IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i6p2363-d333862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rank-Ordered Analysis of Consumer Preferences for the Attributes of a Value-Added Biofuel Co-Product

Author

Listed:
  • Yejun Choi

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA)

  • Dayton M. Lambert

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA)

  • Kimberly L. Jensen

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37919, USA)

  • Christopher D. Clark

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37919, USA)

  • Burton C. English

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37919, USA)

  • McKenzie Thomas

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37919, USA)

Abstract

Biochar is a co-product of the production of advanced biofuels that sequesters carbon when used as a soil amendment. Gardening consumers are a potential market for biochar and their purchase of biochar-amended products could provide biofuel producers with an additional revenue stream. To better understand this opportunity, preferences for the attributes of potting soils amended with biochar were elicited using a best-worst scaling experiment administered in a survey of 880 Tennessee households. The attributes analyzed were whether the biochar was produced in Tennessee, certified as biobased, a coproduct of biofuel production, and produced from food waste, wood waste, agricultural by-product, or a non-food energy crop feedstock. The effects of consumer demographics and attitudes on preferences for the biochar attributes were also estimated. We tested the independence of irrelevant alternative assumption using a structured covariance matrix designed specifically to the survey’s structure. The results suggest that the attributes most likely to influence favorably consumers are production from agricultural by-product or wood waste feedstock. On the other hand, the attributes least likely to entice consumers are biochar produced in Tennessee or produced as a co-product of renewable fuel.

Suggested Citation

  • Yejun Choi & Dayton M. Lambert & Kimberly L. Jensen & Christopher D. Clark & Burton C. English & McKenzie Thomas, 2020. "Rank-Ordered Analysis of Consumer Preferences for the Attributes of a Value-Added Biofuel Co-Product," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2363-:d:333862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2363/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2363/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dayton Lambert & Christopher Clark & Michael Wilcox & Seong-Hoon Cho, 2011. "Distance, density, local amenities, and suburban development preferences in a rapidly growing East Tennessee county," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 519-532, December.
    2. Li, Xiaogu & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Clark, Christopher D., 2018. "Consequentiality Beliefs And Consumer Valuation Of Extrinsic Attributes In Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 1-26, February.
    3. Potoglou, Dimitris & Burge, Peter & Flynn, Terry & Netten, Ann & Malley, Juliette & Forder, Julien & Brazier, John E., 2011. "Best-worst scaling vs. discrete choice experiments: An empirical comparison using social care data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(10), pages 1717-1727, May.
    4. Keane, Michael P & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1994. "The Solution and Estimation of Discrete Choice Dynamic Programming Models by Simulation and Interpolation: Monte Carlo Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 648-672, November.
    5. Vassilis A. Hajivassiliou & Daniel L. McFadden, 1998. "The Method of Simulated Scores for the Estimation of LDV Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 863-896, July.
    6. Thomas, McKenzie & Jensen, Kimberly & Clark, Christoper & Lambert, Dayton & English, Burton & Walker, Forbes, 2019. "Consumers' Willigness to Pay for Potting Mix with Biochar," 2019 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2019, Birmingham, Alabama 284292, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Pattara, C. & Cappelletti, G.M. & Cichelli, A., 2010. "Recovery and use of olive stones: Commodity, environmental and economic assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 1484-1489, June.
    8. Lanfranchi, Maurizio & Giannetto, Carlo & De Pascale, Angelina, 2016. "Economic analysis and energy valorization of by-products of the olive oil process: “Valdemone DOP” extra virgin olive oil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1227-1236.
    9. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    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. McKenzie Thomas & Kimberly L. Jensen & Dayton M. Lambert & Burton C. English & Christopher D. Clark & Forbes R. Walker, 2021. "Consumer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Potting Mix with Biochar," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, June.

    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. Boneva, T. & Golin, M. & Kaufmann, K. & Rauh, C., 2022. "Beliefs About Maternal Labor Supply," Janeway Institute Working Papers 2230, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1986. "Classical estimation methods for LDV models using simulation," Handbook of Econometrics, in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 40, pages 2383-2441, Elsevier.
    3. Aguirregabiria, Victor & Mira, Pedro, 2010. "Dynamic discrete choice structural models: A survey," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 38-67, May.
    4. Adams, Richard H. & Cuecuecha, Alfredo, 2013. "The Impact of Remittances on Investment and Poverty in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 24-40.
    5. Daniel Ackerberg, 2009. "A new use of importance sampling to reduce computational burden in simulation estimation," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 343-376, December.
    6. Denise Doiron & Hong Il Yoo, 2020. "Stated preferences over job characteristics: A panel study," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 43-82, February.
    7. Philipp Eisenhauer & James J. Heckman & Stefano Mosso, 2015. "Estimation Of Dynamic Discrete Choice Models By Maximum Likelihood And The Simulated Method Of Moments," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(2), pages 331-357, May.
    8. Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari & Hiroshi Shimizu & Andrea Vezzulli, 2013. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation and the Sources of Breakthrough Inventions: Evidence from a Data-set of R&D Awards," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Esben Sloth Andersen (ed.), Long Term Economic Development, edition 127, pages 313-340, Springer.
    9. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Donaldson, Cam & Currie, Gillian & Burgess, Leonie, 2013. "Best worst discrete choice experiments in health: Methods and an application," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 74-82.
    10. Yoo, Hong Il & Doiron, Denise, 2013. "The use of alternative preference elicitation methods in complex discrete choice experiments," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1166-1179.
    11. Rauh, Christopher & Boneva, Teodora & Kaufmann, Katja, 2021. "Maternal labor supply: Perceived returns, constraints, and social norms," CEPR Discussion Papers 16095, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Lee, Donghoon & Song, Kyungchul, 2015. "Simulated maximum likelihood estimation for discrete choices using transformed simulated frequencies," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 131-153.
    13. Xu, Kecheng & Davidson, Rachel A. & Nozick, Linda K. & Wachtendorf, Tricia & DeYoung, Sarah E., 2016. "Hurricane evacuation demand models with a focus on use for prediction in future events," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 90-101.
    14. Yamaguchi, Shintaro, 2010. "The effect of match quality and specific experience on career decisions and wage growth," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 407-423, April.
    15. Patil, Vikram & Ghosh, Ranjan & Kathuria, Vinish & Farrell, Katharine N., 2020. "Money, Land or self-employment? Understanding preference heterogeneity in landowners’ choices for compensation under land acquisition in India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    16. Maria Casanova-Rivas, 2008. "Dynamic Complementarities: A Computational and Empirical Analysis of Couples' Retirement Decisions," 2008 Meeting Papers 1073, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Denis Fougère & Julien Pouget, 2003. "Les déterminants économiques de l'entrée dans la fonction publique," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 369(1), pages 15-48.
    18. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Wechsler, Seth James, 2012. "Fifteen Years Later: Examining the Adoption of Bt Corn Varieties by U.S. Farmers," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124257, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Nikolaj Malchow-Møller & Michael Svarer, 2003. "Estimation of the multinomial logit model with random effects," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(7), pages 389-392.
    20. Ito, Nobuyuki & Takeuchi, Kenji & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "Do battery-switching systems accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles? A stated preference study," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-92.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2363-:d:333862. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.