[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/waea11/109776.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Switchgrass as a Cellulosic Bioenergy Crop: A Stated Choice Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Fewell, Jason E.
  • Bergtold, Jason S.
  • Williams, Jeffery R.
Abstract
Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Switchgrass as a Cellulosic Bioenergy Crop: A Stated Choice Approach Agriculture’s role as a source of feedstocks in a potential lignocellulosic-based biofuel industry is a critical economic issue. Several studies have assessed the technical feasibility of producing bioenergy crops on agricultural lands. However, few of these studies have assessed farmers’ willingness to produce or supply bioenergy crops or crop residues. Biomass markets for bioenergy crops do not exist, and developing these markets may take several years. Therefore, an important, yet unaddressed question is under what contractual or pricing arrangements farmers will grow biomass for bioenergy in these nascent markets. The purpose of this paper is to examine farmers’ willingness to produce switchgrass under alternative contractual, pricing, and harvesting arrangements. Contracts are likely to be the preferred method to bring together producers and processors of biomass for bioenergy. Contract design may vary across farmers and crop type, and may include attributes specific to annual crops, contract length, quantity or acreage requirements, quality specifications, payment dates, and other important features. A stated choice survey was administered in three, six-county areas of Kansas by Kansas State University and the USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service from November 2010 to January 2011 to assess farmers’ willingness to produce cellulosic biomass under different contractual arrangements. This paper focuses on the switchgrass stated choice experiment from the survey. The stated choice experiment asked farmers to rank their preferred contractual arrangement from two contract options and one “do not adopt” option. Contractual attributes included percentage net returns above the next best alternative (e.g. CRP or hay production), contract length, a custom harvest option, insurance availability, and a seed-cost share option. Respondents then ranked their preferred contract option. The survey also collected data on farm characteristics, bioenergy crop preferences, socio-economic demographics, risk preferences, and marketing behavior. The survey used a stratified sample of farmers who farm more than 260 acres and grow corn. A total of 460 surveys were administered with a 65 percent completion rate. The underlying theoretical model uses the random utility model (RUM) approach to assess farmers’ willingness to grow switchgrass for bioenergy and determine the contractual attributes most likely to increase the likelihood of adoption. This framework allows us to define the “price,” or farmers’ mean willingness to accept, for harvested biomass sold to an intermediate processor. The estimated choice models follow the approach of Boxall and Adamowicz (2002) to capture heterogeneity across farmers and geographic regions due to management differences, conservation practices, and risk preferences. Using the percentage net return above CRP or hay production allows prices to float to levels that will entice farmers to adopt switchgrass. This will help determine a market price for bioenergy crops based on current market and production conditions without specifying an exact monetary value for the biomass. In addition, the survey results will facilitate contract designs between biorefineries and farmers while informing policymakers and the biofuel industry about farmers’ willingness to supply biomass for bioenergy production. Reference: Boxall, P.C. and W.L. Adamowicz, “Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach,” Environmental and Resource Economics 23(2002): 421 – 446.

Suggested Citation

  • Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2011. "Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Switchgrass as a Cellulosic Bioenergy Crop: A Stated Choice Approach," 2011 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2011, Banff, Alberta,Canada 109776, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:waea11:109776
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.109776
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/109776/files/Farmers_%20Willingness%20to%20grow%20switchgrass.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.109776?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marie Walsh & Daniel de la Torre Ugarte & Hosein Shapouri & Stephen Slinsky, 2003. "Bioenergy Crop Production in the United States: Potential Quantities, Land Use Changes, and Economic Impacts on the Agricultural Sector," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(4), pages 313-333, April.
    2. Jensen, Kimberly L. & Clark, Christopher D. & Ellis, Pamela & English, Burton C. & Menard, R. Jamey & Walsh, Marie E., 2006. "Farmer Willingness to Grow Switchgrass for Energy Production," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21355, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Paul Gallagher & Mark Dikeman & John Fritz & Eric Wailes & Wayne Gauthier & Hosein Shapouri, 2003. "Supply and Social Cost Estimates for Biomass from Crop Residues in the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(4), pages 335-358, April.
