Evaluation for Establishing a Monitoring System to Reach Sustainability in New York State’s Bioeconomy

Abstract

New York State (NYS) is actively promoting the transition to a bioeconomy to address climate change, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and foster sustainable development. This study aims to evaluate the potential of NYS’s bioeconomy, as outlined in the scoping plan guided by the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), in achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. The primary objectives are to assess the bioeconomy’s role in meeting climate targets by quantifying its contributions to GHG mitigation and renewable energy integration and to propose a robust monitoring framework for tracking progress. The study also examines the socioeconomic benefits of bioeconomy initiatives, particularly for disadvantaged communities (DACs), and identifies key dimensions and indicators for sustainability monitoring. The hypothesis tested posits that an integrated bioeconomy strategy can simultaneously address environmental, social, and economic goals. Findings reveal that while biomass resources offer significant opportunities for GHG mitigation and economic growth, challenges remain in feedstock estimation, deployment readiness, and stakeholder coordination. A comprehensive monitoring framework is proposed to guide policy decisions and ensure alignment with sustainability objectives. This research provides actionable insights to advance NYS’s bioeconomy, emphasizing inclusivity, environmental stewardship, and resilience.

1. Introduction

According to the New York State (NYS) Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) [1], fossil fuels are the primary energy source in NYS, accounting for 73% of its primary energy in 2019 and causing 77% of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In 2020, the annual net GHG emissions (20-year GWP, CO₂ eq) were estimated at 382 million metric tons (MMT) from its different economic sectors [2]. Hence, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA; Climate Act) was enacted in 2019 with the goal of lowering GHG emissions and enhancing community resilience. It aims to achieve statewide “net-zero emissions” by 2050, along with a mandated reduction of 40% by 2030 (limit to 245.9 MMT CO₂ eq) and 85% (limit to 61.5 MMT CO₂ eq) from 1990 levels by 2050 [3]. Aligned with the Climate Act, a scoping plan has been created, detailing sector-specific and economy-wide actions based on the goals and requirements [2]. These actions are outlined within four scenarios, interconnecting economic sectors, and providing guidance on how NYS can attain these goals [2]. The actions are primarily focused on achieving carbon neutrality through a substantial reliance on renewable energy such as solar, offshore and onshore wind, hydropower, and low-carbon fuels. Additionally, the plan emphasizes the promotion of a climate-focused bioeconomy and the expansion of markets for bio-based products.

The term “bioeconomy” is continually evolving and varies significantly between countries based on their economies, natural resource availability, and technological advancements [4,5]. It refers to the use of biological materials (feedstocks) as alternatives to fossil-based resources for producing energy, food, feed, fiber, services, and manufactured goods [6]. It transforms bio-based raw materials into value-added products, fostering local job creation and economic development while providing environmental benefits such as climate mitigation, water filtration, wildlife habitat conservation, and recreational opportunities [7,8]. In the United States, the bioeconomy is driven by research and innovation in life sciences and biotechnology, supported by advancements in engineering and information sciences, with the goal of promoting economic growth and enhancing public health and security [9]. Bioeconomy in NYS’s scoping plan emphasizes the use of locally grown, sustainable biomass feedstocks such as forest and agricultural residues, waste, and purpose-grown crops to replace fossil fuel-intensive products, contributing to GHG reductions and aligning with climate and social justice goals [2]. The plan highlights the potential of the bioeconomy to deliver low-carbon products and services, offering significant environmental, social, and health benefits, particularly for disadvantaged communities (DACs), who face disproportionate energy and pollution burdens [10]. To realize these advantages, it is important to establish a framework to measure progress. This would enable policymakers to monitor key targets, identify areas for improvement, and make informed decisions toward building a sustainable bioeconomy, ultimately balancing economic growth with ecological integrity, and synergizing economic and environmental sustainability.

“Sustainability can be viewed as that future state where Earth’s (restored) biogeochemical systems function indefinitely under (decreased) pressures from human socioeconomic demands” [11] (p. 15). It is defined and approached differently by various organizations. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emphasizes the harmonious coexistence of humans and nature to support current and future generations, stressing the dependency of human well-being on the natural environment [12]. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) expands on this, incorporating the need to meet human needs, improve environmental quality, and maintain agricultural viability [13]. The United Nations (UN) defines sustainability as meeting the needs of the present without compromising future generations’ ability to meet theirs [14]. Together, these definitions highlight the interconnectedness of environmental health, human well-being, and economic stability as essential components of sustainability.

Sustainability perspectives range from anthropocentric, where natural and manufactured capital are viewed as interchangeable and reliant on economic growth and technology [15], to ecocentric, which emphasizes the limited substitutability of natural resources and prioritizes environmental protection [16]. An anthropocentric bioeconomy follows a ‘weak sustainability’ model, while an ecocentric bioeconomy reflects ‘strong sustainability’, which is more suitable for policymakers pursuing sustainable strategies. Shaker and Mackay [11] note that economic growth and ecological integrity often counterbalance each other, leading to trade-offs. The bioeconomy, however, offers fertile ground for aligning economic and environmental goals, addressing this inherent tension [11]. In this study, we adopted the definition of sustainability from Shaker et al. [17], which views ‘sustainability’ as humanity’s target goal of achieving human-ecosystem equilibrium (homeostasis), while ‘sustainable development’ is the holistic approach and temporal process leading toward this end goal. Therefore, it is important to include the environmental factors, technical feasibility, economic viability, and social desirability for understanding and measuring bioeconomy sustainability for NYS.

Measuring progress toward sustainability, however, is complex and lacks a standardized approach. There are two primary methods: using multiple indicators to capture economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, or employing a single key index to simplify measurement [18,19]. The composite indices, which aggregate several indicators into a multidimensional view, are used to provide a broader assessment of sustainability conditions [20,21]. Despite the extensive development of these metrics, challenges remain when determining the number of dimensions, selecting the appropriate indicators, addressing scale dependencies, and ensuring accuracy and relevance [21,22,23,24,25,26]. Consequently, innovative approaches that integrate various techniques and dimensions are necessary to improve these vital tools for policy guidance and sustainability monitoring.

