IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae18/277001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effects of Experience on Landowner Preferences over Bioenergy Feedstocks

Author

Listed:
  • Van Deynze, B.

Abstract

This study examines how landowners’ prior experience with bioenergy feedstock crops affects their intentions to lease land to produce those crops, and how attitudes and concerns about bioenergy affect intentions differently for landowners with differing levels of experience. I analyze stated preference data from a representative sample of landowners in Northern Michigan and Wisconsin. Landowners were asked whether they would provide cropland or farmable noncropland to produce three different bioenergy feedstocks: corn stover, switchgrass, and poplar. I develop measures of landowner attitudes and concerns through confirmatory factor analysis and use the resulting measures along with a proxy for experience as covariates in probit models with intention to provide land as the dependent variable. The results indicate that experience has a significant effect on landowners’ decisions for switchgrass and poplar, but less of an impact on the decisions for corn stover. Experience also activates pro-bioenergy attitudes while nullifying concerns about rental and process disamenities. However, experience can increase the impact of concerns about environmental disamenities created by poplar. These findings suggest that targeted outreach can significantly increase the supply of land to produce bioenergy feedstocks. Acknowledgment : This research was funded by the Department of Energy Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (DOE BER Office of Science DE-FC02- 07ER64494), DOE OBP Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (DE-AC05-76RL01830), the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station, MSU AgBioResearch, and the USDA National Institue of Food and Agriculture. For access to the survey data and methodological guidance, I thank Scott Swinton. For feedback on earlier drafts of this paper, I thank Soren Anderson and Frank Lupi.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Deynze, B., 2018. "The Effects of Experience on Landowner Preferences over Bioenergy Feedstocks," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277001, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae18:277001
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.277001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/277001/files/vandeynze_bioenergy_v2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.277001?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. Swinton, Scott M. & Babcock, Bruce A. & James, Laura K. & Bandaru, Varaprasad, 2011. "Higher US crop prices trigger little area expansion so marginal land for biofuel crops is limited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5254-5258, September.
    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. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Englin, Jeffrey, 1997. "Respondent Experience and Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 296-313, July.
    4. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    5. LaRiviere, Jacob & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick & Aanesen, Margrethe & Falk-Petersen, Jannike & Tinch, Dugald, 2014. "The value of familiarity: Effects of knowledge and objective signals on willingness to pay for a public good," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 376-389.
    6. Swinton, Scott & Babcock, Bruce A. & James, Laura K. & Bandaru, Varaprasad, 2011. "Higher U.S. Crop Prices Trigger Little Area Expansion So Marginal Land for Biofuels is Limited," Staff General Research Papers Archive 34897, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Altman, Ira & Bergtold, Jason & Sanders, Dwight & Johnson, Tom, 2015. "Willingness to supply biomass for bioenergy production: A random parameter truncated analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-10.
    8. Barham, Bradford L & Mooney, Daniel F. & Swinton, Scott M., 2016. "Inconvenient Truths about Landowner (Un)Willingness to Grow Dedicated Bioenergy Crops," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1-8, November.
    9. Theodoros Skevas & Ioannis Skevas & Scott M. Swinton, 2018. "Does Spatial Dependence Affect the Intention to Make Land Available for Bioenergy Crops?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(2), pages 393-412, June.
    10. Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Weimer, David L., 2004. "Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 331-363, March.
    11. Greene, William, 2010. "Testing hypotheses about interaction terms in nonlinear models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 291-296, May.
    12. Ackerberg, Daniel A, 2001. "Empirically Distinguishing Informative and Prestige Effects of Advertising," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(2), pages 316-333, Summer.
    13. Mikolaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley & Jacob LaRiviere, 2015. "The Effects of Experience on Preferences: Theory and Empirics for Environmental Public Goods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 333-351.
    14. Daniel F. Mooney & Bradford L. Barham & Chang Lian, 2015. "Inelastic and Fragmented Farm Supply Response for Second-generation Bioenergy Feedstocks: Ex Ante Survey Evidence from Wisconsin," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 287-310.
    15. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Burli, Pralhad & Lal, Pankaj & Wolde, Bernabas & Jose, Shibu & Bardhan, Sougata, 2021. "Perceptions about switchgrass and land allocation decisions: Evidence from a farmer survey in Missouri," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Ahtiainen, Heini & Tienhaara, Annika & Pouta, Eija & Czajkowski, Mikolaj, 2017. "Role of information in the valuation of unfamiliar goods – the case of genetic resources in agriculture," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261423, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. 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.
    4. Johannes Diederich & Timo Goeschl, 2014. "Willingness to Pay for Voluntary Climate Action and Its Determinants: Field-Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(3), pages 405-429, March.
    5. De Laporte, Aaron V. & Ripplinger, David G., 2019. "The effects of site selection, opportunity costs and transportation costs on bioethanol production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 73-82.
    6. Kularatne, Thamarasi & Wilson, Clevo & Lee, Boon & Hoang, Viet-Ngu, 2021. "Tourists’ before and after experience valuations: A unique choice experiment with policy implications for the nature-based tourism industry," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 529-543.
    7. Loría, Luis Enrique & Watson, Verity & Kiso, Takahiko & Phimister, Euan, 2019. "Investigating users' preferences for Low Emission Buses: Experiences from Europe's largest hydrogen bus fleet," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Katherine Simpson & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Managed Realignment for Flood Risk Reductions: What are the Drivers of Public Willingness to Pay?," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2016-06, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    9. Sharp, Benjamin E. & Miller, Shelie A., 2014. "Estimating maximum land use change potential from a regional biofuel industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 261-269.
    10. Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Campbell, Danny & Hanley, Nick, 2017. "Disentangling the influence of knowledge on attribute non-attendance," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 36-50.
    11. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    12. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    13. Jacob LaRiviere & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley & Katherine Simpson, 2016. "What is the Causal Impact of Knowledge on Preferences in Stated Preference Studies?," Working Papers 2016-12, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    14. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Termansen, Mette, 2018. "Farmers’ willingness to participate in collective biogas investment: A discrete choice experiment study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 87-101.
    15. P. A. Turner & C. B. Field & D. B. Lobell & D. L. Sanchez & K. J. Mach, 2018. "Unprecedented rates of land-use transformation in modelled climate change mitigation pathways," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(5), pages 240-245, May.
    16. Olivier Beaumais & Anne Briand & Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges, 2010. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Better Tap Water Quality? A Cross-Country Valuation Study," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10051, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    17. Ribeiro, Barbara E. & Quintanilla, Miguel A., 2015. "Transitions in biofuel technologies: An appraisal of the social impacts of cellulosic ethanol using the Delphi method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 53-68.
    18. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Piroli, Giuseppe & Ciaian, Pavel & Kancs, d'Artis, 2012. "Land use change impacts of biofuels: Near-VAR evidence from the US," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 98-109.
    20. Bruno Lanz, 2015. "Avertive expenditures, endogenous quality perception, and the demand for public goods: An instrumental variable approach," CIES Research Paper series 36-2015, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    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:iaae18:277001. 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/iaaeeea.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.