IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v33y2017i3p339-357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects of Contract Mechanism Design and Risk Preferences on Biomass Supply for Ethanol Production

Author

Listed:
  • Kassu Wamisho Hossiso
  • Aaron Laporte
  • David Ripplinger

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study used a stated choice experimental survey to evaluate the effects of contract design mechanisms and farmers’ risk preferences in supplying biomass for ethanol production in a vertically coordinated biomass supply chain in Northern Plain of the United States. A rank‐ordered logit model was used to assess the effects of price‐ and quantity‐based contract mechanisms, risk preferences, and farm characteristics on ranking of contract preferences. Our empirical results show that, under price‐based contract, farmers are likely to prefer contract that set fixed price when a contract was offered over short term, however, over the long term, farmers prefer a contract item that set formula with a floor price. Under quantity‐based design mechanism, our model results illustrate that contract items that limit biomass quantity delivery requirement become less preferable even if farmers are allowed to negotiate on delivery price. In addition, farmer's risk perception factors toward engaging in marketing organization and vertically coordinated supply chains play a significant role in ranking contract preferences. [EconLit citations: D82; Q13; Q42]

Suggested Citation

  • Kassu Wamisho Hossiso & Aaron Laporte & David Ripplinger, 2017. "The Effects of Contract Mechanism Design and Risk Preferences on Biomass Supply for Ethanol Production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 339-357, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:33:y:2017:i:3:p:339-357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/agr.21491
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    2. Lajili, Kaouthar & Barry, Peter J. & Sonka, Steven T. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 1997. "Farmers' Preferences For Crop Contracts," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Dennis Fok & Richard Paap & Bram Van Dijk, 2012. "A Rank‐Ordered Logit Model With Unobserved Heterogeneity In Ranking Capabilities," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 831-846, August.
    4. Larson, James A. & English, Burton C. & He, Lixia, 2008. "Economic Analysis of Farm-Level Supply of Biomass Feedstocks for Energy Production Under Alternative Contract Scenarios and Risk," Integration of Agricultural and Energy Systems Conference, February 12-13, 2008, Atlanta, Georgia 48706, Farm Foundation.
    5. Okwo, Adaora & Thomas, Valerie M., 2014. "Biomass feedstock contracts: Role of land quality and yield variability in near term feasibility," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 67-80.
    6. Bard, Sharon K. & Barry, Peter J., 2001. "Assessing Farmers' Attitudes Toward Risk Using The "Closing-In" Method," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-13, July.
    7. Bergtold, Jason S. & Duffy, Patricia A. & Hite, Diane & Raper, Randy L., 2012. "Demographic and Management Factors Affecting the Adoption and Perceived Yield Benefit of Winter Cover Crops in the Southeast," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 99-116, February.
    8. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    9. Henry Kaiser, 1974. "An index of factorial simplicity," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 39(1), pages 31-36, March.
    10. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    11. Ira Altman & Jason Bergtold & Dwight R. Sanders & Thomas G. Johnson, 2013. "Market Development of Biomass Industries," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 486-496, September.
    12. Hausman, Jerry A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1987. "Specifying and testing econometric models for rank-ordered data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-2), pages 83-104.
    13. Brian Roe & Thomas L. Sporleder & Betsy Belleville, 2004. "Hog Producer Preferences for Marketing Contract Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 115-123.
    14. Altman, Ira & Bergtold, Jason & Sanders, Dwight & Johnson, Tom, 2015. "Willingness to supply biomass for bioenergy production: A random parameter truncated analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-10.
    15. Jensen, Kimberly L. & English, Burton C. & Clark, Christopher D. & Menard, R. Jamey, 2011. "Preferences for Marketing Arrangements by Potential Switchgrass Growers," Journal of Cooperatives, NCERA-210, vol. 25, pages 1-28.
    16. Epplin, Francis M. & Clark, Christopher D. & Roberts, Roland K. & Hwang, Seonghuyk, 2007. "AJAE Appendix: Challenges to the Development of a Dedicated Energy Crop," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Babcock, Bruce A. & Marette, Stéphan & Tréguer, David, 2011. "Opportunity for profitable investments in cellulosic biofuels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 714-719, February.
    18. Epplin, Francis M. & Haque, Mohua, 2011. "Policies to Facilitate Conversion of Millions of Acres to the Production of Biofuel Feedstock," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(3), pages 1-14, August.
    19. Shapouri, Hosein & Salassi, Michael, 2006. "The Economic Feasibility of Ethanol Production from Sugar in the United States," Miscellaneous Publications 322769, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    20. 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.
    21. Coyle, William T., 2010. "Next-Generation Biofuels: Near-Term Challenges and Implications for Agriculture," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-8.
    22. Alexander, Corinne & Ivanic, Rasto & Rosch, Stephanie & Tyner, Wallace & Wu, Steven Y. & Yoder, Joshua R., 2012. "Contract theory and implications for perennial energy crop contracting," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 970-979.
    23. Fewell, Jason & Lynes, Melissa & Williams, Jeffery & Bergtold, Jason, 2013. "Kansas Farmers Interest and Preferences for Growing Cellulosic Bioenergy Crops," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2013, pages 1-22, June.
    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. De Laporte, Aaron V. & Ripplinger, David G., 2019. "The effects of site selection, opportunity costs and transportation costs on bioethanol production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 73-82.
    2. Maria Raimondo & Francesco Caracciolo & Luigi Cembalo & Gaetano Chinnici & Biagio Pecorino & Mario D’Amico, 2018. "Making Virtue Out of Necessity: Managing the Citrus Waste Supply Chain for Bioeconomy Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Bairagi, Subir K. & Mohanty, Samarendu & Ynion, Jhoanne & Demont, Matty, 2017. "Determinants of Consumer Preferences for Rice Attributes: Evidence from South and Southeast Asia," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258384, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Sant’Anna, Ana Claudia & Bergtold, Jason S. & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Caldas, Marcellus M. & Granco, Gabriel, 2022. "Biofuel feedstock contract attributes, substitutability and tradeoffs in sugarcane production for ethanol in the Brazilian Cerrado: A stated choice approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 665-679.

