Countries are forced to develop bio-based economic strategies to promote efficient use of renewable natural resources. The transition towards a sustainable forest bio-based economy is associated with resource efficiency optimization, adoption of innovative bio-based approaches in terms of technological improvements and cost effectiveness, and an opportunity to reach multiple societal challenges. This paper is focused on a comparative analysis of the forestry sector in the Republic of Bulgaria and the Slovak Republic by estimating the economic efficiency of four Bulgarian state-owned forest enterprises and four Slovak forest enterprises. The evaluation of economic efficiency was carried out using selected indicators of the studied enterprises over a period of five years. A data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach was used as a non-parametric linear technique for measuring the relative efficiency of a set of production decision-making units (DMUs). The Malmquist productivity index (MPI) was used to assess the pure efficiency changes (PEC) and technological changes (TCs) of the studied forest enterprises. Data for 2014–2018 were processed. The results obtained for the economic efficiency study outlined the major factors affecting the differences in efficiency scores. The long-term sustainability and increased economic efficiency of forest enterprises in both countries can be achieved by improvements in forest management and investments in research and development activities.

This article provides useful information for universities offering forestry programs and facing the growing demand for bioeconomy education. An explorative survey on bioeconomy perception among 1400 students enrolled in 29 universities across nine European countries offering forestry programs was performed. The data have been elaborated via descriptive statistics and cluster analysis. Around 70% of respondents have heard about the bioeconomy, mainly through university courses. Students perceive forestry as the most important sector for bioeconomy; however, the extent of perceived importance of forestry varies between countries, most significantly across groups of countries along a North–South European axis. Although differences across bachelor and master programs are less pronounced, they shed light on how bioeconomy is addressed by university programs and the level of student satisfaction with this. These differences and particularities are relevant for potential development routes towards comprehensive bioeconomy curricula at European forestry universities with a forestry focus.

Research background: The European Union has laid the foundations of European bioeconomy by publishing Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe in 2012 and A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment in 2018. These publications have inspired individual countries to develop their national bioeconomy strategy.Purpose of the article: The lack of engagement in the area of bioeconomy appears to be a problem, as individual national strategies differ vastly amongst the countries. For successful bioeconomy development, there is a need to identify and address the differences in these strategies. That is why, we aim our attention at comparing European and Slovak bioeconomy legislative and at analysing to what extent have Slovak legislative implemented aspects of the European legislative.Methods: The methodology of this study relies on document analysis of officially adopted policy strategies and roadmaps in the EU and Slovak Republic. The paper aims at defining the concept of bioeconomy, its relevance for the society and identifying the differences in European and Slovak strategic documents.Findings & Value added: Since Slovakia is a part of EU, it largely transmits the key areas of EU strategies to its own national strategy. Nevertheless, while comparing strategic documents on the two levels, disparities can be find resulting from specific prerequisites, economic situation and other circumstances. The main difference being the extend to what bioeconomy is addressed. While EU places a great importance to this concept, Slovakia does not aim as much attention to it.