Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Context Matters—Using an Agent-Based Model to Investigate the Influence of Market Context on the Supply of Local Biomass for Anaerobic Digestion

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biogas plant managers often face difficulties in obtaining feedstock at stable and affordable prices. The context in which the biogas plant manager needs to purchase the feedstock could be important when the biomass is also used in valorization trajectories besides anaerobic digestion. Using a combination of qualitative research and agent-based modelling, we investigated the effect of market context on the purchase of local biomass for anaerobic digestion. This paper details the institutional arrangements of our case study, the silage maize market in Flanders and the results of a scenario analysis, simulating nine different market contexts. Silage maize is an interesting case study, as it is both used for feed by farmers and as an input in biogas plants. The results show that mainly the time of entry into the market explains the difficulties in obtaining a stable supply of silage maize to biogas plants. Furthermore, we found a silage maize price increase for farmers in competition with a biogas plant, especially in case of a silage maize deficit in the market. The different institutional arrangements used have no significant effect. Our findings may guide biogas plant managers in assessing and reducing the consequences of the establishment of a biogas plant, competing for local biomass resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Decree of 8 May 2009 Decreet van 8 mei 2009 concerning general provisions relating to the energy policy (Decreet van 8 mei houdende algemene bepalingen betreffende het energiebeleid). [2]

  2. Often other arrangements are part of the agreement as well, such as the deposition of manure by the buyer on the fields in question.

  3. Dutch net energy system for dairy cows.

  4. Silage maize yields can differ largely between years due to the weather conditions. As a result, farmers with a silage maize surplus still tend to plant a surplus of silage maize in order to protect themselves from a possible bad harvest. Consequently, they will not easily switch to other more profitable crops.

  5. As farmers generally do not know themselves the exact volumes that were harvested and biogas plant managers are quite protective of their accountancy data, we were not able to gain access to quantitative data on exact prices and volumes to confirm this statement.

  6. The equations to calculate these prices can be found in the ODD. We related this to the prices of an alternative feedstock called Ecofrit, an alternative feedstock for biogas plants composed of several products, including organic biological waste, glycerine, fats, grains and others. The biogas potential of this alternative feedstock is known to be between 160 and 185 Nm3/t depending on the exact composition.

  7. In this paper, trust is used in the sense of loyalty towards another agent to keep the trading relationship going.

  8. We made this choice in order to be able to compare the prices paid by the biogas plant, as for scenarios 2 and 3, he is only present on the market at year 10.

  9. For all statistical significance tests, we used a Mann-Whitney U test

References

  1. Eurobserv’er (2007) The state of renewable energies in Europe, Edition 2013. http://www.energies-renouvelables.org/observ-er/stat_baro/barobilan/barobilan13-gb.pdf. Accessed 7 August 2014

  2. De Geest V, De Mey J, Vanacker K, Meers E (2013) Voortgangsrapport 2013 Anaerobe vergisting in Vlaanderen. Biogas-E vzw. http://www.biogas-e.be/sites/default/media/rapporten/Voortgangsrapport_2013.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2015

  3. Gold S, Suaring S (2010) Securing feedstock supply of biogas plants—a managerial challenge. Corp. Responsib. Res. Conf. pp 1–16

  4. Poeschl M, Ward S, Owende P (2010) Prospects for expanded utilization of biogas in Germany. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14:1782–1797. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.04.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McCormick K, Kåberger T (2007) Key barriers for bioenergy in Europe: economic conditions, know-how and institutional capacity and supply chain co-ordination. Biomass Bioenergy 31:443–452. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.01.008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gold S, Suering S (2011) Supply chain and logistics issues of bio-energy production. J Clean Prod 19:32–42. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Sleen P (2010) Biomass contracting: biomass contract structures for digestion installations. Dissertation. University of Twente

  8. De Geest V, De Mey J, Vanacker K Wynsberghe T, Meers, E (2014) Voortgangsrapport 2014 Anaerobe vergisting in Vlaanderen, stand van zaken werkjaar 2013-2014. Biogas-E vzw. http://www.biogas-e.be/sites/default/media/rapporten/Voortgangsrapport_2014.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2015

  9. Berhard HR (2006) Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches, 4th edn. Altamira press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  10. Tesfatsion L, Judd K L (2006) Handbook of computational economics 2: agent-based computational economics. Amsterdam, North-Holland, Amsterdam

  11. Bonabeau E (2002) Agent-based modeling: methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci UDA 99(Suppl 3):7280–7287. doi:10.1073/pnas.082080899

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Matthews RB, Gilbert NG, Roach A, Polhill JG, Gotts NM (2007) Agent-based land-use models: a review of applications. Landsc Ecol 22:1447–1459. doi:10.1007/s10980-007-9135-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Happe K (2004) Agricultural policies and farm structures agent-based modeling and application to EU-policy reform. Dissertation. University of Hohenheim

  14. Negahban A, Yilmaz L (2014) Agent-based simulation applications in marketing research: an integrated review. J Simul 8:129–142. doi:10.1057/jos.2013.21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kostadinov F, Holm S, Steubing B, These O, Lemm R (2013) Simulation of a Swiss wood fuel and roundwood market: an explorative study in agent-based modelling. For Policy Econ. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2013.08.001

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ostermeyer A, Schönau F (2012) Effects of biogas production on inter- and in-farm competition, No 135772. Proc 2012 EAAE 131st Seminar, September 18-19. Prague, pp 1-20

