Large scale deployment of biobased products in Europe: an economic perspective

Can you tell us about your professional background? 

Trained as a chemist, my career over the past 20 years has been focusing on bringing bio-based solutions to industrial scale in the bioeconomy space. I have always been active at the intersection of industry, innovation, and sustainability. Along the way, I settled in Toulouse where I had the pleasure to serve as Managing Director of Toulouse White Biotechnology (TWB) for 4.5 years.
Early in my career, I worked extensively in the energy and material sector, notably on the development of sustainable aviation fuels with TotalEnergies and Boeing. This experience gave me a strong understanding that scaling such new technologies for the bioeconomy requires a comprehensive value chain approach involving all the stakeholders, involving policy-makers.
Currently at L’Oréal, I am supporting the transformation of our value chains by proposition directions, position and disruptive innovation to reduce L’Oréal Scope 3. This encompasses decarbonization solutions for raw materials, improving the resilience of bio-based raw materials value chain and streamlining the use of water upstream and downstream.

What prompted you to get in touch with TSE?

I became familiar with the Toulouse School of Economics (TSE) through my previous position managing TWB. My predecessor and TWB founder, Pierre Monsan, is a member of the Executive Committee of TSE-Partnership, which created a natural connection.
Our sustainability journey has been using the planetary boundaries framework as a scientific guide.. However, this framework mainly addresses environmental impacts and does not take into account the economic considerations.
One of the major challenges we face in transitioning our raw material portfolio toward more sustainable options is precisely the economic impact. Many of these alternatives come with a “green premium,” meaning they are more expensive than the incumbent solution. This issue sparked the discussion between TSE and L’Oréal and ultimately led to our collaboration, as economic research can absolutely help in understanding and addressing these challenges — and TSE is a key partner in reflecting how to shape the future of sustainable value chains.

This partnership focuses on issues related to bio-based ingredients and products. Could you explain the main challenges faced regarding bio-based inputs, and how companies like yours approach these challenges to ensure your bio-based commitments? 

L’Oréal has been engaged in its sustainability journey for more than 30 years: from 1990 with the creation of our first environmental laboratory, which aimed to understand the environmental impact of our formulas, to nowadays with our second program, “L’Oréal for the Future”, which takes a comprehensive approach by addressing the entire value chain—from raw material extraction to product use and end-of-life. As part of this strategy, we set voluntary objectives to transform our raw material portfolio: by 2030, we will aim to source over 75% of ingredients from nature (from plants or mineral sources) or from recycled materials in formulas.
There is also an evolving European regulatory context. In April 2024 the European Commission identified key barriers and corresponding actions to boost biotechnology and biomanufacturing. This was followed by the revision of the bioeconomy strategy in November 2025, and ongoing discussions are now being held around a potential legislative framework, the EU Biotech Act No. 2.
The European Commission is considering several measures to promote the bioeconomy, among which the introduction of mandatory targets for bio-based content in products sold on the European market. Given our existing commitments and the possible regulatory changes, we decided to partner with TSE to analyze the impacts of such measures, drawing lessons from other sectors where similar regulations have already been implemented.

Other industries have faced regulations imposing minimum shares of bio-based content (e.g., packaging, plastics, or fuels). Are there examples that you consider relevant for assessing the potential impact of similar regulations on the cosmetics sector? 

This question was actually at the heart of our first collaboration with TSE last year. One of the most relevant examples is the Renewable Energy Directive (RED). However, there are important differences between the energy sector and the cosmetics sector.
First, the energy sector has been highly regulated, unlike the cosmetics industry at a lower level. 
Second, its value chain is relatively short and more integrated, with major players covering activities from resource extraction to fuel distribution. In contrast, the cosmetics sector has much more complex and fragmented value chains. A single product formula contains many ingredients, each sourced through different pathways. For some ingredients, the value chain may involve up to 10 to 12 intermediates between the raw resource and the final ingredient we purchase.
These elements makes direct comparisons with the energy sector challenging.

How could economic research help address your current challenges and those of the industry?

When we look at the transition toward more sustainable raw materials, we face three main challenges.
–    The first is technological maturity: do we have the right innovations and technologies available?
–    The second is industrialization: can these technologies be scaled up effectively?
–    The third is cost: sustainable solutions often come with a significant “green premium.” For example, bio-based solutions can be between 1.5 and 5 times more expensive than fossil-based materials.
These three challenges are interconnected. Ultimately, we need solutions that meet the required specifications, can be produced at scale, and are cost competitive. While technological progress is encouraging, the main bottlenecks today lie in industrialization and cost.
This creates a “chicken-and-egg” situation. Companies may be able to industrialize new processes, but these first-of-a-kind plants are expensive. As a result, they often target niche markets, which may not be large enough to justify industrial-scale investment. Without sufficient market demand and off-take agreements, financing becomes difficult, and projects cannot move forward.
This is where economic research plays a crucial role. We need to rethink how value is created and distributed along the value chain in the context of sustainability. More broadly, our current economy is still largely based on fossil carbon, however we need to transition toward more sustainable carbon sources that will be the foundation of the economy of tomorrow.
A key question is how to establish a mechanism to promote sustainable carbon in particular in terms of industrialization and investment. Today, sustainable products are still systematically compared to fossil-based alternatives. As long as fossil resources remain relatively inexpensive as opposed to more sustainable ones, it remains difficult for sustainable solutions to compete economically.

Useful links:

• TSE Sustainable Finance Center
• All interviews
   

Interview published in TSE Reflect, July 2026