IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v105y2017icp183-190.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forestland owners’ willingness to consider multiple ways of supplying biomass simultaneously: Implications for biofuel incentive policies

Author

Listed:
  • Wolde, Bernabas
  • Lal, Pankaj
  • Burli, Pralhad

Abstract

Because socioeconomic based approaches account for relevant limiting and motivating factors, they provide a more realistic measurement of forestland owners’ willingness to supply biomass for bioenergy production- information useful to policy makers in setting production targets and in designing relevant incentive programs. Although forestland owners can supply biomass using different means, including supplying biomass from existing stands and changing land use to establish feedstock plantation, among others, previous studies mostly focus only on a given way of supplying biomass at a time. This produces incomplete information that adversely affects its use. By presenting survey takers in Virginia and Texas three different ways of supplying biomass at the same time, we determine forestland owners’ willingness to consider multiple ways of supplying biomass simultaneously and identify the factors that predict such behavior, assess overlap in forestland owners across the different ways of supplying biomass, and assess if and how respondents’ forest management plans and sustainability concerns correspond with their supply decision. Our results show a higher and more articulated rate of willingness to supply biomass than reported in previous studies. The results also suggest that opportunities exist for synergizing programs that incentivize disparate ways of supplying biomass.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolde, Bernabas & Lal, Pankaj & Burli, Pralhad, 2017. "Forestland owners’ willingness to consider multiple ways of supplying biomass simultaneously: Implications for biofuel incentive policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 183-190.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:105:y:2017:i:c:p:183-190
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517301155
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.040?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G.C., Shivan & Mehmood, Sayeed R., 2010. "Factors influencing nonindustrial private forest landowners' policy preference for promoting bioenergy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 581-588, October.
    2. Schaaf, Kenli A. & Broussard, Shorna R., 2006. "Private forest policy tools: A national survey exploring the American public's perceptions and support," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 316-334, December.
    3. Fortney, Jennifer & Arano, Kathryn G. & Jacobson, Michael, 2011. "An evaluation of West Virginia's Managed Timberland Tax Incentive Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 69-78, January.
    4. Gruchy, Steven R. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Joshi, Omkar & Hussain, Anwar, 2012. "An assessment of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to harvest woody biomass in support of bioenergy production in Mississippi: A contingent rating approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 140-145.
    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. Sharma, Bijay P. & Yu, T. Edward & English, Burton C. & Boyer, Christopher N. & Larson, James A., 2020. "Impact of government subsidies on a cellulosic biofuel sector with diverse risk preferences toward feedstock uncertainty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    2. Wang, Zhanwu & Wang, Zhenfeng & Tahir, Nadeem & Wang, Heng & Li, Jin & Xu, Guangyin, 2020. "Study of synergetic development in straw power supply chain: Straw price and government subsidy as incentive," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    3. Lim, Chun Hsion & Lam, Hon Loong & Ng, Wendy Pei Qin, 2018. "A novel HAZOP approach for literature review on biomass supply chain optimisation model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 13-25.

    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. Qu, Mei & Lin, Ying & Liu, Can & Yao, Shunbo & Cao, Yang, 2016. "Farmers׳ perceptions of developing forest based bioenergy in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 581-589.
    2. Joshi, Omkar & Grebner, Donald L. & Hussain, Anwar & Grado, Stephen C., 2013. "Landowner knowledge and willingness to supply woody biomass for wood-based bioenergy: Sample selection approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 97-109.
    3. Choudhury, Hari K. & Goswami, Kishor, 2013. "Determinants of expansion of area under jatropha plantation in North East India: A Tobit analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 46-52.
    4. Põllumäe, Priit & Lilleleht, Ando & Korjus, Henn, 2016. "Institutional barriers in forest owners' cooperation: The case of Estonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-16.
    5. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Quang-Loc Nguyen & Ruining Jin & Minh-Hieu Thi Nguyen & Thi-Phuong Nguyen & Viet-Phuong La & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2023. "Increasing Supply for Woody-Biomass-Based Energy through Wasted Resources: Insights from US Private Landowners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    6. Khanal, Puskar N. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Grado, Stephen C. & Grala, Robert K. & Henderson, James E., 2017. "Evaluating non-industrial private forest landowner willingness to manage for forest carbon sequestration in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 112-119.
    7. Creamer, Selmin F. & Blatner, Keith A. & Butler, Brett J., 2012. "Certification of family forests: What influences owners’ awareness and participation?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 131-144.
    8. Sarah Mittlefehldt & Erin Bunting & Emily Huff & Joseph Welsh & Robert Goodwin, 2021. "New Methods for Assessing Sustainability of Wood-Burning Energy Facilities: Combining Historical and Spatial Approaches," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-18, November.
    9. Janota, Jessica J. & Broussard, Shorna R., 2008. "Examining private forest policy preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 89-97, January.
    10. Josset, Clement & Shanafelt, David W. & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Probabilistic typology of private forest owners: A tool to target the development of new market for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    11. Mutandwa, Edward & Grala, Robert K. & Grebner, Donald L., 2016. "Family forest land availability for the production of ecosystem services in Mississippi, United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 18-24.
    12. Beardmore, Leslie & Heagney, Elizabeth & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2019. "Complementary land use in the Richmond River catchment: Evaluating economic and environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    13. Dulys, Elena & Swinton, Scott & Klammer, Sarah, 2016. "What Drives the Potential Supply of Timber Residues from Private Lands?," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 242363, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Pradipta Halder & Javier Arevalo & Liisa Tahvanainen & Paavo Pelkonen, 2014. "Benefits and Challenges Associated with the Development of Forest-Based Bioenergy Projects in India: Results from an Expert Survey," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, March.
    15. Cubbage, Frederick & Harou, Patrice & Sills, Erin, 2007. "Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 833-851, April.
    16. repec:ags:aaea16:235752 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Fanny Groundstroem & Sirkku Juhola, 2021. "Using systems thinking and causal loop diagrams to identify cascading climate change impacts on bioenergy supply systems," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 1-48, October.
    18. Gruchy, Steven R. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Joshi, Omkar & Hussain, Anwar, 2012. "An assessment of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to harvest woody biomass in support of bioenergy production in Mississippi: A contingent rating approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 140-145.
    19. Omoyemeh J. Ile & Hanna McCormick & Sheila Skrabacz & Shamik Bhattacharya & Maricar Aguilos & Henrique D. R. Carvalho & Joshua Idassi & Justin Baker & Joshua L. Heitman & John S. King, 2022. "Integrating Short Rotation Woody Crops into Conventional Agricultural Practices in the Southeastern United States: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    20. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Daniel, Marissa “Jo” & Cai, Zhen, 2014. "Family-forest Owners’ Willingness to Harvest Sawlogs and Woody Biomass: The Effect of Price on Social Availability," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 1-21, August.
    21. Keith L. Kline & Virginia H. Dale & Erin Rose & Bruce Tonn, 2021. "Effects of Production of Woody Pellets in the Southeastern United States on the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, January.

    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:eee:enepol:v:105:y:2017:i:c:p:183-190. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.