, Martino Nieddu. Bioéconomie : un retour historique sur deux problématisations de l’usage des ressources renouvelables. Natures Sciences Sociétés. 2020; 28 (3-4):216-225.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nicolas Béfort; Martino Nieddu. 2020. "Bioéconomie : un retour historique sur deux problématisations de l’usage des ressources renouvelables." Natures Sciences Sociétés 28, no. 3-4: 216-225.

Journal article
Published: 24 January 2020 in Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The bioeconomy is steadily becoming more important to regional, national and European public policy. As it encompasses the transformation of agricultural, marine and organic resources into food, feed, fuels, energy and materials, the bioeconomy should become a major new industry replacing oil-based products. However, policymakers take two main approaches to developing the bioeconomy. The first, biotech-oriented approach depicts the bioeconomy as a biotechnology subsector. The second, biomass-oriented approach (i) considers biomass transformation as its starting point, (ii) raises the issue of bioeconomy sustainability, and (iii) considers biotechnology as just one of many transformation technologies. The growing literature on defining the bioeconomy has not yet covered the articulation between biotechnology and bioeconomy. This paper fills this critical gap and provides policy recommendations depending on whether the goal is to develop biotechnology or to contribute to green growth and sustainability.

ACS Style

N. Befort. Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2020, 153, 119923 .

AMA Style

N. Befort. Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2020; 153 ():119923.

Chicago/Turabian Style

N. Befort. 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 153, no. : 119923.

Journal article
Published: 01 October 2019 in Natures Sciences Sociétés
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The bioeconomy is under tension regarding its function: a transition lever based on an in-depth transformation of its production modes regarding the use of renewable resources, or a possibly green growth lever in maintained modes of production. This contribution to the debate identifies three leads to develop bioeconomy as means of organizing the sustainable transition to sustainable production modes through a renewed approach to territories, new relations regarding the exploitation of nature, and the development of new knowledge bases under sustainability constraints.

ACS Style

Nicolas Béfort; Florence De Fouchécour; Aliénor De Rouffignac; Christopher A. Holt; Margot Leclère; Teddy Loth; Roman Moscoviz; Florian Pion; Jean-François Ruault; Marina Thierry. Toward a European bioeconomic transition: is a soft shift enough to challenge hard socio-ecological issues? Natures Sciences Sociétés 2019, 27, 438 -444.

AMA Style

Nicolas Béfort, Florence De Fouchécour, Aliénor De Rouffignac, Christopher A. Holt, Margot Leclère, Teddy Loth, Roman Moscoviz, Florian Pion, Jean-François Ruault, Marina Thierry. Toward a European bioeconomic transition: is a soft shift enough to challenge hard socio-ecological issues? Natures Sciences Sociétés. 2019; 27 (4):438-444.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nicolas Béfort; Florence De Fouchécour; Aliénor De Rouffignac; Christopher A. Holt; Margot Leclère; Teddy Loth; Roman Moscoviz; Florian Pion; Jean-François Ruault; Marina Thierry. 2019. "Toward a European bioeconomic transition: is a soft shift enough to challenge hard socio-ecological issues?" Natures Sciences Sociétés 27, no. 4: 438-444.

Journal article
Published: 24 December 2017 in Revue de la régulation
Reads 0
Downloads 0

La transition vers l’usage de ressources renouvelables en remplacement du pétrole met en jeu des régimes de production dans lesquels des acteurs cherchent à utiliser la contestation de certains produits chimiques dangereux comme opportunité de développement. Nous proposons d’étudier le cas des formaldéhydes, un produit historique de la chimie présent massivement dans les résines et adhésifs.

ACS Style

Nicolas Béfort. Régulation, verrous technologiques et transition écologique : le cas des formaldéhydes. Revue de la régulation 2017, 1 .

AMA Style

Nicolas Béfort. Régulation, verrous technologiques et transition écologique : le cas des formaldéhydes. Revue de la régulation. 2017; (22):1.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nicolas Béfort. 2017. "Régulation, verrous technologiques et transition écologique : le cas des formaldéhydes." Revue de la régulation , no. 22: 1.