Farmers’ willingness to introduce short-rotation tree plantations on agricultural land: A case study in southern Sweden

IF 5.8 2区 生物学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING Biomass & Bioenergy Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1016/j.biombioe.2024.107424
Elin Anander , Pål Börjesson , Lovisa Björnsson , Kristina Blennow
{"title":"Farmers’ willingness to introduce short-rotation tree plantations on agricultural land: A case study in southern Sweden","authors":"Elin Anander ,&nbsp;Pål Börjesson ,&nbsp;Lovisa Björnsson ,&nbsp;Kristina Blennow","doi":"10.1016/j.biombioe.2024.107424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>To meet climate targets, expanding <em>Populus</em> spp. tree cultivation is proposed as a potential biomass feedstock, especially on agricultural land that does not come into conflict with food production. However, biomass potential assessments typically overlook landowners' perspectives, risking a gap between theoretical potentials and realisation. Here, we test empirical consequences of two hypotheses based on a survey targeting southern Swedish farmers: 1) Relying exclusively on agricultural land cover data to identify abandoned agricultural land leads to an overestimation of the total agricultural land that can be utilised for future biomass production from <em>Populus</em> spp. feedstocks. 2) The absence of data on farmers' intentions to cultivate fast-growing tree species on agricultural land leads to overestimation of the potential biomass supply from <em>Populus</em> spp. in biomass assessments. Findings suggest that less than 50 % of farmers with unsubsidised arable land, which is often assumed to be abandoned, would consider cultivating these tree species on this type of land (26 % [7–48]). Furthermore, only 11 % [6–17] would consider cultivating <em>Populus</em> spp. on agricultural land overall during 2021–2030, indicating a generally low level of interest among farmers. However, higher rates were observed in forested areas. The projected near-future cultivation potential of 2.0 kha [1.1–3.0] suggests an at least threefold overestimation in previous theoretical assessments. This study highlights a disparity between biophysical land data and producer perspectives, showing that neglecting farmers’ perspectives risks overestimating the biomass supply, potentially leading to misguided expectations and inefficient policies. Our findings support targeted policy recommendations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":253,"journal":{"name":"Biomass & Bioenergy","volume":"191 ","pages":"Article 107424"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomass & Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0961953424003775","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To meet climate targets, expanding Populus spp. tree cultivation is proposed as a potential biomass feedstock, especially on agricultural land that does not come into conflict with food production. However, biomass potential assessments typically overlook landowners' perspectives, risking a gap between theoretical potentials and realisation. Here, we test empirical consequences of two hypotheses based on a survey targeting southern Swedish farmers: 1) Relying exclusively on agricultural land cover data to identify abandoned agricultural land leads to an overestimation of the total agricultural land that can be utilised for future biomass production from Populus spp. feedstocks. 2) The absence of data on farmers' intentions to cultivate fast-growing tree species on agricultural land leads to overestimation of the potential biomass supply from Populus spp. in biomass assessments. Findings suggest that less than 50 % of farmers with unsubsidised arable land, which is often assumed to be abandoned, would consider cultivating these tree species on this type of land (26 % [7–48]). Furthermore, only 11 % [6–17] would consider cultivating Populus spp. on agricultural land overall during 2021–2030, indicating a generally low level of interest among farmers. However, higher rates were observed in forested areas. The projected near-future cultivation potential of 2.0 kha [1.1–3.0] suggests an at least threefold overestimation in previous theoretical assessments. This study highlights a disparity between biophysical land data and producer perspectives, showing that neglecting farmers’ perspectives risks overestimating the biomass supply, potentially leading to misguided expectations and inefficient policies. Our findings support targeted policy recommendations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
农民在农业用地上引进短轮植树造林的意愿:瑞典南部案例研究
为实现气候目标,有人建议扩大杨树的种植,将其作为一种潜在的生物质原料,尤其是在不与粮食生产相冲突的农业用地上。然而,生物质潜力评估通常会忽略土地所有者的观点,导致理论潜力与现实之间存在差距。在此,我们基于一项针对瑞典南部农民的调查,对两个假设的经验后果进行了检验:1)完全依赖农业用地覆盖数据来识别废弃农田,会导致高估可用于未来杨树属原料生物质生产的农业用地总量。2) 由于缺乏农民在农田上种植速生树种的意向数据,导致在生物量评估中高估了杨树属植物的潜在生物量供应。研究结果表明,在拥有无补贴耕地(通常被认为是荒废的耕地)的农民中,只有不到 50% 的人会考虑在这类土地上种植这些树种(26% [7-48])。此外,只有 11% [6-17] 的人考虑在 2021-2030 年期间在农田上种植杨树,这表明农民的兴趣普遍不高。不过,林区的种植率较高。预计近未来的种植潜力为 2.0 千公顷 [1.1-3.0] ,这表明之前的理论评估至少高估了三倍。本研究强调了生物物理土地数据与生产者观点之间的差异,表明忽视农民的观点可能会高估生物质供应,从而可能导致错误的预期和低效的政策。我们的研究结果支持有针对性的政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Biomass & Bioenergy
Biomass & Bioenergy 工程技术-能源与燃料
CiteScore
11.50
自引率
3.30%
发文量
258
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Biomass & Bioenergy is an international journal publishing original research papers and short communications, review articles and case studies on biological resources, chemical and biological processes, and biomass products for new renewable sources of energy and materials. The scope of the journal extends to the environmental, management and economic aspects of biomass and bioenergy. Key areas covered by the journal: • Biomass: sources, energy crop production processes, genetic improvements, composition. Please note that research on these biomass subjects must be linked directly to bioenergy generation. • Biological Residues: residues/rests from agricultural production, forestry and plantations (palm, sugar etc), processing industries, and municipal sources (MSW). Papers on the use of biomass residues through innovative processes/technological novelty and/or consideration of feedstock/system sustainability (or unsustainability) are welcomed. However waste treatment processes and pollution control or mitigation which are only tangentially related to bioenergy are not in the scope of the journal, as they are more suited to publications in the environmental arena. Papers that describe conventional waste streams (ie well described in existing literature) that do not empirically address ''new'' added value from the process are not suitable for submission to the journal. • Bioenergy Processes: fermentations, thermochemical conversions, liquid and gaseous fuels, and petrochemical substitutes • Bioenergy Utilization: direct combustion, gasification, electricity production, chemical processes, and by-product remediation • Biomass and the Environment: carbon cycle, the net energy efficiency of bioenergy systems, assessment of sustainability, and biodiversity issues.
期刊最新文献
Negative CO2 emissions through iG-CLC of pinus residue in a continuous unit of 0.5 kWth using a natural Mn-based oxygen carrier Solar-driven torrefaction for sustainable bioenergy production: A review Financial assessment of integrating anaerobic digestion with cattle farming for biomethane production – Implications for farm economics and the supply chain The depth-dependent study of microalgae growth under continuous culture conditions at different depths was considered The inhibition of xylanase enzymes by oligosaccharides produced during the degradation of biopolymers in biomass
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1