IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gjagec/199779.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Präferenzen von Landwirten bei der Gestaltung von Substratlieferverträgen für Biogasanlagen: Ein Choice-Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Reise, Christian
  • Liebe, Ulf
  • Mußhoff, Oliver

Abstract

Für einen nachhaltigen Ausbau von Energie aus Biogasanlagen ist die Versorgung mit Substraten notwendig, die vielfach über entsprechende Lieferverträge geregelt wird. Nach Wissen der Autoren liegen bislang keine quantitativen Untersuchungen zur Analyse des Auswahlverhaltens von Landwirten in Bezug auf Lieferverträge für diese Anlagen vor. Daher sind Aussagen bezüglich einer zielführenden Ausgestaltung von Lieferverträgen nur eingeschränkt möglich. Wir haben deshalb im Rahmen einer Befragung von 178 deutschen Landwirten untersucht, inwieweit verschiedene Faktoren für den Abschluss von Substratlieferverträgen relevant sind. Dazu wurde ein Choice-Experiment durchgeführt. Durch die systematische Variation von Vertragsmerkmalen wird der jeweilige Einfluss auf die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Vertragsabschlusses bestimmt. Es wird deutlich, dass die befragten Landwirte Verträge mit anderen Landwirten oder einem Bioenergiedorf gegenüber außerlandwirtschaftlichen Investoren bevorzugen. Weiterhin sinkt die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Vertragsabschlusses mit zunehmender Laufzeit. Demgegenüber wird ein Vertrag durch einen höheren Verkaufspreis für die Betriebsleiter attraktiver. Die Untersuchung der Befragtenmerkmale zeigt, dass die Höhe der Prämie für ein zusätzliches Jahr Vertragslaufzeit von der individuellen Wertschätzung der unternehmerischen Freiheit des jeweiligen Betriebsleiters abhängig ist. Es ist nicht festzustellen, dass risikoaverse Landwirte tendenziell Verträge mit festen Preisen gegenüber Verträgen mit Preisgleitklauseln bevorzugen. Zudem zeigen sich keine großen Unterschiede im Auswahlverhalten von Landwirten, die einen Substratliefervertrag abgeschlossen haben, und Landwirten ohne diese Erfahrung. Substrate supply, which is often regulated by corresponding contracts, is essential for a sustainable expansion of renewable energies generated in biogas plants. To the authors’ knowledge, no quantitative investigations of farmers’ preferences with regard to supply contracts for biogas plants have been carried out so far. Hence, it has been only possible to a limited extent to make predictions for a targeted arrangement of supply contracts. We, therefore, investigated, to what extent different factors have relevance for the conclusion of substrate supply contracts. This has been done by conducting a survey with 178 German farm managers. The survey included a choice experiment in which participants were confronted with different contract features. These features were varied systematically and thus revealed the influence of each individual feature on the probability of contract conclusion. It becomes clear that the farmers who were interviewed preferred to conclude contracts with other farmers or with a bioenergy village rather than with external investors. The probability of contract conclusion decreases with an increasing lifetime of the contract. However, a contract with a higher sales price is more attractive for the farmers. The investigation of the characteristics of respondents shows that the amount of the premium for one additional year of contractual lifetime depends on the individual valuation of the entrepreneurial freedom of the respective farm manager. It cannot be established that risk-averse farmers tend to prefer contracts with fixed prices over contracts with price adjustment clauses. In addition, there are no great differences in the choice behavior of farmers who have already signed a substrate supply contract and farmers without this experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Reise, Christian & Liebe, Ulf & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2012. "Präferenzen von Landwirten bei der Gestaltung von Substratlieferverträgen für Biogasanlagen: Ein Choice-Experiment," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 61(03), pages 1-16, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:199779
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.199779
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/199779/files/GJAE_3_Reise.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.199779?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. Steffen, Nina & Schlecht, Stephanie & Spiller, Achim, 2009. "Ausgestaltung von Milchlieferverträgen nach der Quote," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 187440, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    2. Oliver Musshoff & Norbert Hirschauer, 2008. "Investment planning under uncertainty and flexibility: the case of a purchasable sales contract ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(1), pages 17-36, March.