Establishing a monitoring system aligned with USA and international standards is imperative for tracking economic, social, and environmental progress toward a sustainable bioeconomy in NYS. However, like many other states, NYS currently lacks a comprehensive monitoring system to evaluate the full range of impacts associated with bioeconomy. This study aims to address key questions related to the bioeconomy as outlined in the New York State (NYS) scoping plan. Specifically, it seeks to clarify the bioeconomy’s definition, identify prioritized biobased systems, and assess its role in reducing GHG emissions to help meet climate targets. Additionally, the study explores the potential socioeconomic benefits of bioeconomy for disadvantaged communities (DACs) and NYS residents while also defining key dimensions and indicators for effectively monitoring bioeconomic progress in the state (Figure S1). Therefore, the research objectives (R.O.) of this study are:

○

R.O.1: Assess the role of the bioeconomy in achieving the climate targets outlined in NYS’s Climate Act by quantifying its potential contributions to GHG mitigation and renewable energy integration.

○

R.O.2: Propose a monitoring framework that provides policymakers with actionable insights, facilitating informed decisions and the strategic implementation of bioeconomy programs.

2. Methods

The research methodology involved a systematic literature review that was centered around four main areas of interest: (1) bioeconomy concepts, definitions, frameworks, strategic roadmaps, and related legislative policies; (2) key metrics and indicators for assessing bioeconomy sustainability; (3) challenges, growth prospects, market readiness, standards, and evaluation tools; and (4) analysis of bioeconomy impacts, innovation trends, and product upgrades. The systematic search was performed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) model [27], which helped in structuring the identification, screening, and inclusion of relevant studies.

The literature search was conducted across multiple electronic databases, including Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, PubMed, and SpringerLink, using the search strings “Bioeconomy”, “Bioeconomy in North America”, “Bioeconomy in USA”, “Bioeconomy in Northeastern Region”, “Bioeconomy monitoring dimensions and indicators”, “Bioeconomy roadmaps”, “Bioeconomy strategy”, “challenges and opportunities for bioeconomy”, “impact of bioeconomy”, market readiness for bioeconomy”, “tools for measuring bioeconomy”, “database for bioeconomy”, and “sustainability in bioeconomy”.

In total, 393 records were identified: 109 from Web of Science, 77 from ScienceDirect, 125 from Google Scholar, 11 from PubMed, and 71 from SpringerLink. After the initial screening based on title and abstract, 105 records were excluded for not aligning with the study’s goals. The remaining 288 records were further filtered to remove 67 duplicates, followed by the exclusion of 43 records due to insufficient data, poor quality, high retrieval costs, language barriers (non-English), or being short editorial communications. “Insufficient data” was defined as a lack of essential quantitative or qualitative information required to meet the study’s objectives, such as missing methodologies or incomplete datasets. “Poor quality” referred to studies that did not meet academic rigor, including non-peer-reviewed articles, those with evident methodological flaws, outdated data, or inconsistent results. Factors such as clarity of research objectives, robustness of data analysis, and critical discussions were also considered. Ultimately, 177 records were included for in-depth analysis (Figure 1).

To evaluate the potential GHG emission reductions from biobased systems with NYS’s bioeconomy, a detailed examination of the NYS scoping plan [2] was conducted using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission factor guidelines [28]. Additionally, the integrated analysis within the scoping plan [29] estimated the health and economic benefits associated with bioeconomic activities using a damages-based approach, following the NYS DEC guidelines. This approach quantified the societal value of avoided damages associated with reduced CO₂ emissions. The calculation began by determining the annual levels of emissions reductions (or emissions avoided) through a comparison of the target scenario to a no-action baseline scenario. The monetary value of CO₂ emission reductions was then derived using the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC), based on reference values outlined in the NYS DEC guidelines [30] using a 2% discount rate of interest.

To describe the process and method applied to assess the NYS’s bioeconomy, available records related to global, U.S.A., and NYS perspectives were examined. The selection of key dimensions and indicators for monitoring the bioeconomy was guided by an analysis of bioeconomy strategies and roadmaps from countries with similar biological resources and economic transition goals. This review encompassed policies aimed at advancing biotechnology, fostering innovation in biobased materials, promoting infrastructure development, building capacity, and establishing strategies for collaboration, supply chain development, market promotion, and commercialization of biobased products.

To consider potential future indicators, the study suggests using the Kendall [31] method (Equation (1)) to determine the coefficient of concordance (W) for each set of indicators, indicating stakeholders’ consistency in their views (Table S1).

$$W={\displaystyle \frac{12\sum _{i=1}^n{\left(r_i-\overline{r}\right)}^2}{N^2\left(n^3-n\right)}}$$

(1)

where N is the number of stakeholders; n is the number of evaluation criteria; $r_i$ is the number of stakeholders points of an indicator; and $\overline{r}$ is the average of group stakeholders.

3. Results

This results section highlights the pivotal role of bioeconomy in achieving the CLCPA objectives, proposing a comprehensive monitoring system for informed decision-making [32]. It covers defining the bioeconomy, evaluating biomass resources in NYS, and assessing benefits from low-carbon fuels, densified fuels, soil amendments, harvested wood products, and bio-based chemicals. The study identifies opportunities and challenges in NYS’s bioeconomy and examines environmental, social, and economic impacts. Emphasizing GHG mitigation and sustainability, the study proposes key monitoring dimensions and indicators, conducts a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of bioeconomy strategies, and develops a monitoring and evaluation framework. Prioritizing these efforts can accelerate progress towards NYS’s climate goals and promote sustainable economic growth and societal well-being.

