Are short rotation coppices an alternative to traditional agricultural land use in Germany? A real options approach
Short rotation coppice (SRC) is an interesting economic alternative to agricultural land use. Nevertheless, farmers often do not switch to SRC. Thus, it seems like the farmers do not act according to the classical investment theory. A relatively new approach which can help to explain farmers’ reluctance is the real options approach (ROA). Compared to the classical investment theory, the investment triggers are shifted upwards. We want to answer the question of whether the ROA is an explanatory approach for farmers’ reluctance to invest in SRC. To do so, we develop a model to calculate the investment triggers of the gross margins (GM) of SRC a farmer should switch from rye production to SRC. The results show that the trigger GMs calculated according to the ROA are higher than those of the net present value and a risk-averse farmer invests earlier than a risk-neutral farmer. It can be concluded that a part of famers’ reluctance concerning SRC can be explained by the ROA.
|Date of creation:||Feb 2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200|
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://www.aares.info/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dickey, David A & Fuller, Wayne A, 1981. "Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 1057-1072, June.
- Jasmina Behan & Kieran McQuinn & Maurice J. Roche, 2006. "Rural Land Use: Traditional Agriculture or Forestry?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 112-123.
- Robert McDonald & Daniel Siegel, 1986. "The Value of Waiting to Invest," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 707-727.
- Ibáñez, Alfredo & Zapatero, Fernando, 2004. "Monte Carlo Valuation of American Options through Computation of the Optimal Exercise Frontier," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(02), pages 253-275, June.
- Darren Hudson & Keith Coble & Jayson Lusk, 2005. "Consistency of risk premium measures," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(1), pages 41-49, 07.
- Gjolberg, Ole & Guttormsen, Atle G., 2002. "Real options in the forest: what if prices are mean-reverting?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 13-20, May.
- Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
- Anderson, Jock R., 1974. "Risk Efficiency in the Interpretation of Agricultural Production Research," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(03), September.
- Rocha, Katia & Moreira, Ajax R.B. & Reis, Eustaquio J. & Carvalho, Leonardo, 2006. "The market value of forest concessions in the Brazilian Amazon: a Real Option approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 149-160, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aare13:152184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.