IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare13/152184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are short rotation coppices an alternative to traditional agricultural land use in Germany? A real options approach

Author

Listed:
  • Haverkamp, Matthias Wolbert
  • Musshoff, Oliver

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Haverkamp, Matthias Wolbert & Musshoff, Oliver, 2013. "Are short rotation coppices an alternative to traditional agricultural land use in Germany? A real options approach," 2013 Conference (57th), February 5-8, 2013, Sydney, Australia 152184, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare13:152184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/152184
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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, July.
    9. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land conversion; short-rotation-coppice; rye; real options approach; net-present-value; Agricultural and Food Policy; Demand and Price Analysis; Land Economics/Use;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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: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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.