3.1. New York Bioeconomy: Definition and Strategies

The scoping plan has identified key biomass feedstocks in NYS, including wood and wood processing wastes, agricultural crops and waste materials, organics in municipal solid waste, animal manure, and wastewater treatment byproducts [2] (p. 308). The plan defines bioeconomy as the utilization of these locally grown, sustainable, and renewable feedstocks to manufacture products that can substitute for imported, fossil fuel-intensive items. This strategic approach is designed to contribute significantly to the reduction of GHG emissions, aligning with the climate and social justice requirements outlined in the Climate Act [2] (p. 304).

The bioeconomy definition can be characterized by two essential perspectives. Firstly, it signifies a shift from fossil fuels to low-carbon bio-products, reflecting a commitment to environmental sustainability. Secondly, it underscores a dedication to social justice by emphasizing health benefits through the avoidance of air pollution and the mitigation of GHG emissions. This commitment is particularly directed towards DACs in NYS, aiming to address specific needs and promote equitable access to the benefits of the bioeconomy. The overall objective is to foster a sustainable, locally driven economy that prioritizes both environmental health and social equity (Figure 2).

The scoping plan outlines seven pivotal bioeconomy strategies aimed at mitigating GHG emissions while bolstering carbon sequestration and storage. Additionally, these strategies are intended to foster job creation and boost economic output. The recommended strategies include: (1) AF17: Develop forestry training programs to support expanding workforce and climate knowledge; (2) AF18: Expand markets for sustainably harvested durable wood products; (3) AF19: Develop a sustainable biomass feedstock action plan for bioenergy and low-carbon products; (4) AF20: Increase market access for New York low-carbon products; (5) AF24: Advance deployment of net negative carbon dioxide removal (CDR); (6) AF21: Provide financial and technical assistance for low-carbon product development; and (7) AF22: Advance bio-based products research, development, and demonstration.

Strategies AF17, AF18, AF19, AF20, and AF24 require the identification of sustainable feedstock volumes and production methods, emphasizing NYS’s biomass resources and exploring additional uses for low-carbon product development, with a focus on air quality and health benefits, particularly to DACs. These strategies also recommend utilizing CDR feedstocks such as agricultural waste and energy crops, providing both bioresources and ecosystem services [2] (Table S1). Strategies AF17, AF21, and AF22 suggest strengthening policy initiatives, including research and development, to enhance the bioeconomy and effectively achieve the goals outlined in the Climate Act within the specified timeframe. Considering the strategies, this research has evaluated and identified the potential benefits and impacts linked to the establishment and growth of a biobased economy in NYS.

3.2. Potential Benefits and Impacts of Developing the Biobased Economy in NYS

3.2.1. Biomass Resource Overview in NYS

In 2010, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) published the “Renewable Fuels Roadmap (RFR)” [33], assessing the potential for expanding biofuel production in NYS under three different scenarios. Big Step Forward Pathway, excluding agricultural, feed, and forested lands, projected an annual production of 9.15 million dry tons of feedstock. Giant Leap Forward and Distributed Production Pathways, incorporating agricultural land, estimated an annual production of 14.33 million dry tons of biofuel feedstock. In 2023, the Billion-Ton-Report (BT23) [34] reported that NYS can annually produce 10.9 to 17.4 million dry tons of biomass under four different scenarios. Moreover, the state’s forestland, pasture, grassland, and other shrub and herbaceous lands act as significant carbon pools, providing substantial economic benefits (e.g., carbon tax) and contributing to environmental sustainability [35,36,37].

The USEPA’s RE-Powering America’s Land Initiative program [38] identifies sites with renewable energy potential, revealing that 8.61 million dry tons of biomass resources are annually accessible for utilization in biofuels and bioenergy in NYS. This biomass supply has the potential to produce between 1.33 × 10¹⁴ GJ (126 TBtu) and 2.23 × 10¹⁴ GJ (211 TBtu) of energy per year [34,39] (Figure S2).

3.2.2. Potential Benefits of Biobased System for NYS

The USDA identifies seven major industries in NYS associated with biomass-derived products (excluding food and feed): agriculture and forestry, biorefining, biochemicals, enzymes, bioplastics and packaging, forest products, and textiles [40]. According to the NYS’s Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) [41], these bioeconomy sectors contribute over $13 billion in economic output and $10 billion in economic activity. They directly employ 40,000 individuals and indirectly support 53,000 jobs [42] (Table S2).

This study focuses on four key categories of biobased systems: (1) Low-carbon fuels (biofuels); (2) Densified fuels and soil amendment products; (3) Harvested wood products; and (4) Biochemicals and biomaterials. The forthcoming paragraphs evaluate their benefits, including their potential for mitigating GHG emissions and creating value-added to NYS’s economy.

