Biofuels have been promoted worldwide under the assumption that they can support several strategic policy goals, while mitigating associated risks. Drawing on published evidence on performance, contributing papers to this Special Section question assumptions commonly attributed to biofuels: their carbon neutrality, their positive effect on rural livelihoods, and policymakers’ ability to effectively govern for sustainability. This paper takes these findings as its starting point and asks, “What next?” for countries wishing to advance biofuels as one option for the necessary divestment from fossil fuels. Deriving recommendations for national biofuel programs from past performance is no easy task. Context, complexity, power dynamics and scaling pose significant challenges to achieving policy aims. We are nevertheless able to distill a set of sine qua nons (indispensables) for sustainable biofuel governance from the evidence and change management literatures. They are put forward not as recipes for success, but minimum conditions and “best bet” approaches requiring testing, deliberation, and refinement. Perhaps the most fundamental sine qua non is to pursue options that downscale global demand – as current levels of global energy consumption, if only in the transport sector, cannot be met by biomass-derived agrofuels in a way that meets social and environmental sustainability goals.

The special issue Scaling up bioenergy? identifies major policy expectations attached to biofuels production worldwide, and it provides systematic reviews of actual biofuel performance and governance in these areas. Papers address the extent to which policy expectations related to climate change mitigation, energy security, rural livelihoods and risk mitigation have been achieved, and the effectiveness of public and private governance in advancing sector sustainability. Building on these findings, the synthesis paper asks, “What next?” for countries wishing to advance national biofuel programmes as one option for the necessary divestment from fossil fuels. Among other sine qua nons, the special issue highlights the urgent need to downscale global energy demand, and to stop treating biofuels as an isolated sector. Goldemberg et al. (2018) query several aspects of our approach, from research design, data collection, to our recommendation to apply the “precautionary principle” in research as well as policy making. Unfortunately, Goldemberg et al. (2018) incorrectly portray our main argument. Moreover, they claim bias in our approach and mistakes in our empirical evidence, however, without bringing forward an evenhanded critique of research philosophy, methodology or referencing different empirical literature. We fully stand behind our research philosophy and findings presented.