In this section I am concerned with some challenges facing Bioeconomics although some of them may be common to other paradigms too. These are how to :

• Make compatible the competitive economic and the affective non-economic components of the human enterprise? In other words: How to make compatible the monetary capital with the social capital? And thus prove that the efficient functioning of the market does not depend only on egoism and self-interest.

• Change industrial capitalism to bioeconomic capitalism: Principles of bioeconomics and bioeconomic business activity should be allowed to become part of policy of the economic institutions of the state and of the market economy

• Change the theoretical basis of economics from neoclassical theory to thebioeconomic theory?

• Introduce the principles of bioeconomics in the business activity ?: (a) remain part of the capitalist institution but trying to bring about change? (b) change culture of management to culture of administration?: new vision of management: pleasing–cooperation in contrast to vision of domination (top-down, command-obey structure)

• Bring about fair dissemination of wealth?

• Introduce the Bioeconomic Accounting System where utilisation of biological resources and negative externalities are noted as expenditures and restedfrom GNP in contrast to National Accounting System prevalent now where utilisation of biological resources and externalities are summed up in the GNP. It goes without saying that this type of accounting gives a false impression of biological wealth of a country and also is false as a sustainability indicator.

• How to bridge the gulf between the genetic code of A, T, C , G and the economic- monetary code of $, £, ¥ and €. In other words, how to bridge the chasm between the artificial socioeconomic world of the human enterprise and the real world of biology and nature’s economy. This may be achieved by developing a Bioeconomic Theory of the Gene whereby genes are treated not only as units of evolution in the biological sense but also as units in the socioeconomic evolution by considering them as resources in the socioeconomic sense due to their information content for manufacturing proteins. This will provide for a socioeconomic enterprise that is biologically sustainable and economically productive in a genetically healthy population and a healthy Gaia and which would ensure humanity’s health and evolution for the long term.

• Introduce a more encompassing indicator of human wealth and well being:GNP is the sine qua non of the growth-at-all-cost capitalism and has to increase every year in order to keep up with inflation, externalities etc. : The Red Queen Effect. It really is a measure of regress and not progress for very obvious reasons. It has been devised by economists (who apparently can add but not subtract) in order to make a very, very complex story very, very simple ; so simple in fact as to make it not only useless but also harmful.

• Integrate principles of biology with the social sciences and especially with economics. WHY?
  Because progress in biology will be in areas of biotechnology such as genomics, cloning and animal organ transpantation in humans among others. Such progress will impact the economic system and humanity’s social structures and therefore the interactions between them will cause serious economic, social, environmental and ethical problems: importance of holistic, interdisciplinary investigation.

• The science of biology has had great success in claryfing through the discipline of evolucionary biology the how of human evolution. Also, through the discipline of conservation biology it has claryfied the how of the destruction of the biological foundation of life. The challenge is to show how humanity can continue its evolution through sustainable existance. This is the challenge of bioeconomics.