• Low-carbon fuels (biofuels): The scenarios outlined in the scoping plan encourage the adoption of low-carbon fuels, with projected demand ranging from 9.50 × 10¹³ GJ to 3.64 × 10¹⁴ GJ (90 TBtu to 345 TBtu). According to the Billion-Ton Report 2023, NYS’s potential annual biomass supply could support bioenergy production ranging from 1.33 × 10¹⁴ GJ to 2.51 × 10¹⁴ GJ (126 TBtu to 238 TBtu) (Figure S2). Integrating this bioenergy into the primary energy system could reduce annual emissions by 9.3 to 17.6 MMT of CO₂ equivalent in NYS [43] (Figure S3). These mitigation measures could also result in avoided social costs, estimated at $0.47 to 0.88 billion by 2030 and $1.66 to 3.12 billion by 2050 [29,30].
  In 2022, New York State’s transportation sector consumed approximately 30.94 billion liters (1128.1 TBtu) of liquid fuels, with biodiesel accounting for 0.29 billion liters (10.5 TBtu) of this total [44]. The scoping plan indicates that the reliance on liquid fuels in the transportation sector will decline due to the increasing adoption of electric vehicles. However, a substantial demand for liquid fuels is expected to persist, with projected requirements of 27.5 billion liters (7.26 billion gallons) by 2030 and 22.3 billion liters (5.9 billion gallons) by 2050. Our evaluation of NYS’s ability to produce and utilize renewable diesel as a substitute for fossil fuels shows that the state’s current biomass resources, as detailed in BT2023, could produce between 3.4 and 6.5 billion liters (0.91 and 1.72 billion gallons) of renewable fuels (Figure 3). Given the emission factor for petroleum is 8.78 kg CO₂ eq/gallon [28], and renewable diesel offers a 50% life-cycle emission reduction with renewable diesel offering a 50% life-cycle emission reduction [45], this shift could reduce emissions by 4 to 7.6 MMT of CO₂ equivalent, replacing an equivalent volume of petroleum-based fuels. This transition highlights substantial potential benefits, with estimated savings of $0.20 to $0.42 billion in 2030 and $0.71 to $1.34 billion in 2050 through the reduction of fossil fuel emissions via the adoption of biofuels. The ongoing need and emission reduction potential highlight the importance of low-carbon fuels in supporting the transition to a more sustainable transportation system while addressing future fuel demands.
• Densified fuels and soil amendment products: Low-grade biomass resources, such as forest residues (sawdust, wood chips, barks, and logging residues) and agricultural residues (straws and corn stover), along with energy crops such as willow and warm-season grasses, are potential inputs for producing densified biofuels such as briquettes, wood pellets, and charcoal. These resources also produce soil amendment products such as biochar, offering sustainable alternatives for energy and agricultural practices.
  The NYS wood pellet market is on a steady growth trajectory, with applications ranging from softwood, hardwood, wood mulch, sawdust, and wood chips to BBQ pellets, heating pellets, fire logs, and animal bedding. Currently, eight operational mills collectively produce around 400,000 tons per year [47], with a combined value exceeding $120 million. The state’s low-grade biomass resources also present a valuable opportunity for producing charcoal and biochar, versatile products with applications in enhancing soil carbon sequestration and fertility. Biochar has potential applications in stabilizing soil organic carbon [48], solidification of municipal solid waste incineration fly ash [49], mine land reclamation, gardening, water and wastewater treatment, and even building materials [50]. As of 2021, the biochar and charcoal market in NYS was valued at $7 million [51].
• Harvested wood products: Forest land covers 61% of NYS and annually yields a variety of products, including logs (e.g., saw, veneer, bolt, pallet, scragg logs, and poles) and pulpwood and chips (roundwood and whole-tree-derived fuel, pulp, and panel chips), comprising 76% hardwood and 24% softwood [41,52]. These harvested wood and products not only sustain employment but also significantly contribute to the state’s economy. While the current growth-to-harvest ratio in NYS is 2.8, unsustainable management practices, development and urbanization, pests and diseases, and pressure from invasive plants can result in deforestation, biodiversity loss, and soil degradation, undermining the environmental benefits of bioeconomic strategies [53]. Therefore, the use of sustainable forest management practices is essential so that the benefits associated with harvested wood products are realized.
  In 2019, NYS’s timber harvest totaled 124 million cubic feet, with 517 million board feet from log production and 1.6 million green tons from pulpwood and chips. The state consumed 386 million board feet of logs (89%) and 1.3 million green tons of pulpwood and chips (86%). The remaining production was exported to Canada and neighboring states [52]. From 2001 to 2021, the forest sector, including forestry and logging, solid wood products, pulp and paper, and wood furniture industries, contributed an annual average of $18.1 billion to NYS’s economic growth. This encompassed $6.7 billion in yearly total value added, $5.0 billion annually for total base labor income, and an average of 62,043 jobs provided each year [52,54] (Figure S4).
  Additionally, harvested wood products offer significant potential for reducing embodied carbon emissions, particularly in the buildings sector. In 2019, buildings in NYS accounted for 32% of total carbon emissions, with equipment and foam insulation contributing 14% of these emissions. In contrast, harvested wood products removed 1.51 MMT of CO₂eq [2]. Incorporating engineered wood, such as mass timber construction methods such as Cross Laminated Timber (CLT), glulam, Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL), and Nail Laminated Timber (NLT), offers a carbon displacement benefit ranging from 22% to 69% compared to conventional steel and concrete buildings [55]. As part of the scoping plan, the objective is to retrofit 0.74 billion ft² of exterior building walls in NYS by 2030 and 2.72 billion ft² by 2050. Utilizing wood for this retrofitting effort is projected to create a demand for 7.73 MMT in 2030 and 28.40 MMT in 2050, leading to an embodied carbon reduction of 7.40 MMT by 2030 and 27.19 MMT by 2050 [56].
• Biochemicals and biomaterials: Biomass resources have potential applications in producing biodegradable polymers and chemicals for construction, personal care, and packaging industries. Currently, 96% of the USA’s consumer product manufacturing relies on direct chemical inputs, with only 4% derived from biomass. These biochemicals are utilized in various products such as synthetic rubber, thermoplastics, resins, creams, lotions, synthetic fiber, soap, cosmetics, and ink [57].
  Enzymes from biomass resources play a crucial role in the biofuel industry, contributing to the production of cellulosic ethanol, food and beverage, detergent, animal feed, textiles, paper and pulp, wastewater treatment, and biobased chemicals. The USA’s enzyme market was valued at $3.1 billion in 2021, expected to reach $4.9 billion by 2030 [58].
  Bio-based polymers, or bioplastics, including materials such as wool, gelatin, silk, cellulose, and starch, are used in various sectors, including agriculture, packaging, medical, and textiles [59]. In 2021, only 0.3% of the total annual plastic production in the USA, valued at $2.3 billion [60], was derived from biomass resources. These sectors anticipate a growth of 6–50% in the USA, supporting over 237,000 jobs by 2025 [61].
  NYS has the potential to leverage biomass resources to produce biochemicals and biopolymers, providing more sustainable alternatives to fossil fuel-based feedstocks. Annually, the state generates an average of 6.8 million tons of plastic packaging waste, corresponding to 19.38 MMT of CO₂ eq. emissions [62]. Therefore, biodegradable plastics provide a solution, reducing embodied carbon in the plastic industry and aiding in the state’s decarbonization efforts while also addressing health impacts associated with plastic waste.

