德国农民对来自生活污水和厨房垃圾的肥料的偏好——一个离散选择实验

IF 0.7 4区 经济学 Q4 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
Katrin Utai, M. Narjes, T. Krimly, C. Lippert
{"title":"德国农民对来自生活污水和厨房垃圾的肥料的偏好——一个离散选择实验","authors":"Katrin Utai, M. Narjes, T. Krimly, C. Lippert","doi":"10.30430/gjae.2022.0235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In view of increasing energy and resource scarcities, nutrient recycling from domestic wastewater is a promising way to obtain mineral fertilizers. Given the lacking evidence about the acceptance of recycling fertilizers by the farming sector, we elicited farmer preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for selected attributes of mineral fertilizers made from domestic sewage and kitchen waste. We conducted a Discrete Choice Experiment with 206 German farmers and fitted a Random Parameter Logit (RPL) model. As-suming an average market price level of around 300 euros per tonne of N-P-K fertilizer, the choice exper-iment revealed that farmers not engaged in non-food production such as forage cultivation or renewable energies activities and without farmer-to-consumer direct marketing would accept a recycling fertilizer only together with a financial compensation via price discount of approximately 10%. The average WTP drops considerably if a fertilizer’s heavy metal contents are relatively high and if the absence of drug residues cannot be guaranteed, whereas a customizable nutrient composition and a constant supply availability would have a sales promoting effect. Farmers’ characteristics can only partly explain the notable heterogeneity of the WTP for the considered fertilizer attributes. Even though the WTP for a recycling fertilizer is on average less than that for a conventional mineral fertilizer, the estimated WTP standard deviations suggest that not all farmers expect a financial compensation via price discount when purchasing recycling fertilizers.","PeriodicalId":48919,"journal":{"name":"German Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Farmers’ Preferences for Fertilizers derived from Domestic Sewage and Kitchen Waste – A Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany\",\"authors\":\"Katrin Utai, M. Narjes, T. Krimly, C. Lippert\",\"doi\":\"10.30430/gjae.2022.0235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In view of increasing energy and resource scarcities, nutrient recycling from domestic wastewater is a promising way to obtain mineral fertilizers. Given the lacking evidence about the acceptance of recycling fertilizers by the farming sector, we elicited farmer preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for selected attributes of mineral fertilizers made from domestic sewage and kitchen waste. We conducted a Discrete Choice Experiment with 206 German farmers and fitted a Random Parameter Logit (RPL) model. As-suming an average market price level of around 300 euros per tonne of N-P-K fertilizer, the choice exper-iment revealed that farmers not engaged in non-food production such as forage cultivation or renewable energies activities and without farmer-to-consumer direct marketing would accept a recycling fertilizer only together with a financial compensation via price discount of approximately 10%. The average WTP drops considerably if a fertilizer’s heavy metal contents are relatively high and if the absence of drug residues cannot be guaranteed, whereas a customizable nutrient composition and a constant supply availability would have a sales promoting effect. Farmers’ characteristics can only partly explain the notable heterogeneity of the WTP for the considered fertilizer attributes. Even though the WTP for a recycling fertilizer is on average less than that for a conventional mineral fertilizer, the estimated WTP standard deviations suggest that not all farmers expect a financial compensation via price discount when purchasing recycling fertilizers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"German Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"German Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30430/gjae.2022.0235\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Journal of Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30430/gjae.2022.0235","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

鉴于能源和资源日益短缺,从生活废水中回收养分是一种很有前途的获取矿物肥料的方法。鉴于缺乏证据表明农业部门接受循环肥料,我们引出了农民对由生活污水和厨房垃圾制成的矿物肥料的选择属性的偏好和支付意愿(WTP)。我们对206名德国农民进行了离散选择实验,并拟合了随机参数Logit (RPL)模型。假设N-P-K肥料的平均市场价格水平约为每吨300欧元,选择实验显示,不从事非粮食生产(如饲料种植或可再生能源活动)且没有农民对消费者直接营销的农民只会接受回收肥料,并通过大约10%的价格折扣获得经济补偿。如果肥料的重金属含量相对较高,并且不能保证没有药物残留,则平均WTP会大幅下降,而可定制的营养成分和持续的供应将具有促进销售的效果。农民的特征只能部分解释WTP对所考虑的肥料属性的显著异质性。尽管循环肥料的WTP平均低于传统矿物肥料,但估计的WTP标准差表明,并非所有农民在购买循环肥料时都期望通过价格折扣获得经济补偿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Farmers’ Preferences for Fertilizers derived from Domestic Sewage and Kitchen Waste – A Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany
In view of increasing energy and resource scarcities, nutrient recycling from domestic wastewater is a promising way to obtain mineral fertilizers. Given the lacking evidence about the acceptance of recycling fertilizers by the farming sector, we elicited farmer preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for selected attributes of mineral fertilizers made from domestic sewage and kitchen waste. We conducted a Discrete Choice Experiment with 206 German farmers and fitted a Random Parameter Logit (RPL) model. As-suming an average market price level of around 300 euros per tonne of N-P-K fertilizer, the choice exper-iment revealed that farmers not engaged in non-food production such as forage cultivation or renewable energies activities and without farmer-to-consumer direct marketing would accept a recycling fertilizer only together with a financial compensation via price discount of approximately 10%. The average WTP drops considerably if a fertilizer’s heavy metal contents are relatively high and if the absence of drug residues cannot be guaranteed, whereas a customizable nutrient composition and a constant supply availability would have a sales promoting effect. Farmers’ characteristics can only partly explain the notable heterogeneity of the WTP for the considered fertilizer attributes. Even though the WTP for a recycling fertilizer is on average less than that for a conventional mineral fertilizer, the estimated WTP standard deviations suggest that not all farmers expect a financial compensation via price discount when purchasing recycling fertilizers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
German Journal of Agricultural Economics
German Journal of Agricultural Economics AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The GJAE publishes a broad range of theoretical, applied and policy-related articles. It aims for a balanced coverage of economic issues within agricultural and food production, demand and trade, rural development, and sustainable and efficient resource use as well as specific German or European issues. The GJAE also welcomes review articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信