The Importance of Public Sources of Financing the Development of Renewable Energy in Agriculture, Using the Example of Eastern Poland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- What motivates farmers to obtain energy from renewable sources?
- What is the perception of farmers about the role of the state in energy transformation?
- What support do farmers expect from the state in the development of renewable energy?
- Are there differences between the surveyed voivodeships in their approach to the motivators for installing renewable energy sources by farmers and their perception of the directions and instruments of state support and energy transformation?
2. Literature Review
2.1. Factors Determining the Development of Renewable Energy in Agriculture
2.2. Support from Public Funds as a Motivator for Investing in Renewable Energy on Farms
- individual customers (in the field of, e.g., photovoltaics, heat pumps, building insulation);
- entrepreneurs (e.g., in relation to improving the efficiency of production processes and renewable energy sources);
- municipal companies (in areas related to, e.g., heat production or waste utilization).
3. Materials and Methods
- Lublin voivodeship—population finite—35.2 thousand farms—sample size—96;
- Podlaskie voivodeship—population finite—35.7 thousand farms—sample size—96;
- Podkarpackie voivodeship—population finite—7.7 thousand farms—sample size—95;
- Świętokrzyskie voivodeship—population finite—10.4 thousand farms—sample size—96;
- Warmian–Masurian voivodeship—population finite—21.9 thousand farms—sample size—96.
4. Results
4.1. Farmers’ Motivations to Use Renewable Energy Sources
4.2. Farmers’ Perception of the State’s Role in Energy Transformation
4.3. Farmers’ Expectations Regarding Funds and Regulations Supporting the Development of Renewable Energy
4.4. Spatial Diversity of the Studied Phenomena
4.5. Summary of Results
5. Discussion
6. Summary and Conclusions
- The most important motivators encouraging the surveyed farmers to obtain energy from renewable sources are market incentives, especially high energy prices and problems with traditional energy carriers (coal, gas). Energy independence is also important. The following motivators were rated relatively low: the availability of renewable energy sources among neighbors, the possibility of managing waste from the farm, and, contrary to studies by other authors, the high level of subsidies.
- In solving climate and energy transformation problems, according to the vast majority of respondents, the state should play a huge role. The most important activities requiring its support include the following: investments in renewable energy sources, the insulation of houses, the construction of buildings with high standards of thermal and energy efficiency, and the sale of devices with such standards.
- In terms of supporting the development of renewable energy sources, the surveyed farmers expect appropriate regulations, financial support in the form of direct instruments (subsidies), indirect impact support (tax reliefs, preferential loans), technological support (e.g., construction of energy storage facilities, modernization of transmission networks), and educational support (promotion of good practices in the field of renewable energy) from the state. It is important that many strong relationships have been demonstrated between farmers’ expectations regarding the instruments of state support for the development of renewable energy sources and the perception of actions taken by the state to support energy transformation. Similarly, most of the relationships between the assessments of instruments supporting the use of renewable energy were strong and statistically significant. However, no statistical differences were found in farmers’ assessments depending on the source of financing for renewable energy.
- The spatial and structural diversity of agriculture affects farmers’ opinions on renewable energy, and the research conducted showed statistically significant differences between the opinions of the surveyed farmers regarding motivators to invest in renewable energy, the perception of the role of the state and society, as well as instruments used in the energy transformation process in five voivodeships of Eastern Poland. The lowest ratings for most items were given by farmers from the Warmian–Masurian and Podlaskie voivodeships, which means that they expect support from public funds to a lesser extent. At the same time, it is worth adding that these voivodeships had the relatively highest percentage of farmers who financed investments in renewable energy sources from their own funds.
- In response to the main research question and in connection with the verification of the research hypothesis, 244 respondents were identified who already had RES installations (47% of all respondents). The analysis showed no statistically significant differences in the assessment of individual motivators between groups of investors depending on the use of public funds. The only exception was the evaluation of the motivator in the form of a high level of funding. This was rated higher by those farmers who benefited from public support. Their percentage among those with renewable energy installations was 65%. Since the remaining owners of renewable energy installations (over one-third of the total) financed the investments from their own funds, it seems that the answer to the question cannot be unambiguous. However, in combination with the impact of other motivators, it can be concluded that public funds have triggered the process of the diffusion of renewable energy in agriculture in Eastern Poland but are not a necessary condition for farmers to make investment decisions.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Government Energy Spending Tracker, IEA, June 2023 Update. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/government-energy-spending-tracker-2 (accessed on 10 March 2024).