  17. Heairet A, Choudhary S, Miller S, Ming Xu (2012) Beyond life cycle analysis: using an agent-based approach to model the emerging bio-energy industry. Proc 2012 I.E. Int Symp. Sustain. Syst. Technol. (ISSST), May 16-18. Boston, pp 1-5

  18. Macal C M, North M J (2009) Agent-based modeling and simulation. Proc 2009 Winter Sim Conf., December 13-16, Austin pp 86-98. doi: 10.1109/WSC.2009.5429318

  19. Borrill P L, Tesfatsion L (2010) Agent-based modelling: the right mathematics for the social sciences? Working paper No. 10023. Iowa State University

  20. Wilensky U (1999) Netlogo. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling Northwestern University

  21. Haesaert G (2003). Onderzoek naar achteruitgang en opkomst van cultuurgewassen en rassen in Vlaanderen. Vlaamse Onderzoekseenheid Land- en Tuinbouw (VOLT). http://www2.vlaanderen.be/landbouw/downloads/volt/06.pdf Accessed 21 May 2015. Accessed 21 May 2015

  22. Kerselaers E, Rogge E, Vanempten E, Lauwers L, Van Huylenbroeck G (2013) Changing land use in the countryside: stakeholders’ perception of the ongoing rural planning processes in Flanders. Land Use Policy 32:197–206. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.10.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Platteau J, Van Gijseghem D, Van Bogaert T, Maertens E (2012) Landbouwrapport 2012. Departement Landbouw en Visserij, Brussel

  24. Poppo L, Zenger T (2002) Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strateg Manag J 23:707–725. doi:10.1002/smj.249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Williamson O (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Palay TM (1985) Avoiding regulatory constraints: contracting safeguards and the role of informal agreements. J Law, Econ Organ 1:155–175

    Google Scholar 

  27. Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Adm Sci Q 42:35–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Cannon JP, Achrol RS, Grundlach GT (2000) Contracts, norms and plural form governance. J Acad Mark Sci 28:180–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Klein PG (2000) New institutional economics. In: Boeckaer B, De Geest G (eds) Encyclopedia of law and economics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 456–489

    Google Scholar 

  30. Larson A (1992) Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: a study of the governance of exchange relationships. Adm Sci Q 37:76–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Landbouw Economisch Instituut (2014) Agrarische prijzen. Wageningen UR. http://www.wageningenur.nl/nl/Expertises-Dienstverlening/Onderzoeksinstituten/LEI/Data-1/Agrarische-prijzen.htm. Accessed 21 May 2015

  32. Grimm V, Berger U, DeAngelis DL, Polhill JG, Giske J, Railsback SF (2010) The ODD protocol: a review and first update. Ecol Modell 221:2760–2768. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.08.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Index Mundi (2014) Maize (corn) monthly price. Index Mundi. www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=corn&months=240&currency=eur. Accessed 16 Dec 2014

  34. Klos TB, Nooteboom B (2001) Agent-based computational transaction cost economics. J Econ Dyn Conrol 25:503–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Grimm V, Berger U, Bastiansen F, Eliassen S, Ginot V, Giske J, Gross-custard J, Grand T, Heinz SK, Huse G, Huth A, Jpsen JU, Jørgensen C, Mooij WM, Müller B, Pe’er G, Piou C, Railsback SF, Robbins AM, Robbins MM, Rossmanith E, Rüger N, Strand E, Souisse S, Stillman R, Vabø R, Visser U, DeAngelis DL (2006) A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models. Ecol Modell 198:115–126. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.04.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wageningen UR Livestock research (2014) Voederwaardeprijzen rundvee. Wageningen UR. http://www.wageningenur.nl/nl/Expertises-Dienstverlening/Onderzoeksinstituten/livestock-research/Faciliteiten-producten/Voederwaardeprijzen-Rundvee.htm. Accessed 21 May 2015

  37. Mitterleitner H, Schilcher A, Demmel M (2007) Konzepte zur Reduzierung der Kosten beim Transport von nachwachsenden Rohstoffern für Biogasanlagen. Lerchl Druck, Freising

    Google Scholar 

  38. Shastri Y, Rodríguez L, Hansen A, Ting KC (2011) Agent-based analysis of biomass feedstock production dynamics. Bioenergy Res 4:258–275. doi:10.1007/s12155-011-9139-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The work of Anouk Mertens is supported by the Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology of Flanders (IWT Vlaanderen, 131479). We would like to thank the interviewees for providing inputs and valuable insights into the issues discussed.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Bio-Science Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653 Bl. A, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Anouk Mertens, Ludwig Lauwers & Jeroen Buysse

  2. Social Sciences Unit, Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research, Burgemeester Van Gansberghelaan 115 bus 2, 9820, Merelbeke, Belgium

    Anouk Mertens, Jef Van Meensel, Koen Mondelaers & Ludwig Lauwers

Authors
  1. Anouk Mertens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jef Van Meensel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Koen Mondelaers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ludwig Lauwers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jeroen Buysse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anouk Mertens.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 254 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mertens, A., Van Meensel, J., Mondelaers, K. et al. Context Matters—Using an Agent-Based Model to Investigate the Influence of Market Context on the Supply of Local Biomass for Anaerobic Digestion. Bioenerg. Res. 9, 132–145 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9668-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-015-9668-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation