IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v34y2025i2p2088-2102.html

The Symbiotic Production of Food and Green Electricity: Consumer Preferences for Food Produced in Agrivoltaic Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Maureen Schulze
  • Kristin Jürkenbeck

Abstract

In light of the commitment by EU member states to achieve climate neutrality for the European continent by 2050, the expansion of renewable energy sources emerges as a significant challenge of our time. Agrivoltaic systems, which combine the production of renewable energy and food, offer a solution to alleviate the competition for limited land resources. However, scientific insights into whether consumers value food produced in agrivoltaic systems are lacking, so far. Knowledge of consumers' preferences is, however, crucial to successfully commercialize food production within agrivoltaic systems. This study addresses this research gap by conducting a hypothetical choice experiment with a sample of 448 German consumers. It examines consumers' preferences for food produced in agrivoltaic systems, using raspberries as a case study. Results of the random parameter logit (RPL) modeling revealed that consumers are willing to pay a premium for food labeled with information about the production of green electricity. Additionally, information on reduced plastic and water usage of food produced within agrivoltaics systems were also valued, next to domestic and regional production. A latent class segmentation was carried out for the targeted marketing for food produced in agrivoltaic systems. This resulted in four distinct consumer segments that differ according to their preference structure. Targeted recommendations are provided to enhance consumer acceptance and facilitate the diffusion of agrivoltaic systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Maureen Schulze & Kristin Jürkenbeck, 2025. "The Symbiotic Production of Food and Green Electricity: Consumer Preferences for Food Produced in Agrivoltaic Systems," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 2088-2102, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:34:y:2025:i:2:p:2088-2102
    DOI: 10.1002/bse.4080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4080
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/bse.4080?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. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1990. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities: A Correction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(1), pages 189-190, February.
    2. Shiksha Kushwah & Amandeep Dhir & Mahim Sagar & Bhumika Gupta, 2019. "Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers," Post-Print hal-02559373, HAL.
    3. Michelle S. Segovia & Marco A. Palma, 2016. "Buying your way into a healthier lifestyle: a latent class analysis of healthy food purchases," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(21), pages 1965-1977, May.
    4. Carlos Toledo & Alessandra Scognamiglio, 2021. "Agrivoltaic Systems Design and Assessment: A Critical Review, and a Descriptive Model towards a Sustainable Landscape Vision (Three-Dimensional Agrivoltaic Patterns)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-38, June.
    5. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    6. Jayson L. Lusk, 2003. "Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 840-856.
    7. Chinedu, Obi & Sanou, Edouard & Tur-Cardona, Juan & Bartolini, Fabio & Gheysen, Godelieve & Speelman, Stijn, 2018. "Farmers’ valuation of transgenic biofortified sorghum for nutritional improvement in Burkina Faso: A latent class approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 132-140.
    8. Apostolidis, Chrysostomos & McLeay, Fraser, 2016. "Should we stop meating like this? Reducing meat consumption through substitution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 74-89.
    9. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    10. Konstantinos B. Simoglou & Emmanouil Roditakis, 2022. "Consumers’ Benefit—Risk Perception on Pesticides and Food Safety—A Survey in Greece," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, January.
    11. Peschel, Anne & Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2016. "How does consumer knowledge affect environmentally sustainable choices? Evidence from a cross-country latent class analysis of food labels," MPRA Paper 69864, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Hong Il Yoo, 2020. "lclogit2: An enhanced command to fit latent class conditional logit models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 20(2), pages 405-425, June.
    13. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    14. Katherine Fuller & Carola Grebitus, 2023. "Consumers' preferences and willingness to pay for coffee sustainability labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1007-1025, October.
    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. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Melania Salazar‐Ordóñez & Rubén Granado‐Díaz, 2025. "Consumer preferences toward new circular bioeconomy agri‐food products," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(2), pages 2614-2633, April.
    2. Jianhua Wang & Jiaye Ge & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Urban Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pork with Certified Labels: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Aluisio Goulart Silva & Maurizio Canavari & Alcido Elenor Wander, 2018. "Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for integrated production label on common beans," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 20(1), pages 11-28.
    4. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    5. Carnegie, Rachel & Wang, Holly & Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David, 2014. "Consumer Preferences for Quality and Safety Attributes of Duck in Restaurant Entrees: Is China A Viable Market for The U.S. Duck Industry?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170717, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Katherine Fuller & Carola Grebitus, 2023. "Consumers' preferences and willingness to pay for coffee sustainability labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1007-1025, October.
    7. Rombach, Meike & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Do all roses smell equally sweet? Willingness to pay for flower attributes in specialized retail settings by German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-99.
    8. Thøgersen, John, 2023. "How does origin labelling on food packaging influence consumer product evaluation and choices? A systematic literature review," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    9. Ren, Yanjun & Liu, Qi & Wu, Guanzhang & Loy, Jens-Peter, 2025. "Consumer preferences for sugar-sweetened beverages: Evidence from online surveys and laboratory eye-tracking choice experiments," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    10. Claudio Mirabella & Valeria Borsellino & Antonino Galati & Emanuele Schimmenti & Francesco Caracciolo, 2025. "Enhancing ethical food consumption: the impact of information framing on consumer preferences," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    11. Lin, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Green identity labeling, environmental information, and pro-environmental food choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    12. Giacomo Giannoccaro & Ruggiero Sardaro & Rossella de Vito & Luigi Roselli & Bernardo C. de Gennaro, 2020. "Politiche di gestione della risorsa idrica sotterranea a fini irrigui. Analisi delle preferenze degli agricoltori," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 22(2), pages 1-27.
    13. Eunae Son & Song Soo Lim, 2021. "Consumer Acceptance of Gene-Edited versus Genetically Modified Foods in Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Leonardo Cei & Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Francesco Pagliacci, 2023. "Pay more for me, I’m from the mountains! The role of the EU Mountain Product term and other credence attributes in consumers’ valuation of lamb meat," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.
    15. Cordula Hinkes & Inken Christoph-Schulz, 2020. "No Palm Oil or Certified Sustainable Palm Oil? Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Role of Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-26, September.
    16. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    17. Giannoccaro, Giacomo & Roselli, Luigi & Sardaro, Ruggiero & de Gennaro, Bernardo C., 2022. "Design of an incentive-based tool for effective water saving policy in agriculture," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    18. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    19. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    20. Zhanguo Zhu & Qinyuan Shen & Zhifeng Gao, 2022. "Consumer choices in agricultural markets with multitier collective labels and private brands," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 905-922, October.

    More about this item

    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:bla:bstrat:v:34:y:2025:i:2:p:2088-2102. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0836 .

    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.