- Cadoret, I.; Padovano, F. The political drivers of renewable energies policies. Energy Econ. 2016, 56, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, B.; Omoju, O.E. Focusing on the right targets: Economic factors driving non-hydro renewable energy transition. Renew. Energy 2017, 113, 52–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tu, Y.-X.; Kubatko, O.; Piven, V.; Sotnyk, I.; Kurbatova, T. Determinants of Renewable Energy Development: Evidence from the EU Countries. Energies 2022, 15, 7093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papież, M.; Śmiech, S.; Frodyma, K. Determinants of renewable energy development in the EU countries. A 20-year perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 91, 918–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bednarczyk, J.L.; Brzozowska-Rup, K.; Luściński, S. Determinants of the Energy Development Based on Renewable Energy Sources in Poland. Energies 2021, 14, 6762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Silva, P.P.; Cerqueira, P.A.; Ogbe, W. Determinants of renewable energy growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from panel ARDL. Energy 2018, 156, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Şener, S.E.C.; Sharp, J.L.; Anctil, A. Factors impacting diverging paths of renewable energy: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 2335–2342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Streimikiene, D.; Baležentis, T.; Volkov, A.; Morkūnas, M.; Žičkienė, A.; Streimikis, J. Barriers and Drivers of Renewable Energy Penetration in Rural Areas. Energies 2021, 14, 6452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chishti, M.Z.; Dogan, E. Analyzing the determinants of renewable energy: The moderating role of technology and macroeconomic uncertainty. Energy Environ. 2024, 35, 874–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X.; Luo, D. Driving force of rising renewable energy in China: Environment, regulation and employment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 68, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Przychodzen, W.; Przychodzen, J. Determinants of renewable energy production in transition economies: A panel data approach. Energy 2020, 191, 116583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smirnova, E.; Kot, S.; Kolpak, E.; Shestak, V. Governmental support and renewable energy production: A cross-country review. Energy 2021, 230, 120903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Z.-Y.; Chen, Y.-L.; Li, H. What affects the development of renewable energy power generation projects in China: ISM analysis. Renew. Energy 2019, 131, 506–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meleddu, M.; Pulina, M. Public spending on renewable energy in Italian regions. Renew. Energy 2018, 115, 1086–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, D.; Mohsin, M.; Rasheed, A.K.; Chang, Y.; Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. Public spending and green economic growth in BRI region: Mediating role of green finance. Energy Policy 2021, 153, 112256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krozer, Y. Financing of the global shift to renewable energy and energy efficiency. Green Financ. 2019, 1, 264–278. Available online: https://www.aimspress.com/fileOther/PDF/GF/GF-01-03-264.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024). [CrossRef]
- Ziaei, S.M. The impacts of household social benefits, public expenditure on labour markets, and household financial assets on the renewable energy sector. Renew. Energy 2022, 181, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Majeed, Y.; Khan, M.U.; Waseem, M.; Zahid, U.; Mahmood, F.; Majeed, F.; Sultan, M.; Raza, A. Renewable energy as an alternative source for energy management in agriculture. Energy Rep. 2023, 10, 344–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chel, A.; Kaushık, G. Renewable energy for sustainable agriculture. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 31, 91–118. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1051/agro/2010029 (accessed on 28 June 2024). [CrossRef]
- Aleixandre-Tudó, J.L.; Castelló-Cogollos, L.; Aleixandre, J.L.; Aleixandre-Benavent, R. Renewable energies: Worldwide trends in research, funding and international collaboration. Renew. Energy 2019, 139, 268–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ansari, M.A.; Haider, S.; Masood, T. Do renewable energy and globalization enhance ecological footprint: An analysis of top renewable energy countries? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 6719–6732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kaushik, C. Renewable Energy for Sustainable Agriculture. Available online: https://hal.science/hal-00930477v1/file/hal-00930477.pdf (accessed on 17 March 2024).