3.3. NYS Navigating the Future: Opportunities and Challenges for NYS’s Bioeconomy

Among the strategic scenarios in the NYS’s scoping plan, the low-carbon fuels scenario highlights incorporating the maximum amount of biofuel or renewable fuel production in the hard-to-decarbonize sectors of the economy, reaching 3.32 × 10¹⁴ GJ (315 TBtu) by 2030 and 3.64 × 10¹⁴ GJ (345 TBtu) by 2050 [2,29]. Analysis suggests that producing such levels of low-carbon fuels could mitigate 79 and 137 MMT of CO₂ eq emissions by 2030 and 2050, respectively, offering $3.96 billion to $24.4 billion in social benefits (Figure 4). However, it may not be feasible to produce this entire low-carbon fuel from locally grown biomass, as the annual estimated demand for such production ranges from approximately 25–30 million dry tons [63].

Nevertheless, achieving the target of producing 2.39 × 10¹⁴ GJ (227 TBtu) from biomass in the scoping plan by 2030 [29] seems attainable, given that the estimated biomass supply in the BT23 under the high-mature market scenario is 17.5 million dry tons. This suggests that the targeted volume of biofuels production in a low-carbon fuel scenario is feasible, and the goal of GHG mitigation can be achieved, offering health benefits totaling $3.85 billion by the year 2030.

Furthermore, the EPA’s RE-Powering [38] initiatives have pinpointed 354 potential sites for biopower facility deployment, offering an annual feedstock availability of 4.27 million tons within a 50-mile radius. Additionally, there are 54 potential sites for biorefinery facilities, with the potential for 0.68 million tons of feedstock annually within their 50-mile radius [65,66,67,68] (Figure S5). Moreover, the demand for wood pellets in NYS has markedly increased from 65 million tons in 2010 to 128 million tons in 2021, resulting in a significant value surge from $239 million to $468 million, respectively [51]. Despite this escalating demand, the production of wood pellets in NYS remains comparatively low. Consequently, expanding the wood pellet market in NYS holds substantial potential to contribute significantly to its economy, and these fuels can be used to offset fossil fuels such as heating oil or propane in remote rural areas. Furthermore, mass timber products offer a promising alternative to fossil fuel-intensive materials such as concrete and steel in residential construction. NYS’s 8.3 million housing units across 6.7 billion square feet present a substantial opportunity for integrating wood products [29]. Utilizing these materials has the potential to significantly reduce embodied carbon, provided that required insulation values (R-value) are met, ensuring both energy efficiency and occupant comfort.

In parallel, New York City has identified a new source of material: biosolids totaling 1400 tons per day. Currently, 69% of these biosolids are sent to landfills, and the remaining 31% is either composted or used in abandoned mine reclamation. The cost for landfill disposal is $122 per ton, while land reclamation yields a benefit of $139 per ton. NYC is exploring alternative uses for biosolids, such as converting them into biochar and charcoal through pyrolysis, aligning with the city’s goal of ending landfill use by 2030 [69].

The recommended biobased products delineated in the scoping plan (Table S3) have predominantly undergone successful full-scale implementation in both NYS and various other states across the USA [70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107] (Table S4). This indicates that these technologies have demonstrated their effectiveness through implementation at operational scales, affirming their readiness for widespread commercial deployment.

3.4. Impacts of Implementing Sustainability in NYS’s Bioeconomy

Bioeconomy encompasses social, economic, and environmental aspects while promoting sustainable development. Integrating sustainability into policymaking is challenging, as it requires balancing social and environmental considerations, evident in debates over how to use land [108]. In NYS, bioeconomy initiatives must align with U.S. and international sustainability principles, ensuring that potential impacts are carefully evaluated to uphold sustainability and social justice. Our study examines sustainability from environmental, economic, and social perspectives, interpreted through both anthropocentric and ecocentric orientations, to ensure that the framework aligns with the sustainability principles of NYS, the U.S., and the global community.

3.4.1. Environmental Dimension

Global bioenergy targets anticipate a significant rise in biomass feedstock demand, potentially necessitating extensive land expansion used for biomass production [109]. This expansion, estimated at 80 million hectares, raises concerns about deforestation [110], soil depletion [111], ecosystem health [111], as well as water consumption and diminishing water quality [112]. Consequently, NYS must prudently choose feedstock supply lands to mitigate these concerning issues and avoid adverse impacts. Biofuel and bioenergy production is water-intensive, and the associated processes may lead to contamination risks [113]. The construction of new biorefineries can contribute to air pollution, primarily through the release of particulate matter during biomass harvesting and grinding. Noise pollution is another concern, particularly during the pretreatment process. Additionally, biorefineries are a source of GHG emissions stemming from agricultural inputs, management practices, and land-use changes related to biomass production. The chemical release during processing is another potential environmental impact [114]. The establishment of new biorefineries and their associated supply chains should assess and minimize these potential impacts.

To mitigate these issues, ensuring efficient water recycling—by removing salts and organics—and co-locating biorefineries with other industries can help minimize wastewater production [115]. Furthermore, NYS must carefully assess biorefinery locations to avoid excessive water resource stress and prevent negative environmental consequences.

