Case Estonia I Rural-Urban Symbiosis
Author: Jelizaveta Krenjova-Cepilova, PhD, Researcher & Project Manager, FinEst Centre for Smart Cities
The Rural–Urban Symbiosis Model & Tool provides a structured and practical approach for identifying and developing circular value chains between rural and urban regions, with a focus on bio-based side and waste streams, biogas production, and nutrient recycling. It supports public authorities, planners, farmers, waste management companies, and private-sector actors in mapping local bioresources, understanding stakeholder roles, and designing sustainable cooperation models.
In the TREASoURcE project we aim to understand if and how the solutions we create can be replicated in and transferred to other countries. In this overview we present reflections and conclusions from the workshop we conducted with Estonian stakeholders in November 2025 as well as several aspects from the report on the replicability of the Digital Marketplace, since the latter falls under the rural-urban symbiosis approach.
During the workshops the model and the tool were presented and best practice cases of the practical applications of this approach were shared (incl. digital marketplace and local bioeconomy model). Subsequently, to understand the local specifics and potential transferability of the tool, we discussed the main question: What challenges or barriers might prevent stronger rural–urban cooperation in Estonia?
1. Food Waste Reduction
Rural-urban symbiosis helps reduce food waste by creating tighter, more efficient links between food production, consumption, and recovery across regions. Participants discussed that food waste is one of the most critical types of waste to address in terms of prevention and resource efficiency. This type of waste has a very high value.
Food waste is used a lot for biogas production, but other approaches should also be considered (e.g. providing food leftovers to animals, reducing food scraps and left-overs at home, planning portions ahead, encouraging people to purchase close-to-expiring food and imperfect produce such as irregular looking fruits and vegetables).
2. Legislative Barriers and Policy Reform
Legislative barriers turn out to be vital for rural communities and their development. It has been discussed that foreign investors are discouraged from entering the market due to the almost three-year detailed planning process[1], including mandatory public involvement procedures. This suggests a need for policy reform, which would help to streamline planning timelines, introduce flexibility in stakeholder engagement, and as a result to create fast-track pathways for strategic investments.
Also, as the participants mentioned at some point there was an initiative to integrate the environmental permitting process with the planning process. In the words of one of the stakeholders: “The idea was that public involvement and other steps wouldn’t be done sequentially, each taking a year, but rather in parallel, like the disclosure of the detailed plan and the environmental assessment program happening together. This way, one could reduce the three-year timeline to about one to one and a half years.”
The practice of using horse manure for biogas production was actively discussed. Current regulations in Estonia as well as in the EU don’t allow mixing wastewater sludge with manure for fertilization, regardless of sludge quality. Yet sludge from small, non-industrial towns may be clean and safe. A policy recommendation is to allow case-by-case analysis: if sludge is free of heavy metals, its digestate could be used as fertilizer, supporting nutrient recovery and circular practices. Until now, mixing wastewater sludge with manure means the resulting digestate can’t be used as fertilizer as it falls under sludge regulations and is limited to landscaping use, losing valuable nutrients.
3. Circular Economy Education
Another important aspect in the realm of circular economy education was pointed out: the young agricultural producers are eager to farm responsibly but lack clear guidance and support. As one of the participants mentioned, “I gave a small information session here for young agricultural producers, for those just starting out, coming from universities, the Estonian University of Life Sciences, and various vocational schools. These are our new generation of farmers, and they had so many questions on this topic. We ended up with several pages in Word, and I didn’t even know how to answer them”.
The idea of the family-friendly rural experiences that blend leisure, learning, and sustainability was presented. The concept of the farm-based tourism, where families (especially those with children) engage directly with small farms, should be more popularized in Estonia. Families can participate in seasonal farming activities (planting, cultivating, harvesting), often in exchange for produced goods or a countryside experience. It’s an approach that combines tourism, education, and circular economy principles, fostering deeper ties between people and the food they eat.
4. Digital Marketplace and Bioeconomy Challenges
Furthermore, the analyses of the replicability of the Digital Marketplace demonstrated several important overall points that concern Estonian bioeconomy and reflect the challenges of rural-urban symbiosis model:
- In Estonia (and most likely in other EU Member States) there is the need to clarify the terms ‘waste’ and ‘by-products’, and to adjust the system of waste codes, particularly regarding sector-specific issues. For instance, digestate from biogas production is classified as a residue from a national perspective, yet as a by-product from the perspective of the biogas producer, who inherently generates it during the production process[2]. This issue was also actively discussed during workshops with Estonian stakeholders.
- Additionally, it is vital to simplify the application process for waste permits in Estonia. For instance, when a biogas plant needs to promptly utilise waste streams in the production process, such as production waste from the food industry (e.g. yoghurt waste) or low-volume, unstable waste streams (e.g. potatoes) from farmers, an environmental permit has to be applied for. However, the process of obtaining an environmental permit is typically lengthy and entails substantial financial costs. This impedes the utilisation of these residues since their energy value and quality suitability will be diminished if they are stored.
- In Estonia, the establishment of industrial symbiosis parks in proximity to biogas facilities throughout the country is recommended. These parks could incorporate a pyrolysis plant, facilitating the refinement of woody biomass (e.g. stumps). Also, enterprises capable of sharing locally generated energy, materials and water should be included.
The barriers and discussion topics presented above were provided as the input to Waste Reform taking place in Estonia (as of October 2025). The conclusions are also very relevant for the Estonian Circular Bioeconomy Roadmap, which is in the process of renewal.
[1] Detailed spatial planning is a process of reaching societal agreement that provides the legal basis for constructing new buildings, adding extensions to existing ones, dividing land into plots, and altering the boundaries of existing plots.
[2] With the purpose of directing digestate to farmers for utilisation as a soil amendment, it is imperative for them to obtain an environmental permit authorizing the use of digestate as a residue. Analogous scenarios with different types of waste exist in other sectors, underscoring the necessity to align definitions with EU climate policy objectives.