- Bathaei, A.; Štreimikienė, D. Renewable Energy and Sustainable Agriculture: Review of Indicators. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nacer, T.; Hamidat, A.; Nadjemi, O.; Bey, M. Feasibility study of grid connected photovoltaic system in family farms for electricity generation in rural areas. Renew. Energy 2016, 96, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, C.M.S.; Singh, S.; Gupta, M.K.; Nimdeo, Y.M.; Raushan, R.; Deorankar, A.V.; Kumar, T.A.; Rout, P.K.; Chanotiya, C.; Pakhale, V.D. Solar energy: A promising renewable source for meeting energy demand in Indian agriculture applications. Sustain. Energy Technol. 2023, 55, 102905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhuyan, S.; Laxman, T.; Saikanth, D.; Badekhan, A. Advanced Farming Technologies for Pollution Reduction and Increased Crop Productivity. In Advanced Farming Technology; Scripown Publications: New Delhi, India, 2023; pp. 194–214. Available online: https://www.scripown.com/docs/EBOOK_20230715_122225.pdf#page=200 (accessed on 12 February 2024).
- Rahman, M.M.; Khan, I.; Field, D.L.; Techato, K.; Alameh, K. Powering agriculture: Present status, future potential, and challenges of renewable energy applications. Renew. Energy 2022, 188, 731–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, I. Impacts of energy decentralization viewed through the lens of the energy cultures framework: Solar home systems in the developing economies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 119, 109576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mwirigi, J.W.; Makenzi, P.M.; Ochola, W.O. Socio-economic constraints to adoption and sustainability of biogas technology by farmers in Nakuru Districts, Kenya. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2009, 13, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beckman, J.; Xiarchos, I.M. Why are Californian farmers adopting more (and larger) renewable energy operations? Renew. Energy 2013, 55, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ge, J.; Sutherland, L.A.; Polhill, J.G.; Matthews, K.; Miller, D.; Wardell-Johnson, D. Exploring factors affecting on-farm renewable energy adoption in Scotland using large-scale microdata. Energy Policy 2017, 107, 548–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Everest, B. Willingness of farmers to establish a renewable energy (solar and wind) cooperative in NW Turkey. Arab. J. Geosci. 2021, 14, 517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borchers, A.M.; Xiarchos, I.; Beckman, J. Determinants of wind and solar energy system adoption by U.S. farms: A multilevel modeling approach. Energy Policy 2014, 69, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sutherland, L.A.; Toma, L.; Barnes, A.P.; Matthews, K.B.; Hopkins, J. Agri-environmental diversification: Linking environmental, forestry and renewable energy engagement on Scottish farms. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 47, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schaffer, A.; Düvelmeyer, C. Regional drivers of on-farm energy production in Bavaria. Energy Policy 2016, 95, 361–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reise, C.; Musshoff, O.; Granoszewski, K.; Spiller, A. Which factors influence the expansion of bioenergy? An empirical study of the investment behaviours of German farmers. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 73, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pombo-Romero, J.; Langeveld, H.; Fernández-Redondo, M. Diffusion of renewable energy technology on Spanish farms: Drivers and barriers. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 25, 11769–11787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gajdzik, B.; Wolniak, R.; Nagaj, R.; Grebski, W.W.; Romanyshyn, T. Barriers to Renewable Energy Source (RES) Installations as Determinants of Energy Consumption in EU Countries. Energies 2023, 16, 7364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Li, W.; Haq, S.u.; Shahbaz, P. Adoption of Renewable Energy Technology on Farms for Sustainable and Efficient Production: Exploring the Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation, Farmer Perception and Government Policies. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, T.M.; Markowitz, E.M.; Howe, P.D.; Ko, C.Y.; Leiserowitz, A.A. Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2015, 5, 1014–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korkmaz, M. Public awareness and perceptions of climate change: Differences in concern about climate change in the West Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2018, 16, 4039–4050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yayar, R.; Kaplan, C.; Şimşek, U. Awareness on economic, social, and environmental effects of the global warming: Experimental findings from Turkey. Bus. Econ. Res. J. 2014, 5, 81–95. Available online: https://www.berjournal.com/wp-content/plugins/downloads-manager/upload/BERJ5(3)14Article5pp.81-95.pdf (accessed on 28 June 2024).
- Waibel, H.; Pahlisch, T.H.; Völker, M. Farmers’ Perceptions of and Adaptations to Climate Change in Southeast Asia: The Case Study from Thailand and Vietnam; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; Volume 52, pp. 137–160. Available online: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-61194-5_7 (accessed on 28 June 2024).
