Article metrics

  • citations in SCindeks: 0
  • citations in CrossRef:0
  • citations in Google Scholar:[=>]
  • visits in previous 30 days:5
  • full-text downloads in 30 days:2
article: 2 from 4  
Back back to result list
2018, vol. 46, iss. 4, pp. 171-184
article language: English
document type: Original Scientific Paper
published on: 01/02/2019
doi: 10.5937/industrija46-19529
Creative Commons License 4.0
Succeeding in bioeconomy: Serbian universities' blueprint
University Singidunum, Belgrade



The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into the level of integration of the bioeconomy concept in the study programmes and modules at Serbian higher education institutions. Bioeconomy is based on multidisciplinary approach, which consists of research, education and innovation. Bioeconomy must be initiated by the government, developed by research institutions, universities and cluster, and thoroughly implemented into existing and emerging industries. As educators, Serbian universities should play a key role in developing future professionals. Research has been conducted to determine if Serbian universities educate students in the fields relevant to the concept of bioeconomy. All accredited study programmes in academic year of 2017/2018, at all universities in the Republic of Serbia, have been analysed. The research included 17 universities, 152 departments, 481 study programmes, 705 modules and 43,360 courses. The modules within the study programmes were categorised as bioeconomy-based modules, nonbioeconomy-based modules with at least one bioeconomy-based course, and non-bioeconomy-based modules. The research shows that of the total number of modules, 43% include one or more bioeconomy-based courses. The share of such courses within modules ranges from 1% to 21% and differs among groups of scientific fields.


bioeconomy; university curricula; departments; bioeconomy based courses and modules; study programmes