Biodiversity conservation is crucial, demanding endeavors to bolster protected areas, particularly in regions designated for biofuel crop cultivation [116]. Traditional first-generation biofuels have been associated with declines in both vertebrate abundance and plant species richness [113]. To mitigate these impacts, NYS can implement spatial filters to restrict losses (ranging from 54% to 45%) by assessing cultivated areas against protected zones and ecological corridors [114]. Additionally, NYS must prioritize the consideration of biodiversity value by selecting agriculturally marginal land for biomass growth and having more of a focus on perennial purpose-grown crops, which support biodiversity [117].

3.4.2. Social Dimension

The integration of bioeconomy must safeguard societal well-being, encompassing health, safety, labor rights, and cultural diversity. As global population growth escalates food demand, expanding biomass cultivation for energy fuels raises concerns about food security [118]. NYS must carefully allocate lands for biomass production without encroaching on areas crucial for food cultivation to maintain this balance. Moreover, constructing biofuel and bioenergy plants in rural areas presents challenges such as lacking infrastructure [119]. Therefore, NYS should identify cost-effective and socially and environmentally viable locations for establishing biofuels and biorefinery plants.

Biomass feedstock cultivation offers economic benefits to rural areas through positive employment effects and feedstock sales [120]. However, large-scale cultivation may cause land use changes, including forest clearing, synthetic fertilizer use, and air pollutants from plants, leading to adverse health impacts. Thus, it is vital for NYS to monitor these activities to ensure that human health and other societal well-being are not compromised by bioenergy plants. Furthermore, limited information, training, and outreach efforts constrain the growth of biobased systems due to the lack of a skilled workforce [95]. For example, adoption challenges in CLT include a lack of experience and training [88]. Therefore, NYS needs to enhance policies that promote training to generate a skilled workforce capable of successfully implementing the bioeconomy.

3.4.3. Economic Dimension

Transitioning to a bioeconomy faces hurdles such as regulatory challenges and high production costs, hindering market expansion [82]. Challenges in securing cost-effective feedstock supply involve collection, transportation, and treatment [121]. Dealing with mixed feedstocks and seasonal variations can raise production costs. Densification methods can help address these issues [122,123], but pose engineering challenges, as seen in biochar production. The pellet industry’s seasonality relies on stable feedstock supply, impacted by weather and competition. Thus, NYS should analyze the bio-based system supply chain and consider regional or cooperative approaches to cut costs and GHG emissions [119].

The expansion of bioenergy faces hurdles such as high capital and operation costs, necessitating scalability for affordable carbon storage [124]. Additional obstacles include commercial-scale deployment capability, geologic storage requirements, and potential adverse effects on sustainable deployment costs [125]. Concerns about the reliability of Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) technology include safety and preventing CO₂ leakage. To overcome these challenges, NYS needs to identify cost-effective geological storage options and utilize sensing technologies to monitor CO₂ leakage, ensuring the trustworthiness of BECCS.

3.5. Measuring and Monitoring NYS’s Bioeconomy

Considering the potential benefits, impacts, and challenges of sustainably implementing the bioeconomy in NYS, this section evaluates existing international and national strategies and guidelines for developing a sustainable bioeconomy. It compares these strategies with those of NYS and identifies gaps that require improvement for effective implementation. Based on these assessments, this section evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the bioeconomy strategies outlined in the scoping plan, highlighting potential areas and components of the plan that need improvement to ensure that the deployment of the bioeconomy in NYS occurs as sustainably as possible.

3.5.1. Strengths and Weaknesses of NYS’s Bioeconomy Strategies

The Global Bioeconomy Summit declaration [126] provides a foundational framework emphasizing renewable biomass, enabling technologies, and integration across diverse applications. Tailoring solutions to address NYS’s specific challenges and opportunities is essential. The regional bioeconomy forum’s adaptation of six major regions across U.S. regions underscores the importance of region-specific strategies [127]. Challenges in transitioning to a sustainable bioeconomy, such as market penetration and workforce shortages, necessitate a thorough Readiness Assessment (RA) across various dimensions. While NYS’s bioeconomy strategies prioritize evaluating technology readiness level (TRL) and supply chain preparedness, there is a need for further efforts to ensure a collaborative supply chain, engage stakeholders effectively, establish policy support for small- to large-scale projects, and develop a monitoring framework (Table S4). This study proposes six revised thematic areas with appropriate indicators to facilitate this evaluation. It applies a scoring system ranging from 0 to 5 as an example to assess NYS’s bioeconomy strategies compared to international and national strategies (Equation (2)). This approach highlights thematic areas where improvements are necessary for a successful and sustainable transition in NYS (Table S5).

$$ThematicScore={\displaystyle \frac{\sum SubtasksScore}{NumberofSubtasks\times 5}}$$

(2)

The tabulated scores (Table S4) demonstrate extensive policy inclusion across funding, research, incentives, procurement, and sustainability standards for establishing a bioeconomy in NYS [71,126,127,128]. However, the analysis highlights a notable absence of monitoring initiatives (Figure 5). Further efforts are needed to secure sustainable feedstock supply, address market demand, and establish a cost-effective, collaborative supply chain, with a specific focus on engaging stakeholders from both interstate and intrastate regions, as well as incorporating rural areas for effective workforce development, to ensure a sustainable bioeconomy in NYS.

3.5.2. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

Globally, defining and measuring bioeconomy involves diverse approaches, with no universal standard for assessing its sustainability [129]. For instance, the USDA focuses on agricultural and forestry aspects [130,131], while the US Department of Energy (USDOE) assesses biomass availability for energy purposes [132]. Carlson [133] advocates for biotechnology, while Schmidt Futures [134] highlights life sciences, biotechnology research, and engineering and computing advancements. There are international differences in defining the bioeconomy, with the EU [135] emphasizing biological inputs and outputs, while the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) [136] historically focuses on biotechnology. Some countries, such as Canada [137] and Japan [138], have broader definitions encompassing various sectors utilizing biological resources, while Sweden [139] and Finland [140] prioritize forest-based products. This diversity underscores the challenge of delineating the bioeconomy’s scope, with three primary visions: biotechnology, bioresources, and bioecology, each with distinct objectives and implications [141]. Overall, sustainability in bioeconomy requires considering both economic and environmental factors and involves a range of perspectives and approaches.

