IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea11/103930.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Willingness of Agricultural Landowners to Supply Perennial Energy Crops

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, David J.
  • Schulman, Candi
  • Current, Dean
  • Easter, K. William

Abstract

A survey of Minnesota agricultural landowners was conducted to elicit farmers’ willingness to supply perennial bioenergy crops. The survey area in the northern Corn Belt region is primarily planted with corn and soybean. Using dichotomous choice questions, the respondents were asked about their willingness to grow perennial grasses and short rotation woody crops (SRWC) given a range of expected net incomes relative to current net incomes. The survey included questions about farmers’ attitudes about the environment and renewable energy, perceived barriers to growing perennial crops, land tenure, and demographic information. The results from this survey add to the broader understanding of farm households’ willingness to participate in the bioenergy market by growing perennial crops. At nonnegative relative net incomes, on average forty-eight percent of farmers were willing to grow SRWC on at least some of their land with no significant difference between percentages at each relative net income. Seventy-two percent of farmers were willing to grow perennial grasses at non-negative relative net incomes. Farmers were more willing to supply grasses than SRWC at a given relative net income. This may be due to the longer commitment period, longer lapse in income, higher unavailability of harvesting equipment and costs of reconversion of SRWC compared to perennial grasses. Some farmers (18%) are willing to grow perennial grasses at net incomes that are lower then their current net incomes. In contrast the percentage of respondents willing to grow SRWC at lower relative net incomes was not statistically different from zero. Perennial acreage and share of total acreage were non-decreasing in relative net incomes. This study illustrates the importance in understanding farm households’ willingness to supply when estimating aggregate supply in emerging bioenergy markets. Net incomes from growing perennial bioenergy crops must be at least as high as their current net income for more then a small share of farmers to be willing to supply in the bioenergy market. Farmers must also have higher returns than those from perennial grasses to be as likely to grow SRWC. Increasing relative net incomes from perennial crops does increase the quantity of perennial crops supplied with most of the increase coming from farmers who already participate in the market by increasing their perennial acreage.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, David J. & Schulman, Candi & Current, Dean & Easter, K. William, 2011. "Willingness of Agricultural Landowners to Supply Perennial Energy Crops," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103930, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103930
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.103930
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/103930/files/AAEA%20New%20Doc.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.103930?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Galik, Christopher S., 2015. "Exploring the determinants of emerging bioenergy market participation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 107-116.
    3. Ian J. Bonner & Kara G. Cafferty & David J. Muth & Mark D. Tomer & David E. James & Sarah A. Porter & Douglas L. Karlen, 2014. "Opportunities for Energy Crop Production Based on Subfield Scale Distribution of Profitability," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Hoque, Mohammad Mainul & Artz, Georgeanne M. & Martens, Bobby J. & Jarboe, Darren H., 2013. "Essentials for Producer Participation in Biomass Markets When Choices are Correlated," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 142747, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Moon, Jin-Young & Apland, Jeffrey & Folle, Solomon & Mulla, David J., 2012. "Environmental Impacts of Cellulosic Feedstock Production: A Case Study of a Cornbelt Aquifer," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 125016, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. 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.
    7. Mohit Anand & Ruiqing Miao & Madhu Khanna, 2019. "Adopting bioenergy crops: Does farmers’ attitude toward loss matter?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(4), pages 435-450, July.
    8. 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).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:aaea11:103930. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/aaeaaea.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.