- Tate, G.; Mbzibain, A.; Ali, S. A comparison of the drivers influencing farmers’ adoption of enterprises associated with renewable energy. Energy Policy 2012, 49, 400–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.; Rahut, D.B.; Behera, B. Factors influencing farmers’ adoption of energy-based water pumps and impacts on crop productivity and household income in Pakistan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Dong, Y. Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Clean Energy—Survey in Northeastern China. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 510, 022044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelopoulos, D.; Doukas, H.; Psarras, J.; Stamtsis, G. Risk-based analysis and policy implications for renewable energy investments in Greece. Energy Policy 2017, 105, 512–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2022; International Renewable Energy Agency: Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia, 2023; Available online: https://www.irena.org/Publications/2023/Aug/Renewable-Power-Generation-Costs-in-2022 (accessed on 27 March 2024).
- Biernaciak, E. LCOE: Jakie są Koszty Wytwarzania Energii ze źródeł Konwencjonalnych i Odnawialnych? Available online: https://enerad.pl/aktualnosci/lcoe-jakie-sa-koszty-wytwarzania-energii-ze-zrodel-konwencjonalnych-i-odnawialnych/ (accessed on 3 August 2023).
- Szafrański, B. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska o Transformacji Energetycznej w Polsce. Available online: https://bank.pl/ministerstwo-klimatu-i-srodowiska-o-transformacji-energetycznej-w-polsce/ (accessed on 5 April 2024).
- Program Priorytetowy “Agroenergia”. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/web/nfosigw/agroenergia-2021 (accessed on 3 April 2024).
- Program Priorytetowy “Energia dla wsi”. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/web/nfosigw/energia-dla-wsi (accessed on 3 April 2024).
- Plan dla wsi-Ochrona, Wsparcie i Rozwój Polskiego Rolnictwa. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/web/rolnictwo/wsparcie-rolnictwa (accessed on 20 March 2024).
- Morris, W.; Bowen, R. Renewable energy diversification: Considerations for farm business resilience. J. Rural Stud. 2020, 80, 380–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kata, R.; Cyran, K.; Dybka, S.; Lechwar, M.; Pitera, R. Economic and Social Aspects of Using Energy from PV and Solar Installations in Farmers’ Households in the Podkarpackie Region. Energies 2021, 14, 3158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trujillo-Barrera, A.; Pennings, J.M.E.; Hofenk, D. Understanding producers’ motives for adopting sustainable practices: The role of expected rewards, risk perception and risk tolerance. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2016, 43, 359–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pehlken, A.; Wolf, K.; Grecksch, K.; Klenke, T.; Tsydenova, N. More Sustainable Bioenergy by Creating Use of Regional Alternative Biomass? Sustainability 2020, 12, 7849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Augustyn, A.; Florek, M. Branding a Cluster of Regions: The Eastern Poland Macro-region Case Study. In Inter-Regional Place Branding. Best Practices, Challenges and Solutions; Zenker, S., Jacobsen, B.P., Eds.; Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland Is Part of Springer Science Business Media; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 161–173. ISBN 978-3-319-15329-2. [Google Scholar]
- Adamowicz, M. The Potential for Innovative and Smart Rural Development in the Peripheral Regions of Eastern Poland. Agriculture 2021, 11, 188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rocznik Statystyczny Województw 2022. GUS: Warszawa. 2022. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/files/gfx/portalinformacyjny/pl/defaultaktualnosci/5515/4/17/1/rocznik_statystyczny_wojewodztw_2022.pdf (accessed on 4 April 2024).
- Databases Statistics Poland (GUS). GUS Warszawa. 2021. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/banki-i-bazy-danych/ (accessed on 15 March 2024).
- Wykaz Jednostek NUTS 2021 w Polsce (stan na 1 stycznia 2021 r.). Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/statystyka-regionalna/jednostki-terytorialne/klasyfikacja-nuts/klasyfikacja-nuts-w-polsce/ (accessed on 20 March 2023).
- Statistics Poland. Statistical Yearbook of the Regions—Poland, Warsaw. 2022. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/statistical-yearbooks/statistical-yearbooks/statistical-yearbook-of-agriculture-2022,6,17.html (accessed on 13 January 2024).
