IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gewi14/187894.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Interdependenzen Zwischen Risikoeinstellungen Und Entscheidungen In Der Planung Sowie Im Betrieb Von Biogasanlagen

Author

Listed:
  • Steinhorst, Martin Philipp
  • Empl, Johannes-Baptist
  • Bahrs, Enno

Abstract

Die Biogasproduktion hat sich in Deutschland mittlerweile zu einer landwirtschaftsnahen Branche mit Milliardenumsätzen entwickelt. Vor diesem Hintergrund sind auch die Zusam-menhänge zwischen der Einstellung von Betreibern einer Biogasanlage gegenüber finanziel-len Risiken und wichtigen technischen sowie organisatorischen Eigenschaften der zugehöri-gen Biogasanlagen von Bedeutung. Grundlage dieser Untersuchung ist eine Erfassung der Risikoeinstellung von Betreibern von Biogasanlagen über experimentelle Lotterieentschei-dungen, wie sie vielfach auch in der agrarökonomischen Forschung Anwendung finden. Die dabei quantifizierten Risikoeinstellungen werden wichtigen Anlagenparametern gegenüberge-stellt, die ebenfalls in derselben breitangelegten Umfrage unter Biogasanlagenbetreibern in Deutschland gewonnen wurden. Dabei stellen sich durch Anwendung einer ordinalen logis-tischen Regression Zusammenhänge zwischen Risikoeinstellung und Anlagenparametern dar, die einerseits bereits in der Anlagenprojektierung festzulegen sind (ex ante Parameter) oder im späteren Betrieb noch gestaltbar erscheinen (ex post Parameter). Im Ergebnis zeigt sich, dass vor der Investition (ex ante) die Risikoeinstellung der Anlagenbetreiber einen vergleichs-weise engen Zusammenhang mit der Finanzierungsstruktur und der technischen Komplexität des Anlagenaufbaus aufweisen. Nach der Investition (ex post) weist die Risikoeinstellung der Anlagenbetreiber einen vergleichsweise engen Zusammenhang mit der Dauer von technischen Kontrollen, der Substratzusammensetzung, dem Vorhalten von Leistungsreserven und Ent-scheidungen zur Direktvermarktung des erzeugten elektrischen Stroms auf. Die im Beitrag herausgearbeiteten Zusammenhänge zwischen Anlagenparametern und Risikoeinstellungen der Biogasanlagenbetreiber können insbesondere im Finanzierungs-, Beratungs- und Sachver-ständigenwesen wertvolle Informationen darstellen, um z. B. bereits vor der Investitionsent-scheidung die individuellen Risikoprofile optimal auf die technische und finanzielle Struktur der Anlage abzustimmen.