    3. Enneking, Ulrich, 2003. "Die Analyse von Lebensmittelpräferenzen mit Hilfe von Discrete-Choice-Modellen am Beispiel ökologisch produzierter Wurstwaren," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 52(05), pages 1-14.
    4. Key, Nigel D., 2004. "Agricultural Contracting and the Scale of Production," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Steinhorst, Martin P. & Bahrs, Enno, 2011. "Die Analyse der Rationalität im Verhalten von Stakeholdern des Agribusiness anhand eines Experiments," 51st Annual Conference, Halle, Germany, September 28-30, 2011 114490, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    6. Peter Bogetoft & Henrik Ballebye Olesen, 2002. "Ten rules of thumb in contract design: lessons from Danish agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(2), pages 185-204, June.
    7. Schmitz, Kim & Schmitz, P. Michael & Wronka, Tobias C., 2003. "Bewertung von Landschaftsfunktionen mit Choice Experiments," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 52(08), pages 1-11.
    8. Steffen Andersen & Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2008. "Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 583-618, May.
    9. Ani L. Katchova & Mario J. Miranda, 2004. "Two-Step Econometric Estimation of Farm Characteristics Affecting Marketing Contract Decisions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 88-102.
    10. Douadia Bougherara & Geraldine Ducos & . European School On New Institutional Economics, 2006. "Farmers’ preferences over conservation contract flexibility and duration: an estimation of the effect of transaction costs using choice experiment," Post-Print hal-01939954, HAL.
    11. Matthias Benz, "undated". "Entrepreneurship as a non-profit-seeking activity," IEW - Working Papers 243, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. Reise, Christian & Musshoff, Oliver & Granoszewski, Karol & Spiller, Achim, 2012. "Which factors influence the expansion of bioenergy? An empirical study of the investment behaviours of German farmers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 133-141.
    13. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2005. "Individual Risk Attitudes: New Evidence from a Large, Representative, Experimentally-Validated Survey," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 511, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    15. Key, Nigel D. & MacDonald, James M., 2006. "Agricultural Contracting Trading Autonomy for Risk Reduction," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-6, February.
    16. List John A. & Sinha Paramita & Taylor Michael H., 2006. "Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-39, January.
    17. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Friedman, Daniel, 1998. "A comparison of learning and replicator dynamics using experimental data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 263-280, April.
    18. Brian E. Roe & David R. Just, 2009. "Internal and External Validity in Economics Research: Tradeoffs between Experiments, Field Experiments, Natural Experiments, and Field Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1266-1271.
    19. G. A. A. Wossink, 2003. "Biodiversity conservation by farmers: analysis of actual and contingent participation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 30(4), pages 461-485, December.
    20. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    21. Ping Qin & Fredrik Carlsson & Jintao Xu, 2011. "Forest Tenure Reform in China: A Choice Experiment on Farmers’ Property Rights Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(3), pages 473-487.
    22. Harwood, Joy L. & Heifner, Richard G. & Coble, Keith H. & Perry, Janet E. & Somwaru, Agapi, 1999. "Managing Risk in Farming: Concepts, Research, and Analysis," Agricultural Economic Reports 34081, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    23. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    24. Tiedemann, Torben & Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2011. "Risikoberücksichtigung in der nicht parametrischen Effizienzanalyse: Auswirkungen auf die Effizienzbewertung von deutschen Schweinemastbetrieben," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 60(04), pages 1-15, November.
    25. 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.
    26. Gebrezgabher, Solomie A. & Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & Oude Lansink, Alfons G.J.M., 2010. "Costs of Producing Biogas at Dairy Farms in The Netherlands," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 1(1), pages 1-10.
    27. Loewenstein, George, 1999. "Experimental Economics from the Vantage-Point of Behavioural Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 23-34, February.