- Chyung, S.Y.; Roberts, K.; Swanson, I.; Hankinson, A. Evidence-Based Survey Design: The Use of a Midpoint on the Likert Scale. Perform. Improv. 2017, 56, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norman, G. Likert scales, levels of measurement and the ‘‘laws’’ of statistics. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 2010, 15, 625–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Härdle, W.K.; Simar, L. Cluster Analysis. In Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Available online: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-26006-4 (accessed on 20 March 2024).
- Aczel, A.D. Statystyka w Zarządzaniu (Statistics in Management); Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2018; ISBN 978-83-01-19537-3. [Google Scholar]
- Ali Abd Al-Hameed, K. Spearman’s correlation coefficient in statistical Analysis. Int. J. Nonlinear Anal. Appl. 2022, 13, 3249–3255. Available online: https://ijnaa.semnan.ac.ir/article_6079_b33de0a741ab703e8afa7a63fc2ebfb4.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024).
- Wiśniewski, J.W. Ekonometrologia. Studia i Prace Wydziału Nauk Ekonomicznych i Zarządzania 36/2, 131–143. 2014. Available online: https://bazhum.muzhp.pl/media/files/Studia_i_Prace_Wydzialu_Nauk_Ekonomicznych_i_Zarzadzania/Studia_i_Prace_Wydzialu_Nauk_Ekonomicznych_i_Zarzadzania-r2014-t36-n2/Studia_i_Prace_Wydzialu_Nauk_Ekonomicznych_i_Zarzadzania-r2014-t36-n2-s131-143/Studia_i_Prace_Wydzialu_Nauk_Ekonomicznych_i_Zarzadzania-r2014-t36-n2-s131-143.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024).
- Jędrzej, J.T.; Janaszek-Mańkowska, M.A.; Mańkowski, D.; komputerowa Analiza Danych W Badaniach Naukowych. Wydawnictwo SGGW. 2016. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dariusz-Mankowski/publication/333419891_Computer_data_analysis_in_scientific_research/links/5cecf900458515026a614518/Computer-data-analysis-in-scientific-research.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2024).
- Wielewska, I. Zainteresowanie rolników wykorzystaniem odnawialnych źródeł energii. Rocz. Nauk. SERiA 2014, 16, 216–221. Available online: https://rnseria.com/resources/html/article/details?id=172864 (accessed on 15 March 2024).
- Mioduszewski, J.; Krukowski, K.; Oliński, M. Wybrane Aspekty Rozwoju Gospodarstw Dzierżawiących Nieruchomości Rolne Skarbu Państwa, Ostrołęckie Towarzystwo Naukowe im. Adama Chętnika, Ostrołęka 2021. Available online: http://www.otn.ostroleka.pl/218-nowosci-wydawnictwa-otn-grudzien-2021 (accessed on 15 March 2022).
- Frantál, B.; Prousek, A. It’s not right, but we do it. Exploring why and how Czech farmers become renewable energy producers. Biomass Bioenergy 2016, 87, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gitelman, L.; Kozhevnikov, M.; Visotskaya, Y. Diversification as a Method of Ensuring the Sustainability of Energy Supply within the Energy Transition. Resources 2023, 12, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, S.; Ali, A.; Ciocia, A.; D’Angola, A. Technological Elements behind the Renewable Energy Community: Current Status, Existing Gap, Necessity, and Future Perspective—Overview. Energies 2024, 17, 3100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elahi, E.; Khalid, Z.; Zhang, Z. Understanding farmers’ intention and willingness to install renewable energy technology: A solution to reduce the environmental emissions of agriculture. Appl. Energy 2022, 309, 118459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agir, S.; Derin-Gure, P.; Senturk, B. Farmers’ perspectives on challenges and opportunities of agrivoltaics in Turkiye: An institutional perspective. Renew. Energy 2023, 212, 35–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bozorgparvar, E.; Yazdanpanah, M.; Forouzani, M.; Khosravipour, B. Cleaner and greener livestock production: Appraising producers’ perceptions regarding renewable energy in Iran. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 203, 769–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosário, J.; Madureira, L.; Marques, C.; Silva, R. Understanding Farmers’ Adoption of Sustainable Agriculture Innovations: A Systematic Literature Review. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Przygodzka, R. Selected problems of taxation of agriculture in Poland. In Changing, Adapting Agriculture and Countryside; Takasc, K., Ed.; Karoly Robert College: Gyongyos, Hungary, 2014; pp. 1231–1239. ISBN ISBN 978-963-9941-76-2. [Google Scholar]
- Plan strategiczny dla WPR 2023–2027. Ministerstwo Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi: Warszawa. 2022. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/web/rolnictwo/plan-strategiczny-dla-wspolnej-polityki-rolnej-na-lata-2023-27 (accessed on 4 April 2024).
