IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gjagec/355608.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

German Renewable Energy Policies and Their Implications for Local Land Use – Maize for Biogas From 2008 - 2018 in Brandenburg

Author

Listed:
  • Lakes, Tobia
  • Appel, Franziska
  • Ovando, Felipe Vergara

Abstract

This study investigates the spatiotemporal dynamics of maize cultivation for biogas production in Brandenburg, Germany, from 2008 to 2018, employing a spatially explicit mul- ticriteria analysis. By combining plot-level land-use data from the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) with biogas pnt information, we analyze the likelihood of maize cultiva- tion for biogas at the plot level and find that maize for biogas accounts for over 5% of the total arable land in Brandenburg. We identify patterns of high concentration, particularly in the north- west of the region. The analysis also reveals a steady increase in maize cultivation, aligning with regulatory changes in the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG). These findings offer valuable insights into the spatial patterns and drivers of biogas maize production, providing a basis for future environmental and economic research. The study highlights the need for plot- level information to evaluate the effects of renewable energy policies on local land use.

Suggested Citation

  • Lakes, Tobia & Appel, Franziska & Ovando, Felipe Vergara, 2025. "German Renewable Energy Policies and Their Implications for Local Land Use – Maize for Biogas From 2008 - 2018 in Brandenburg," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 74, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:355608
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.355608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/355608/files/2562_Lakes_et_al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.355608?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. Balmann, Alfons & Graubner, Marten & Müller, Daniel & Hüttel, Silke & Seifert, Stefan & Odening, Martin & Plogmann, Jana & Ritter, Matthias, 2021. "Market Power in Agricultural Land Markets: Concepts and Empirical Challenges," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 70(4), pages 213-235.
    2. 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.
    3. Britz, Wolfgang & Delzeit, Ruth, 2013. "The impact of German biogas production on European and global agricultural markets, land use and the environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1268-1275.
    4. Sultana, Arifa & Kumar, Amit, 2014. "Development of tortuosity factor for assessment of lignocellulosic biomass delivery cost to a biorefinery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 288-295.
    5. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    6. 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.
    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. 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".
    2. Cannemi, Marco & García-Melón, Mónica & Aragonés-Beltrán, Pablo & Gómez-Navarro, Tomás, 2014. "Modeling decision making as a support tool for policy making on renewable energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 127-137.
    3. Franco, Camilo & Bojesen, Mikkel & Hougaard, Jens Leth & Nielsen, Kurt, 2015. "A fuzzy approach to a multiple criteria and Geographical Information System for decision support on suitable locations for biogas plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 304-315.
    4. Jonas Zetterholm & Elina Bryngemark & Johan Ahlström & Patrik Söderholm & Simon Harvey & Elisabeth Wetterlund, 2020. "Economic Evaluation of Large-Scale Biorefinery Deployment: A Framework Integrating Dynamic Biomass Market and Techno-Economic Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Ritter, Matthias & Hüttel, Silke & Odening, Martin & Seifert, Stefan, 2020. "Revisiting the relationship between land price and parcel size in agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    6. David P. Brown & David E. M. Sappington, 2017. "Optimal policies to promote efficient distributed generation of electricity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 159-188, October.
    7. Reza Vaziri & Mehran Mohsenzadeh & Jafar Habibi, 2016. "TBDQ: A Pragmatic Task-Based Method to Data Quality Assessment and Improvement," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-30, May.
    8. Eric Sucky, 2006. "Kontraktlogistik—Ein stochastisch dynamischer Planungsansatz zur Logistikdienstleisterauswahl," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 131-153, June.
    9. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    10. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    11. Andrew Chapman & Timothy Fraser & Melanie Dennis, 2019. "Investigating Ties between Energy Policy and Social Equity Research: A Citation Network Analysis," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, April.
    12. Carrilho-Nunes, Inês & Catalão-Lopes, Margarida, 2022. "The effects of environmental policy and technology transfer on GHG emissions: The case of Portugal," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 255-264.
    13. Emmanuel Kazuva & Jiquan Zhang & Zhijun Tong & Alu Si & Li Na, 2018. "The DPSIR Model for Environmental Risk Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste in Dar es Salaam City, Tanzania," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-30, August.
    14. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    15. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    16. Guilan Kong & Lili Jiang & Xiaofeng Yin & Tianbing Wang & Dong-Ling Xu & Jian-Bo Yang & Yonghua Hu, 2018. "Combining principal component analysis and the evidential reasoning approach for healthcare quality assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 679-699, December.
    17. Hu, Mingming & Ren, Peiyu & Lan, Jibin & Wang, Jun & Zheng, Weimin, 2014. "Note on “Some models for deriving the priority weights from interval fuzzy preference relations”," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 771-773.
    18. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    19. Ngan, Sue Lin & How, Bing Shen & Teng, Sin Yong & Leong, Wei Dong & Loy, Adrian Chun Minh & Yatim, Puan & Promentilla, Michael Angelo B. & Lam, Hon Loong, 2020. "A hybrid approach to prioritize risk mitigation strategies for biomass polygeneration systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    20. Paul, Swarup & Sarkar, Bijan & Bose, P.K., 2015. "Eclectic decision for the selection of tree borne oil (TBO) as alternative fuel for internal combustion engine," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 256-263.

    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:355608. 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.