This study conducts a review of the current practices of bioeconomy education and training in the EU; as well as the associated methodologies; techniques and approaches. In recent years; considerable efforts have been made towards developing appropriate bioeconomy education and training programs in order to support a transition towards a circular bioeconomy. This review separates bioeconomy education approaches along: higher education and academic approaches, vocational education and training (VET) and practical approaches, short-term training and education approaches, and other approaches. A range of training methodologies and techniques and pedagogical approaches are identified. The main commonalities found amongst these approaches are that they are generally problem based and interdisciplinary, and combine academic and experiential. Higher education approaches are generally based on traditional lecture/campus-based formats with some experiential approaches integrated. In contrast, VET approaches often combine academic and practical learning methods while focusing on developing practical skills. A range of short-term courses and other approaches to bioeconomy education are also reviewed.

As the European Union advances its bioeconomy strategy, the agricultural sector emerges as a key domain requiring targeted upskilling in digital and entrepreneurial competencies. This study examines how agricultural professionals perceive the importance of these competencies and identifies related training needs, drawing on the European Commission’s Digital Competence Framework (DigComp) and Entrepreneurship Competence Framework (EntreComp). Using a quantitative survey methodology, data were collected from 140 respondents, including farmers, agronomists, consultants, entrepreneurs, and policymakers, in four European countries: Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Sweden. Descriptive and non-parametric analyses (Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis tests) revealed strong recognition of digital competencies across all groups, with significant variation by country, while perceptions of entrepreneurial competencies differed mainly by professional role. Moreover, a significant lack of formal bioeconomy-related education was identified. The findings underscore the need for targeted, competence-based education and policy interventions to equip professionals with the skills required for a sustainable and innovation-driven agricultural sector.

This study presents a review of the current state of the European Bioeconomy, presenting key concepts, bioeconomy figures, relevant policies and biomass flows and discusses the transition to a circular bioeconomy. This review illustrates that the EU bioeconomy is currently interpreted in a broad and inclusive way covering all sectors and systems that rely on biological resources including large thematic sectors including the food and agriculture, forestry, bioenergy, biomaterials and aquatic sectors. Based on this definition, our analysis illustrates that the EU bioeconomy remains largely based on linear production systems and is currently dominated by the food and agriculture sectors but also, that important initiatives towards circularity exist throughout the biobased economy, especially in the biobased industry sectors. Based on this the article argues that framing and developing the bioeconomy through a narrower conceptual framework based on circular principles is appropriate and supports the attainment of the EU’s medium- and long-term sustainability goals. We discuss the importance of sustainable feedstocks, small scale biobased solutions, biobased industries and biorefineries in such a circular bioeconomy framework.

The bioeconomy is a key pillar of the European Green Deal, yet its implementation remains constrained by entrenched linear value chains, fragmented logistics systems, and regulatory uncertainty. This paper examines how practitioners across Europe envision circular bioeconomy transitions, drawing on evidence from 43 harmonised multi-actor workshops conducted in 14 countries with 1,078 participants from primary production, processing industries, technology provision, public authorities, and civil society. Using a structured participatory canvas and comparative thematic analysis, we analyse how stakeholders redesign existing value chains, which innovation pathways they prioritise, and which barriers they encounter in practice. Across agriculture, forestry, aquatic systems and bio-based industries, stakeholders consistently shift the focus from expanding biomass production toward improving the use of existing residues and side-streams. Dominant innovation pathways include residue valorisation, nutrient and water recycling, integrated bioenergy systems, and emerging biomaterials. At the same time, four interlinked barrier domains recur across countries and sectors: high and uncertain costs, immature or inaccessible technologies, weak feedstock logistics and pre-treatment infrastructure, and misaligned or unclear regulatory frameworks—most notably around waste and by-product classification. By providing one of the most extensive cross-country, practitioner-led analyses of circular bioeconomy value chains to date, the study offers granular evidence on how regulatory ambiguity, infrastructure gaps and investment risk constrain implementation on the ground. The findings point to a policy agenda focused on regulatory clarification rather than deregulation, coordinated investment in residue aggregation and pre-treatment infrastructure, and applied context-sensitive research to support scalable circular bio-based solutions.