    28. Steffen, Nina & Schlecht, Stephanie & Spiller, Achim, 2009. "Ausgestaltung von Milchlieferverträgen nach der Quote," 54th Annual Conference, Goettingen, Germany, September 17-19, 2014 187440, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    29. Enno Bahrs & Stephan Kroll & Matthias Sutter, 2008. "Trading Agricultural Payment Entitlements: An Experimental Investigation of Bilateral Negotiations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1201-1207.
    30. David R. Just & Steven Y. Wu, 2009. "Experimental Economics and the Economics of Contracts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1382-1388.
    31. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    32. Jongick Jang & Frayne Olson, 2010. "The role of product differentiation for contract choice in the agro-food sector," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 251-273, June.
    33. Lisa A. Cameron, 1999. "The Importance of Learning in the Adoption of High-Yielding Variety Seeds," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 83-94.
    34. Tiedemann, Torben & Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2011. "Risikoberücksichtigung in der nicht parametrischen Effizienzanalyse: Auswirkungen auf die Effizienzbewertung von deutschen Schweinemastbetrieben," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 60(4).
    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. Sagebiel, Julian & Müller, Jakob R. & Rommel, Jens, 2013. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Electricity from Cooperatives? Results from an Online Choice Experiment in Germany," MPRA Paper 52385, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Reise, Christian & Liebe, Ulf & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2012. "Präferenzen von Landwirten bei der Gestaltung von Substratlieferverträgen für Biogasanlagen: Ein Choice-Experiment," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 61(3).
    2. Reise, Christian & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Design of substrate supply contracts for biogas plants," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124428, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Mußhoff, Oliver & Hirschauer, Norbert & Fahlbusch, Markus, 2014. "An Investigation into the Factors which Determine Farmers’ Acceptance of Supply Contracts: The Ethanol Beet Example," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 63(1).
    4. Mußhoff, Oliver & Hirschauer, Norbert & Fahlbusch, Markus, 2014. "An Investigation into the Factors which Determine Farmers’ Acceptance of Supply Contracts: The Ethanol Beet Example," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 63(01), pages 1-15, March.
    5. Mußhoff, O. & Hirschauer, N., 2012. "Naive Deckungsbeitragsvergleiche führen bei Vorverträgen in die Ire – Lieferung von Industrierüben zur Bioethanolherstellung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 47, March.
    6. Syster C. Maart-Noelck & Oliver Musshoff & Moritz Maack, 2013. "The impact of price floors on farmland investments: a real options based experimental analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(35), pages 4872-4882, December.
    7. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Reise, Christian & Musshoff, Oliver & Granoszewski, Karol & Spiller, Achim, 2012. "Which factors influence the expansion of bioenergy? An empirical study of the investment behaviours of German farmers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 133-141.
    9. Richard G. Newell & Juha Siikamäki, 2014. "Nudging Energy Efficiency Behavior: The Role of Information Labels," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 555-598.
    10. Felicetta Carillo & Francesco Caracciolo & Luigi Cembalo, 2017. "Do durum wheat producers benefit of vertical coordination?," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    11. Frasa, Stefanie & Carlberg, Jared & Hogan, Robert, 2015. "Use of Contracts by Prairie Agricultural Producers," Working Papers 232328, Structure and Performance of Agriculture and Agri-products Industry (SPAA).
    12. Anders Dugstad & Kristine M. Grimsrud & Gorm Kipperberg & Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2021. "Scope Elasticity of Willingness to pay in Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(1), pages 21-57, September.
    13. Syster C. Maart-Noelck & Oliver Musshoff, 2013. "Investing Today or Tomorrow? An Experimental Approach to Farmers’ Decision Behaviour," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 295-318, June.
    14. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    15. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    16. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    17. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. 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).
    19. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2011. "Do EPA Administrators Recommend Environmental Policies That Citizens Want?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(1), pages 60-74.
    20. Adalja, Aaron & Hanson, James & Towe, Charles & Tselepidakis, Elina, 2015. "An Examination of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 253-274, December.

    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:gjagec:199779. 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/iahubde.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.