    4. Dicks, Michael R. & Campiche, Jody L. & Torre Ugarte, Daniel de la & Hellwinckel, Chad M. & Bryant, Henry L. & Richardson, James W., 2009. "Land Use Implications of Expanding Biofuel Demand," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), August.
    5. Heid, Walter G., Jr., 1984. "Turning Great Plains Crop Residues and Other Products Into Energy," Agricultural Economic Reports 307969, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Brian Roe & Thomas L. Sporleder & Betsy Belleville, 2004. "Hog Producer Preferences for Marketing Contract Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 115-123.
    7. Epplin, Francis M. & Clark, Christopher D. & Roberts, Roland K. & Hwang, Seonghuyk, 2007. "AJAE Appendix: Challenges to the Development of a Dedicated Energy Crop," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Gallagher, Paul W. & Dikeman, Mark & Fritz, John & Wailes, Eric & Gauthier, Wayne & Shapouri, Hosein, 2003. "Supply and Social Cost Estimates for Biomass from Crop Residues in the United States," ISU General Staff Papers 200304010800001493, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Bhat, Chandra R., 1998. "Accommodating flexible substitution patterns in multi-dimensional choice modeling: formulation and application to travel mode and departure time choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 455-466, September.
    10. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    11. Hipple, Pat & Duffy, Michael, 2002. "Farmer's Motivation for Adoption of Switchgrass," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10347, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Torre Ugarte, Daniel de la & Walsh, Marie E. & Shapouri, Hosein & Slinsky, Stephen P., 2003. "The Economic Impacts of Bioenergy Crop Production on U.S. Crop Production," Agricultural Economic Reports 33997, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    13. Mapemba, Lawrence D. & Epplin, Francis M., 2004. "Lignocellulosic Biomass Harvest And Delivery Cost," 2004 Annual Meeting, February 14-18, 2004, Tulsa, Oklahoma 34730, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    14. Bangsund, Dean A. & DeVuyst, Eric A. & Leistritz, F. Larry, 2008. "Evaluation of Breakeven Farm-gate Switchgrass Prices in South Central North Dakota," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 37845, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    15. Altman, Ira J. & Boessen, Christian R. & Sanders, Dwight R., 2007. "Contracting for Biomass: Supply Chain Strategies for Renewable Energy," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34907, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miao, Ruiqing & Khanna, Madhu, 2017. "Costs of meeting a cellulosic biofuel mandate with perennial energy crops: Implications for policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 321-334.
    2. Mooney, Daniel F. & Barham, Bradford L. & Lian, Chang, 2013. "Sustainable Biofuels, Marginal Agricultural Lands, and Farm Supply Response: Micro-Evidence for Southwest Wisconsin," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150510, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Galik, Christopher S., 2015. "Exploring the determinants of emerging bioenergy market participation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 107-116.
    4. Miao, Ruiqing & Khanna, Madhu, 2013. "Crop Insurance for Energy Grasses," 2013 AAEA: Crop Insurance and the Farm Bill Symposium 156936, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Leibensperger, Carrie & Yang, Pan & Zhao, Qiankun & Wei, Shuran & Cai, Ximing, 2021. "The synergy between stakeholders for cellulosic biofuel development: Perspectives, opportunities, and barriers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    6. Ochieng, Isabel Joy & Otieno, David & Oluoch-Kosura, Willis & Jistrom, Magnus, 2015. "What Do Farmers Want in the Design of Biofuel Investments in Kenya? A Choice Experiment Approach," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212589, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Miao, Ruiqing & Khanna, Madhu, 2015. "Costs of Meeting the Cellulosic Biofuel Mandate with an Energy Crop with Establishment Cost and Yield Risk: Implications for Policy," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212458, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2016. "Farmers' willingness to contract switchgrass as a cellulosic bioenergy crop in Kansas," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 292-302.
    2. Bergtold, Jason S. & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Fewell, Jason E. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2017. "Annual bioenergy crops for biofuels production: Farmers' contractual preferences for producing sweet sorghum," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 724-731.