Efforts are underway to address these challenges, with recommendations for a structured process to establish a robust monitoring system for a sustainable bioeconomy [142,143]. Despite ongoing efforts, existing methodologies for data collection and assessment struggle to accurately measure the bioeconomy’s overall contribution to the economy, highlighting the need for aligned monitoring standards nationally and internationally. However, challenges persist in establishing a unified set of indicators at both national and international levels. The NASEM [144] report presents a comprehensive strategy for advancing the U.S. bioeconomy, emphasizing the need for developing a measuring framework focusing on economic and social benefits aligned with a “weak sustainability” approach. Additionally, while many states in the USA have adopted bioeconomy strategies, a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework remains lacking in assessing policy effectiveness.

For NYS, establishing a monitoring system aligned with USA and international standards is essential for tracking economic, social, and environmental progress toward a sustainable bioeconomy. This study proposes such a system, based on existing literature and aligned with economic, social, and environmental dimensions. The proposed framework comprises conceptualization, implementation, assessment, and communication components, aiming to provide policy-relevant insights and ensure effective progress evaluation [16,141,142,144,145] (Figure S6).

The Conceptual Framework forms the basis for managing bioeconomy data, including its collection, organization, interpretation, and communication. It comprises three key elements: a participatory process, operational definitions, and boundary establishment. This monitoring system is developed based on identified sectors, existing and potential biobased systems, and stakeholders outlined in the scoping plan for NYS.

The Implementation Framework involves defining impact dimensions, selecting indicators, and establishing a reference value for monitoring progress. The study employs impact categories to select dimensions for monitoring the progress of NYS’s bioeconomy. The proposed dimensions (social, economic, and environmental) are based on international, national, and regional sustainability principles. Additionally, this study incorporates both qualitative and quantitative indicators from relevant reports [16,54,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,155], aligning closely with NYS’s bioeconomy strategies and objectives. The selection principle for these indicators follows guidelines outlined by Bogdanski et al., [142] and Robert et al., [154], ensuring they are meaningful, well-established, timely, frequent, geographically inclusive, comparable across different contexts, consistent over time, and transparently accessible. Some indicators were adjusted to better suit the purpose of the scoping plan, while others were omitted due to measurement ambiguity or their lack of relevance to a sustainable bioeconomy (e.g., demographic indicators).

The Assessment and Communication Framework deals with the complexities of interpreting the sustainability of the bioeconomy due to variations in scale, direction, and indicator units. Recognizing the limitations of single indicators in capturing this complexity, there is a call for a comprehensive set of indicators grouped into environmental, social, and economic dimensions to enhance communication effectively [145]. While composite indices simplify interpretation, challenges arise in their formation [156], necessitating mathematical aggregation to address differences among individual indicators [157]. Therefore, this study proposes the evaluation of various indicators (

Table 1. Collection of indicators tailored for monitoring strategies identified in the NYS scoping plan {2} for the state’s bioeconomy.

Dimensions	Potential Indicators (Unit)	Scoping Plan Strategy	Potential Data Sources
Economic	Value added of bioeconomy sectors ($)	AF20	USA Trade Online Database for import and export data of bioproducts [51]. NAICS code for sectors: agriculture and forestry support services (115), forestry, forest products, and timber tract production (113110, 113210); commercial logging (113310); wood product manufacturing (321); paper manufacturing (322); furniture and related products manufacturing (337)
	Number of direct jobs in bioeconomy sectors (persons)	AF18	U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (U.S. BLS) [158]. NAICS-code level (Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) System codes 43-0000 and 11-0000)).
	Number of indirect jobs in bioeconomy sectors (persons)	AF18	Economic Impact (Input and Output) Analysis Tools, e.g., IMPLAN [159] and Exiobase in OpenLCA [160].
	Average income of employees in the bioeconomy sectors ($)	AF18	U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics [158]
	Total imports of bioproducts in New York State ($)	AF18	USA Trade Online Database [51]
	Total exports of bioproducts from New York State ($)	AF18	USA Trade Online Database [51]
	Total amount of biomass feedstock demand (tons)	AF19	Demand of biomass resources in scoping plan [2,29]
	Total amount of biomass feedstock supply (tons)	AF19	Census of Agriculture for New York State [161]; Billion Ton Report, 2024 [162]; EIA State Energy Data Systems (SEDS) [44]
	Growing stock on forests available for wood supply (m3)	AF20	New York State Wood Products Development Council [53,163]
	Production of low-carbon fuels from biomass (TBtu)	AF19	Primary Energy Sources in New York (EIA SEDS) [44]
	Overall technological readiness level	AF20	NASA TRL guideline [71]
	Overall commercial readiness level	AF20	DOE-ARPA-E guideline [128]
	Public financial support and private investments for bioeconomy market development ($)	AF21	NYSERDA [164], ESD [165], NYPA [166]
Environmental	Forest area density (% of total land)	AF18	NLCD [161]
	Standing forest carbon and changes over time (Mg/ha)	AF18	NY Forest Carbon Assessment [35]
	Total protected areas and land with significant biodiversity values and biodiversity conservation (acres)	AF18	New York Protected Area Database (NYPAD) [167]
	The amount of land for which soil quality (SOC) is maintained or improved for purpose-grown biomass feedstock is cultivated or harvested (acres)	AF18	Field data analysis
	Total GHG emissions (CO2eq)	AF19	EPA GHG Inventory Data [168]
	Total amount of cropland used for biomass production (acres)	AF18	NLCD [161]
	Water use in the entire biomass supply chain (gal/kg)	AF23	Water footprint calculation [169]
	Fossil fuel use in the entire biomass supply chain (MJ/kg)	AF23	Life Cycle Impact Assessment [170,171]
	Ecological Footprint (gha/capita)	AF23	Ecological Footprint and Biocapacity calculation [172,173,174]
	Rate of biodiversity/habitat loss (%)	AF18	Biodiversity richness and abundance calculation [115]
	Material and waste recycling and recovery rates (%)	AF19	NYS DEC [175]
	Land under sustainable forest carbon management (acres)	AF17	NYDEC [41]
Social	Total land area used for food production (acres)	AF18	NLCD [161,176]
	Emissions of non-GHG air pollutants (PM2.5, PM10, SO2eq) in supply chain (µg/ton)	AF23	Life Cycle Assessment [170,171]
	Number of occupational incidences (injuries and fatalities) in the bioeconomy sector (persons)	AF19	U.S. BLS [158]
	Mortality rate (respiratory diseases) attributed to household and ambient air pollution (persons)	AF19	Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) [177]
	Private and public expenditure on bioeconomy-related training, research, and development ($)	AF22	State research and funding resources. Budget or expenditure from private organizations (NYSERDA [164], ESD [165], NYPA [166])
	Proportion of bioeconomy courses in total academic courses (%)	AF22	Survey on institutional syllabus
	Amount of cost for respiratory disease-related doctor visit and hospitalization ($)	AF19	COBRA software [177]
	Amount of social benefits from GHG mitigation ($)	AF19	EPA emission factor and social benefits of GHG mitigation [28,29]
	Life expectancy (years)	AF19	Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) [177]