    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. Wamisho, Kassu & De Laporte, Aaron & Ripplinger, David, 2015. "Biomass Contracts for Ethanol Production: The Role of Farmer’s Risk Preferences," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205703, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2016. "Farmers' willingness to contract switchgrass as a cellulosic bioenergy crop in Kansas," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 292-302.
    3. Bergtold, Jason S. & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Fewell, Jason E. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2017. "Annual bioenergy crops for biofuels production: Farmers' contractual preferences for producing sweet sorghum," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 724-731.
    4. Touza, Julia & Pérez-Alonso, Alicia & Chas-Amil, María L. & Dehnen-Schmutz, Katharina, 2014. "Explaining the rank order of invasive plants by stakeholder groups," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 330-341.
    5. Granoszewski, Karol & Spiller, Achim, 2013. "Langfristige Rohstoffsicherung in der Supply Chain Biogas: Status Quo und Potenziale vertraglicher Zusammenarbeit," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260820, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    6. Rosburg, Alicia & Miranowski, John & McFadden, Jonathan, 2016. "Mitigating Feedstock Supply Risk in Corn Stover Biofuel Production," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235875, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Bairagi, Subir K. & Mohanty, Samarendu & Ynion, Jhoanne & Demont, Matty, 2017. "Determinants of Consumer Preferences for Rice Attributes: Evidence from South and Southeast Asia," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258384, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Marco A. Palma, 2017. "Improving the prediction of ranking data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1681-1710, December.
    9. Gopindra Sivakumar Nair & Sebastian Astroza & Chandra R. Bhat & Sara Khoeini & Ram M. Pendyala, 2018. "An application of a rank ordered probit modeling approach to understanding level of interest in autonomous vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1623-1637, November.
    10. Anoek Castelein & Dennis Fok & Richard Paap, 2020. "A multinomial and rank-ordered logit model with inter- and intra-individual heteroscedasticity," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 20-069/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    11. Ben Aoki-Sherwood & Catherine Bregou & David Liben-Nowell & Kiran Tomlinson & Thomas Zeng, 2024. "Bounding Consideration Probabilities in Consider-Then-Choose Ranking Models," Papers 2401.11016, arXiv.org.
    12. Kwabena Krah & Daniel R Petrolia & Angelica Williams & Keith H Coble & Ardian Harri & Roderick M Rejesus, 2018. "Producer Preferences for Contracts on a Risky Bioenergy Crop," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 240-258.
    13. Gouzaye, Amadou & Epplin, Francis M., 2016. "Land requirements, feedstock haul distance, and expected profit response to land use restrictions for switchgrass production," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 59-66.
    14. Dennis Fok & Richard Paap & Bram Van Dijk, 2012. "A Rank‐Ordered Logit Model With Unobserved Heterogeneity In Ranking Capabilities," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 831-846, August.
    15. Marescotti, Maria Elena & Caputo, Vincenzina & Demartini, Eugenio & Gaviglio, Anna, 2020. "Consumer preferences for wild game cured meat label: do attitudes towards animal welfare matter?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(4), June.
    16. Wamisho, Kassu, 2016. "The Role of Vertical Integration, Risk and Uncertainty in Biomass Supply," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235769, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. 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).
    18. Bauer, Dana & Liu, Pengfei & Swallow, Stephen K. & Johnston, Robert J., 2013. "Do Exurban Communities Want More Development?," Working Papers 25, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    19. Cembalo, Luigi & Pascucci, Stefano & Tagliafierro, Carolina & Caracciolo, Francesco, 2014. "Managing integration in bio-energy chains by promoting a collective action," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182690, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Yan, Jin & Yoo, Hong Il, 2019. "Semiparametric estimation of the random utility model with rank-ordered choice data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 414-438.

    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:wly:agribz:v:33:y:2017:i:3:p:339-357. 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)1520-6297 .

    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.