- Ginalski, Z. Odnawialne Źródła Energii w Gospodarstwach Rolnych, Centrum Doradztwa Rolniczego w Brwinowie Oddział w Radomiu. 2013. Available online: https://www.cdr.gov.pl/images/wydawnictwa/2013/2013-ODNAWIALNE-ZRODLA-ENERGII-W-GOSPODARSTWACH-ROLNYCH.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2024).
- Saleem, M. Possibility of utilizing agriculture biomass as a renewable and sustainable future energy source. Heliyon 2022, 8, e08905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liobikienė, G.; Dagiliūtė, R.; Juknys, R. The determinants of renewable energy usage intentions using theory of planned behaviour approach. Renew. Energy 2021, 170, 587–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rikkonen, P.; Tapio, P.; Rintamäki, H. Visions for small-scale renewable energy production on Finnish farms—A Delphi study on the opportunities for new business. Energy Policy 2019, 129, 939–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
No. | Items |
---|---|
I. Motivators for installing renewable energy sources by farmers | |
1 | Care for the natural environment and the possibility of reducing greenhouse gases |
2 | Possibility of managing by-products |
3 | Energy independence, in the event of limited energy supplies |
4 | High electricity prices |
5 | Difficulties with purchasing traditional energy carriers |
6 | Popularity of the offered solutions for generating energy, from renewable energy sources, among friends/family |
7 | High level of funding |
8 | Social expectations/trends related to increasing the share of renewable energy in energy production |
9 | Health safety resulting from technical solutions of renewable energy installations |
II. Perception of the directions of state support for energy transformation | |
10 | The state should support activities to increase the share of energy, based on renewable energy sources |
11 | The state should support the sale of electrical appliances with the highest energy efficiency standards |
12 | The state should support the sale of electric/hybrid cars |
13 | The state should support the construction of energy-efficient buildings |
14 | The state should support the thermal modernization of buildings |
15 | The state should support farms that strive to save energy |
16 | The state should support farms using renewable energy |
III. Expectations regarding instruments of state support for the development of renewable energy sources | |
17 | The state should provide tax breaks for renewable energy producers |
18 | The state should provide subsidies for the purchase of renewable energy installations |
19 | The state should provide subsidies for house insulation |
20 | The state should provide preferential loans for the purchase of renewable energy installations |
21 | The state should ensure lower energy prices for renewable energy producers |
22 | The state should simplify regulations related to the purchase and installation of installations for the production of energy, from renewable energy sources |
23 | The state should simplify the regulations related to the settlement of the sale and purchase of renewable energy sources |
24 | The state should disseminate knowledge about the profitability of renewable energy sources |
25 | The state should disseminate good practices in the production and use of renewable energy sources |
26 | The state should ensure the modernization and expansion of electricity transmission networks |