Basile, C. (2009) Intellectual capital and professional development schools. Albany: SUNY Press
Biobased Industries Consortium (2018) Bioeconomy and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from:
Blumberga, D., Indzere, Z., Muizniece, I., Blumberga, A., Bazbauers, G., Gravelsins, A. (2017) Why Bioeconomy is Actual for Latvia. Research Achievements in Institute of Energy Systems and Environment. Energy Procedia, (113): 460-465
Chen, J., Zhu, Z., Yuan, X.H. (2004) Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(1): 195-212
Cvjetković, M. (2015) Knowledge and quality as the factors of the business operations and competitiveness promotion - Research results from Serbia. Industrija, vol. 43, br. 2, str. 53-72
Dietz, T., Börner, J., Förster, J., von Braun, J. (2018) Governance of the Bioeconomy: A Global Comparative Study of National Bioeconomy Strategies. Sustainability, 10(9): 3190
Earl, P. (2017) Lifestyle changes and the lifestyle selection process. Journal of Bioeconomics, 19(1): 97-114
Gogan, M. (2014) An Innovative Model for Measuring Intellectual Capital. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (124): 194-199
Grzyb, K., Hartman, B.D., Field, K.G. (2018) Comparing industry and academia priorities in bioenergy education: a Delphi study. International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 37(10): 956-969
Haarich, S. (2017) Bioeconomy development in EU regions. Final report, research and innovation. European Commission
Iazzolino, G., Laise, D. (2016) Value creation and sustainability in knowledge-based strategies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(3): 457-470
Ignjatijević, S., Cogoljević, M., Milenković, N. (2018) Economic assessment of significance of education in the development of a knowledge-based economy. Industrija, vol. 46, br. 3, str. 185-200
Jednak, S., Kragulj, D. (2010) Ekonomija zasnovana na znanju - osnov ekonomskog rasta i razvoja. Management - časopis za teoriju i praksu menadžmenta, vol. 15, br. 57, str. 5-13
Kangas, J., Tikkanen, J., Leskinen, P., Kurttila, M., Kajanus, M. (2017) Developing hybrid SWOT methodologies for choosing joint bioeconomy co-operation priorities by three Finnish universities. Biofuels, 8(4): 459-471
Kaplan, R., Norton, D. (2004) Measuring the strategic readiness of intangible assets. Harvard Business Review, 8(1)
Komnenić, B., Tomić, D., Tomić, G. (2010) Measuring efficiency of intellectual capital in agriculture sector of Vojvodina. Budapest: Agroinform Publishing House
Koukios, E., Monteleone, M., Texeira, C.M.J., Charalambous, A., Girio, F., Hernández, E.L., Mannelli, S., Parajó, J.C., Polycarpou, P., Zabaniotou, A. (2018) Targeting sustainable bioeconomy: A new development strategy for Southern European countries. The Manifesto of the European Mezzogiorno. Journal of Cleaner Production, (172): 3931-3941
Levidow, L., Birch, K., Papaioannou, T. (2013) Divergent Paradigms of European Agro-Food Innovation: The Knowledge-Based Bio-Economy (KBBE) as an R and D Agenda. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 38(1): 94-125
Lyytimaki, J., i dr. (2017) Developing key indicators of green growth. Sustainable Development, 26(1): 51-64
McCormick, K., Kautto, N. (2013) The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview. Sustainability, 5(6): 2589-2608
Mitra, M., Nagchaudhuri, A., Rutzke, C. (2013) Energizing the STEAM curricula with bioenergy and bioproducts. in: 20th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Atlanta, Georgia, 23–26 June, Washington, DC
Mohan, V.S., Nikhil, G.N., Chiranjeevi, P., Reddy, N.C., Rohit, M.V., Kumar, N.A., Sarkar, O. (2016) Waste biorefinery models towards sustainable circular bioeconomy: Critical review and future perspectives. Bioresource Techn, 215(1), 2-12
Muizniece, I., Timma, L., Blumberga, A., Blumberga, D. (2016) The Methodology for Assessment of Bioeconomy Efficiency. Energy Procedia, (95): 482-486
Narumon, S. (2017) Bioeconomy as a new S-curve for Thai economy. Agricultural Economics (Zemědělská ekonomika), 63(No. 9): 430-439
Papadopoulou, E., Vaitsas, K., Fallas, I., Tsipas, G., Chrissafis, K., Bikiaris, D., Kottaridi, C., Vorgias, K.E. (2018) Bio-Economy in Greece: Current Trends and the Road Ahead. EuroBiotech Journal, 2(3): 137-145
Petrović, N., Snider, A., Ćirović, M., Milenković, N. (2012) Debata u obrazovanju za održivi razvoj. Management - časopis za teoriju i praksu menadžmenta, vol. 17, br. 65, str. 33-39
Petty, R., Guthrie, J. (2000) Intellectual capital literature review: measurement, reporting and management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(2): 155-176
Ray, S., Srivastava, S., Diwakar, S., Nair, B., Özdemir, V. (2016) Delivering on the Promise of Bioeconomy in the Developing World: Link It with Social Innovation and Education. in: Srivastava Sanjeeva [ed.] Biomarker Discovery in the Developing World: Dissecting the Pipeline for Meeting the Challenges, New Delhi: Springer Nature, 73-81
Ristić, V., Mirković-Isaeva, O., Vasić, B. (2018) Management of natural wealth: Resources curse and socio-economic development. Industrija, vol. 46, br. 2, str. 131-150
Roos, J., Roos, G., Dragonetti, N.C., Edvinsson, L. (1997) Intellectual Capital. London: Springer Nature
Socaciu, C. (2014) Bioeconomy and Green Economy: European Strategies, Action Plans and Impact on Life Quality. Bulletin of University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca. Food Science and Technology, 71(1): 1
Stewart, T. (1997) Intellectual capital. New York: Doubleday
Sveiby, K. (1997) The new organizational wealth: managing and measuring knowledge-based assets. San Francisco: Barret-Kohler
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., Smart, P. (2003) Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Management, 14(3): 207-222
Vlaamse, O. (2013) Bioeconomy in Flanders: The vision and strategy of the government of Flanders for sustainable and competititve bioeconomy in 2030. Retrieved from:
Vukićević, S., Milošević, S. (2012) IT, inovacije i održivost. Management - časopis za teoriju i praksu menadžmenta, vol. 17, br. 65, str. 79-84
Zilberman, D., Gordon, B., Hochman, G., Wesseler, J. (2018) Economics of sustainable development and the bioeconomy. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 40(1): 22-37