Suggested Citation

  • Steinhorst, Martin Philipp & Empl, Johannes-Baptist & Bahrs, Enno, 2014. "Interdependenzen Zwischen Risikoeinstellungen Und Entscheidungen In Der Planung Sowie Im Betrieb Von Biogasanlagen," 54th Annual Conference, Goettingen, Germany, September 17-19, 2014 187894, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewi14:187894
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.187894
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/187894/files/Interdependenzen%20zwischen%20Risikoeinstellungen%20und%20Entscheidungen%20in%20der%20Planung%20sowie%20im%20Betrieb%20von%20Biogasanlagen.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.187894?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. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    2. Hans-Joachim Naegele & Bernd Thomas & Christine Schrade & Andreas Lemmer & Hans Oechsner & Thomas Jungbluth, 2013. "Influence of Maintenance Intervals on Performance and Emissions of a 192 kW el Biogas Gas Otto CHP Unit and Results of Lubricating Oil Quality Tests—Outcome from a Continuous Two-Year Measuring Campai," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Fama, Eugene F., 1977. "Risk-adjusted discount rates and capital budgeting under uncertainty," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 3-24, August.
    4. Sarah Brown & Gaia Garino & Karl Taylor, 2013. "Household Debt And Attitudes Toward Risk," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(2), pages 283-304, June.
    5. Tobias Heffels & Russell McKenna & Wolf Fichtner, 2012. "Direct marketing of electricity from biogas and biomethane: an economic analysis of several business models in Germany," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 53-70, September.
    6. Lewellen, Katharina, 2006. "Financing decisions when managers are risk averse," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 551-589, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Rauh, Stefan & Berenz, Stefan & Heissenhuber, Alois, 2007. "ABSCHATZUNG DES UNTERNEHMERISCHEN RISIKOS BEIM BETRIEB EINER BIOGASANLAGE MIT HILFE DER MONTECARLO-METHODE (German)," 47th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 26-28, 2007 7588, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    9. Chetan Dave & Catherine Eckel & Cathleen Johnson & Christian Rojas, 2010. "Eliciting risk preferences: When is simple better?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 219-243, December.
    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. Steinhorst, M.P. & Empl, J.-B. & Bahrs, E., 2015. "Interdependenzen zwischen Risikoeinstellungen und Entscheidungen in der Planung sowie im Betrieb von Biogasanlagen," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.
    2. Goldzahl, Léontine, 2017. "Contributions of risk preference, time orientation and perceptions to breast cancer screening regularity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 147-157.
    3. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    4. Fossen, Frank M. & Glocker, Daniela, 2017. "Stated and revealed heterogeneous risk preferences in educational choice," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-25.
    5. Alserda, Gosse A.G. & Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Swinkels, Laurens & van der Lecq, Fieke S.G., 2019. "Individual pension risk preference elicitation and collective asset allocation with heterogeneity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 206-225.
    6. Hermansson, Cecilia, 2018. "Can self-assessed financial risk measures explain and predict bank customers’ objective financial risk?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 226-240.
    7. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin & Janna Heider, 2015. "A Study of Outcome Reporting Bias Using Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 61(1), pages 239-262.
    8. Jan-Erik Loennqvist & Markku Verkasalo & Gari Walkowitz & Philipp C. Wichardt, 2011. "Measuring Individual Risk Attitudes in the Lab: Task or Ask? An Empirical Comparison," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 02-03, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences.
    9. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Fujin Zhou, 2021. "An experimental study of charity hazard: The effect of risky and ambiguous government compensation on flood insurance demand," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 275-318, December.
    10. Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kuzubaş, Tolga U. & Saltoğlu, Burak, 2017. "Measures of individual risk attitudes and portfolio choice: Evidence from pension participants," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 186-203.
    11. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin, 2013. "The “bomb” risk elicitation task," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 31-65, August.
    12. Michele Garagnani, 2023. "The predictive power of risk elicitation tasks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 165-192, October.
    13. Renate Strobl & Conny Wunsch, 2017. "Does Voluntary Risk Taking Affect Solidarity? Experimental Evidence from Kenya," CESifo Working Paper Series 6578, CESifo.
    14. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Delissaint, Diego & Fourati, Maleke & Miquel-Florensa, Josepa & Seabright, Paul, 2021. "Betting on the lord: Lotteries and religiosity in Haiti," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. Strobl, Renate & Wunsch, Conny, 2018. "Risky Choices and Solidarity: Why Experimental Design Matters," Working papers 2018/17, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    16. Stefan Zeisberger & Dennis Vrecko & Thomas Langer, 2012. "Measuring the time stability of Prospect Theory preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 359-386, March.
    17. Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Mani, Subha & Sharma, Smriti & Singhal, Saurabh, 2016. "Eliciting Risk Preferences: Firefighting in the Field," IZA Discussion Papers 9765, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    19. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    20. Eriksen, Kristoffer W. & Kvaløy, Ola & Luzuriaga, Miguel, 2020. "Risk-taking on behalf of others," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk and Uncertainty;

    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:gewi14:187894. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gewisea.html .

    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.