) and visualization approaches for assessing the NYS bioeconomy, including numerical changes (Figure 6), compound annual growth rates (CAGR) (Figure 7a), and task assessment methods (Figure 7b,c). Positive progress towards desired objectives is preferred, while negative trends indicate inadequate progress or regression. Results are visualized using spider diagrams and graphics, organizing indicators into dimensions for improved clarity and comprehension.

Table 1 suggests key indicators for assessing the sustainability of New York State’s bioeconomy across environmental, economic, and social dimensions, with potential data sources. Environmental indicators include forest area and forest carbon, biodiversity protection, cropland for biomass production, sustainable forest carbon management, GHG emissions, water and fossil fuel use, biodiversity loss, recycling rates, and ecological footprint. Economic indicators cover value added by bioeconomy sectors, direct and indirect job creation, average income, bioproduct imports and exports, biomass feedstock demand and supply, forest growing stock, low-carbon fuel production, technological and commercial readiness levels, and financial support for market development. Social indicators address land used for food production, non-GHG air pollutant emissions, occupational incidents, mortality rates linked to air pollution, expenditures on bioeconomy-related research and training, the proportion of bioeconomy courses, healthcare costs for respiratory diseases, social benefits from GHG mitigation, and life expectancy. A challenge in identifying a suite of indicators to use will be impacted by the availability and precision of data that is available and the capacity to collect the needed data.

Figure 6 and Figure 7 visualize theoretical annual changes in bioeconomy indicators from 2022 to 2023. Figure 6 highlights quantifiable indicators across the three dimensions, using percentages or numerical values. Figure 7 illustrates compound annual growth rates (CAGR) to measure the average annual growth of indicators and task assessment methods to track cumulative progress (%) toward defined targets, such as TRL, CRL, and biofuel production. Additionally, it represents overall progress rates for larger groups, such as strategies, by comparing annual relative progress to the 2020 baseline. These are two potential ways that changes in the bioeconomy could be represented with a robust monitoring program in place.

4. Conclusions

This study offers a comprehensive assessment of NYS’s bioeconomy and its potential to meet the state’s CLCPA objectives. Through the analysis of current biomass resources, policy frameworks, and renewable fuel potential, the study identifies both opportunities and challenges in implementing a sustainable bioeconomy. Key findings reveal significant potential for GHG mitigation and economic benefits, particularly through the integration of locally sourced biomass and renewable fuels into the state’s energy infrastructure. However, achieving these targets requires addressing gaps in feedstock supply, stakeholder coordination, and policy implementation.

Moreover, the proposed monitoring and evaluation framework plays a pivotal role in ensuring that progress towards CLCPA goals is tracked effectively. The framework emphasizes the importance of sustainability across environmental, social, and economic dimensions. By incorporating comprehensive indicators and aligning them with national and international standards, the framework provides a robust tool for policymakers to guide bioeconomy initiatives. Additionally, the framework addresses the importance of ensuring social equity, particularly in DACs, while promoting environmental sustainability and economic growth.

Nonetheless, several limitations must be addressed to ensure the framework’s effectiveness. The reliance on data quality and availability poses challenges that may lead to inconsistencies in assessments. Indicator selection, temporal and spatial considerations, and stakeholder engagement require careful refinement to ensure comprehensive coverage and meaningful participation. Additionally, adaptability to changing conditions and integration with existing policies are vital for coherence and long-term success. Resource constraints and uncertainties in monitoring must also be tackled through capacity building and risk management strategies. Indeed, the proposed framework and assessment herein are not immune to subjectivity concerning indicator inclusion criteria, their justification, directionality, and weighting. These limitations reflect the current status of indicator-based monitoring programs as a whole; thus, future research into best practices, stakeholder inclusion, sensitivity analysis, and validation is warranted. That said, this work provides a much-needed, flexible, and informed monitoring framework to aid New York State in assessing progress toward its Climate Act goals.

In conclusion, the successful implementation of a bioeconomy in New York State hinges on continued research, policy support, and stakeholder engagement. By prioritizing sustainability, the state can reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, achieve significant GHG reductions, and foster a resilient, locally driven economy. Future efforts should focus on refining bioeconomy strategies, improving supply chain logistics, and expanding renewable fuel production capacity to meet the long-term goals of the CLCPA and promote overall societal well-being.