EDA Journal Vol 12. No.1 Autumn 2019 | Page 25

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY and development to ensure the hub continues to develop new products to supply new markets, as existing markets change or contract. In theory a successful regional project that truly enters into the bioeconomy can generate the same or even more revenue from the secondary biomass resources as the primary products can achieve, potentially doubling the Gross Regional Product from each hectare in production. Taking a region into the bioeconomy is not without its challenges and barriers. Perhaps one of the greatest barriers is engaging all key stakeholders to connect to the potential such a regional project would offer and appreciate the benefits that collaboration can achieve. A bio hub project is defined by the available biomass, however biomass can’t be considered available until the owner of that biomass commits it in principle to the project. Once again, these stakeholders need to understand the value to them of doing so when they could attempt to reap the economic benefits in a project of their own. The more biomass is given a value the more likely holders of it will consider more carefully how they allocate it. Bio hubs are also not a well ingrained technology in Australia and this can lead to challenges around obtaining approvals, as key agencies are not equipped with the guidelines yet to assess these projects. This can lead to extensive delays and potentially even regulatory barriers to projects moving forward. As more projects roll out across the country this problem will dissipate and projects will be able to more easily understand and meet the required guidelines. Government can also play a key role in this area by looking at case studies of existing projects and understanding where approvals may have been a barrier. Investment is another perceived barrier to these projects not only in the scoping and feasibility phases when viability is completely unknown, but ultimately any infrastructure will also require investment. Given the unknowns around biomass commitment in a region, the cost of a large feasibility study can be considered a risk as no viable project may result and would likely be best enabled with some financial support from government. The infrastructure itself can then require a significant investment although at this point in a well-planned project, viability is assured and should prove attractive to private investment. The likely job creation and new economic activity aspects would also appeal to government funding and if return on investment calculations can be improved with the use of government funding the attractiveness to private investors is also improved. While unquestionably challenges exist in what is a relatively novel concept in Australia the potential benefits are significant. With regional businesses and industry in the driving seat, in collaboration with Government and Government agencies, biomass is a regional competitive advantage there for the taking. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr Elizabeth Perkins Manager, Investment Attraction and Infrastructure Regional Development Australia Limestone Coast. E: [email protected] Dr Elizabeth Perkins is an experienced leader with a track record in financial management, team leadership, strategic planning and project management. Her PhD and research background is uniquely coupled with experience in managing complex facilities in challenging environments. After growing up on the family farm near Penola, Elizabeth completed a Bachelor of Science (Honours) alongside a Diploma in Languages (Mandarin Chinese) at the University of Adelaide in 2005. Elizabeth worked at the University of Queensland’s Heron Island Research Station where she was promoted through the ranks to become the Station Manager in 2012. Elizabeth has been with RDALC since 30 October 2017. VOL.12 NO.1 2019 | 25