IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/forlwp/162019.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Maizification of the landscape for biogas production? Identifying the likelihood of silage maize for biogas in Brandenburg from 2008-2018

Author

Listed:
  • Vergara, Felipe
  • Lakes, Tobia Maike

Abstract

The development of biogas production in Germany has reshaped agricultural land use and production schemes since the implementation of the Renewable Energy Sources Act in 2000. It is associated with a widespread introduction of silage maize as a major substrate. While it contributes significantly to the renewable energy production, intensive maize-for-biogas production comes at the expense of loss of area for food production, is associated with negative ecological effects due to intensive and large-area monoculture, and is also associated with an increase in land prices. However, due to missing data, little is known about the plot-based distribution and development of silage maize for biogas production and, therefore, the local effects remain largely unstudied. This paper aims to identify the plot-level based likelihood of silage maize cultivated for biogas production in the Brandenburg region of Germany from 2008 through 2018. For this ongoing study, we developed and applied a spatially explicit multicriteria approach using plot-level land use information from Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) data and additional datasets on biogas plants. Our initial results show that within the 10 years of this study, the area which was most likely used for biogas silage maize production has tripled. We also find biogas silage maize production has been concentrated in the northwest and central-east of the region, and we identified distinct silage maize hotspots within the area. To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first attempt at biogas production. From our study, we can derive some of the spatially explicit effects of the Renewable Energy Sources Act on local land use dynamics over time. This may be an important asset for comparative and future studies on the effects of policy-driven land use changes on ecological and land price outcomes which will be subject of further analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Vergara, Felipe & Lakes, Tobia Maike, 2019. "Maizification of the landscape for biogas production? Identifying the likelihood of silage maize for biogas in Brandenburg from 2008-2018," FORLand Working Papers 16 (2019), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:forlwp:162019
    DOI: 10.18452/20977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/213070/1/FORLand-2019-16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18452/20977?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. Grundmann, Philipp & Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & Uckert, Götz, 2012. "Responses of agricultural bioenergy sectors in Brandenburg (Germany) to climate, economic and legal changes: An application of Holling's adaptive cycle," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 118-129.
    2. Couture, Toby & Gagnon, Yves, 2010. "An analysis of feed-in tariff remuneration models: Implications for renewable energy investment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 955-965, February.
    3. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    4. Laird, Frank N. & Stefes, Christoph, 2009. "The diverging paths of German and United States policies for renewable energy: Sources of difference," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2619-2629, July.
    5. Claudio Garuti & Carmen Paz Castro & Juan Pablo Sarmiento, 2016. "Disaster Risk Assessment Developing a Perceived Comprehensive Disaster Risk Index: The Cases of Three Chilean Cities," Chapters, in: Fabio De Felice & Antonella Petrillo & Thomas Saaty (ed.), Applications and Theory of Analytic Hierarchy Process - Decision Making for Strategic Decisions, IntechOpen.
    6. Olena Myrna & Martin Odening & Matthias Ritter, 2019. "The Influence of Wind Energy and Biogas on Farmland Prices," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, January.
    7. Susanne Theuerl & Christiane Herrmann & Monika Heiermann & Philipp Grundmann & Niels Landwehr & Ulrich Kreidenweis & Annette Prochnow, 2019. "The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-32, January.
    8. Jyrki Wallenius & James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Stanley Zionts & Kalyanmoy Deb, 2008. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent Accomplishments and What Lies Ahead," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1336-1349, July.
    9. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    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. Xueqing Yang & Yang Liu & Mei Wang & Alberto Bezama & Daniela Thrän, 2021. "Identifying the Necessities of Regional-Based Analysis to Study Germany’s Biogas Production Development under Energy Transition," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Anna Sobczak & Ewa Chomać-Pierzecka & Andrzej Kokiel & Monika Różycka & Jacek Stasiak & Dariusz Soboń, 2022. "Economic Conditions of Using Biodegradable Waste for Biogas Production, Using the Example of Poland and Germany," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-18, July.

    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. Xueqing Yang & Yang Liu & Mei Wang & Alberto Bezama & Daniela Thrän, 2021. "Identifying the Necessities of Regional-Based Analysis to Study Germany’s Biogas Production Development under Energy Transition," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Yan Xu & Chung-Hsing Yeh, 2017. "Sustainability-based selection decisions for e-waste recycling operations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 248(1), pages 531-552, January.
    3. Zhang, Hengjie & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Yu, Shui, 2019. "Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 580-598.
    4. Wang, Xu & Fang, Hong & Fang, Siran, 2020. "An integrated approach for exploitation block selection of shale gas—based on cloud model and grey relational analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    5. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    6. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    7. Steffen Jenner, Gabriel Chan, Rolf Frankenberger, and Mathias Gabel, 2012. "What Drives States to Support Renewable Energy?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    8. Ferreira, Agmar & Kunh, Sheila S. & Fagnani, Kátia C. & De Souza, Tiago A. & Tonezer, Camila & Dos Santos, Geocris Rodrigues & Coimbra-Araújo, Carlos H., 2018. "Economic overview of the use and production of photovoltaic solar energy in brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 181-191.
    9. Höfer, Tim & von Nitzsch, Rüdiger & Madlener, Reinhard, 2019. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," FCN Working Papers 4/2019, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    10. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid, 2018. "Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 462-471.
    11. Sitorus, Fernando & Brito-Parada, Pablo R., 2020. "A multiple criteria decision making method to weight the sustainability criteria of renewable energy technologies under uncertainty," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Pérez de Arce, Miguel & Sauma, Enzo & Contreras, Javier, 2016. "Renewable energy policy performance in reducing CO2 emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 272-280.
    13. Terry Walshe & Mark Burgman, 2010. "A Framework for Assessing and Managing Risks Posed by Emerging Diseases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 236-249, February.
    14. Bongsuk Sung & Cui Wen, 2018. "Causal Dynamic Relationships between Political–Economic Factors and Export Performance in the Renewable Energy Technologies Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    15. Lizarralde, Rafael & Ganzarain, Jaione & Zubizarreta, Mikel, 2022. "Adaptation of the MIVES method for the strategic selection of new technologies at an R&D centre. Focus on the manufacturing sector," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    16. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    17. Ehsan Tavakoli-Hashjini & Annette Piorr & Klaus Müller & José Luis Vicente-Vicente, 2020. "Potential Bioenergy Production from Miscanthus × giganteus in Brandenburg: Producing Bioenergy and Fostering Other Ecosystem Services while Ensuring Food Self-Sufficiency in the Berlin-Brandenburg Reg," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.
    18. Stokes, Leah C., 2013. "The politics of renewable energy policies: The case of feed-in tariffs in Ontario, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 490-500.
    19. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    20. Jose Martino Neto & Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon & Miguel Angel Ortiz-Barrios & Antonella Petrillo, 2023. "Compatibility and correlation of multi-attribute decision making: a case of industrial relocation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 831-852, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biogas; biogas silage maize; maizification; multicriteria approach; AHP; IACS; land use;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government 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:zbw:forlwp:162019. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (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.