    3. Lynes, Melissa K. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R. & Fewell, Jason E., 2012. "Determining Farmers’ Willingness-To-Grow Cellulosic Biofuel Feedstocks on Agricultural Land," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124777, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Lynes, Melissa K. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R. & Fewell, Jason E., 2016. "Willingness of Kansas farm managers to produce alternative cellulosic biofuel feedstocks: An analysis of adoption and initial acreage allocation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 336-348.
    5. Fewell, Jason & Lynes, Melissa & Williams, Jeffery & Bergtold, Jason, 2013. "Kansas Farmers Interest and Preferences for Growing Cellulosic Bioenergy Crops," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2013, pages 1-22, June.
    6. Rosburg, Alicia & Miranowski, John & Jacobs, Keri, 2013. "Cellulosic Biofuel Supply with Heterogeneous Biomass Suppliers: An Application to Switchgrass-based Ethanol," Staff General Research Papers Archive 36359, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Walsh, Marie E., 2005. "Non-Traditional Sources of Biomass Feedstocks," Energy from Agriculture: New Technologies, Innovative Programs and Success Stories, December 14-15, 2005, St. Louis, Missouri 7625, Farm Foundation.
    8. Moon, Jin-Young & Apland, Jeffrey & Folle, Solomon & Mulla, David, 2016. "A Watershed Level Economic Analysis of Cellulosic Biofuel Feedstock Production with Consideration of Water Quality," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(3).
    9. Doering, Otto C., III, 2005. "Agricultural/Renewable Contributions to U.S. Electricity Usage," Energy from Agriculture: New Technologies, Innovative Programs and Success Stories, December 14-15, 2005, St. Louis, Missouri 7626, Farm Foundation.
    10. Granoszewski, Karol & Spiller, Achim, 2013. "Langfristige Rohstoffsicherung in der Supply Chain Biogas: Status Quo und Potenziale vertraglicher Zusammenarbeit," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260820, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    11. Kwabena Krah & Daniel R Petrolia & Angelica Williams & Keith H Coble & Ardian Harri & Roderick M Rejesus, 2018. "Producer Preferences for Contracts on a Risky Bioenergy Crop," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 240-258.
    12. Bai, Yun & Ouyang, Yanfeng & Pang, Jong-Shi, 2012. "Biofuel supply chain design under competitive agricultural land use and feedstock market equilibrium," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1623-1633.
    13. Bergtold, Jason S. & Fewell, Jason E. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2011. "Farmers’ Willingness to Grow Sweet Sorghum as a Cellulosic Bioenergy Crop: A Stated Choice Approach," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 108068, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Bergtold, Jason & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Altman, Ira J. & Fewell, Jason & Jeffery, Williams, 2014. "Estimating the Supply of Corn Stover at the Farm Level for Biofuel Production: Taking Account of Farmers’ Willingness to Harvest," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170573, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Epplin, Francis M., 2008. "Millions of acres for dedicated energy crops: farms, ranches, or plantations?," Integration of Agricultural and Energy Systems Conference, February 12-13, 2008, Atlanta, Georgia 48711, Farm Foundation.
    16. Okwo, Adaora & Thomas, Valerie M., 2014. "Biomass feedstock contracts: Role of land quality and yield variability in near term feasibility," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 67-80.
    17. Timmons, David, 2014. "Using Former Farmland for Biomass Crops: Massachusetts Landowner Motivations and Willingness to Plant," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    18. Bai, Yun & Ouyang, Yanfeng & Pang, Jong-Shi, 2016. "Enhanced models and improved solution for competitive biofuel supply chain design under land use constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 281-297.
    19. Timmons, David, 2014. "Using Former Farmland for Biomass Crops: Massachusetts Landowner Motivations and Willingness to Plant," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 43(3), pages 1-19, December.
    20. Sant'Anna, Ana Claudia & Bergtold, Jason & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Caldas, Marcellus & Granco, Gabriel, 2021. "Deal or No Deal? Analysis of Bioenergy Feedstock Contract Choice with Multiple Opt-out Options and Contract Attribute Substitutability," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315289, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries; Production Economics; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:waea11:109776. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/waeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.