27 | The state should ensure the construction of energy storage facilities |
Items * | M | SD | Belonging to Clusters | Items * | M | SD | Belonging to Clusters |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 4.02 | 0.90 | 1 | 15 | 4.24 | 0.73 | 2 |
9 | 3.77 | 0.97 | 1 | 16 | 4.23 | 0.75 | 2 |
2 | 3.54 | 1.11 | 1 | 17 | 4.37 | 0.72 | 2 |
6 | 3.54 | 0.96 | 1 | 18 | 4.59 | 0.65 | 2 |
8 | 3.16 | 1.02 | 1 | 19 | 4.50 | 0.73 | 2 |
12 | 3.42 | 1.16 | 1 | 21 | 4.44 | 0.73 | 2 |
7 | 3.60 | 1.20 | 1 | 22 | 4.46 | 0.70 | 2 |
3 | 4.27 | 0.91 | 2 | 23 | 4.51 | 0.66 | 2 |
4 | 4.52 | 0.71 | 2 | 20 | 4.13 | 0.87 | 2 |
5 | 4.10 | 0.94 | 2 | 24 | 4.28 | 0.76 | 2 |
10 | 4.26 | 0.77 | 2 | 25 | 4.26 | 0.75 | 2 |
11 | 4.29 | 0.73 | 2 | 26 | 4.40 | 0.72 | 2 |
13 | 4.14 | 0.81 | 2 | 27 | 4.39 | 0.72 | 2 |
14 | 4.27 | 0.70 | 2 |
Items * | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |||||
2 | 0.2853 | ||||||||||||
3 | 0.3040 | 0.3311 | |||||||||||
4 | 0.2609 | 0.2158 | 0.5601 | ||||||||||
5 | 0.2167 | 0.2638 | 0.3937 | 0.4808 | |||||||||
6 | 0.2965 | 0.2685 | 0.1430 | 0.2207 | 0.2894 | ||||||||
7 | 0.0641 | 0.1975 | 0.2352 | 0.1438 | 0.2198 | 0.1659 | |||||||
8 | 0.3285 | 0.3147 | 0.0988 | 0.1136 | 0.1542 | 0.3907 | 0.2665 | ||||||
9 | 0.5174 | 0.3390 | 0.3060 | 0.2215 | 0.2728 | 0.3290 | 0.3655 | 0.4619 | |||||
no linear relationship | weak dependence | moderate dependence | quite a strong relationship | very strong dependence | statistically significant coefficients | ||||||||
<0.2 | 0.2–0.4 | 0.4–0.7 | 0.7–0.9 | >0.9 | p ≤ 0.05 |
Items * | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | |||||
11 | 0.6681 | ||||||||||
12 | 0.3491 | 0.3200 | |||||||||
13 | 0.4798 | 0.5447 | 0.3625 | ||||||||
14 | 0.4902 | 0.5638 | 0.2448 | 0.7323 | |||||||
15 | 0.5505 | 0.5583 | 0.3224 | 0.6138 | 0.7141 | ||||||
16 | 0.6315 | 0.5880 | 0.3367 | 0.5733 | 0.6105 | 0.7607 | |||||
no linear relationship | weak dependence | moderate dependence | quite a strong relationship | very strong dependence | statistically significant coefficients | ||||||
<0.2 | 0.2–0.4 | 0.4–0.7 | 0.7–0.9 | >0.9 | p ≤ 0.05 |
Items * | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ||||
1 | 0.3199 | 0.2945 | 0.2701 | 0.2947 | 0.2759 | 0.3107 | 0.3206 | ||||
2 | 0.1554 | 0.0823 | 0.1619 | 0.1173 | 0.0762 | 0.1535 | 0.1643 | ||||
3 | 0.3260 | 0.2964 | 0.0981 | 0.2317 | 0.2562 | 0.2623 | 0.2636 | ||||
4 | 0.3855 | 0.3540 | 0.1155 | 0.3121 | 0.3314 | 0.3457 | 0.3719 | ||||
5 | 0.2434 | 0.2060 | 0.1228 | 0.1983 | 0.2199 | 0.2339 | 0.2651 | ||||
6 | 0.2411 | 0.1954 | 0.2133 | 0.1652 | 0.1912 | 0.2504 | 0.2651 | ||||
7 | 0.1268 | 0.1192 | 0.0802 | 0.0364 | 0.0748 | 0.1127 | 0.1036 | ||||
8 | 0.1450 | 0.1179 | 0.1944 | 0.1246 | 0.1100 | 0.1367 | 0.1646 | ||||
9 | 0.3289 | 0.3183 | 0.2686 | 0.2802 | 0.2594 | 0.3144 | 0.3385 | ||||
no linear relationship | weak dependence | moderate dependence | quite a strong relationship | very strong dependence | statistically significant coefficients | ||||||
<0.2 | 0.2–0.4 | 0.4–0.7 | 0.7–0.9 | >0.9 | p ≤ 0.05 |
Items * | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ||||
17 | 0.4196 | 0.4074 | 0.2186 | 0.4172 | 0.3779 | 0.4337 | 0.4273 | ||||
18 | 0.4047 | 0.4301 | 0.1875 | 0.3875 | 0.4161 | 0.4043 | 0.3961 | ||||
19 | 0.3341 | 0.3982 | 0.1670 | 0.3747 | 0.4527 | 0.3963 | 0.3651 | ||||
20 | 0.2317 | 0.2806 | 0.2736 | 0.2605 | 0.2041 | 0.3292 | 0.2875 | ||||
21 | 0.3628 | 0.3575 | 0.2424 | 0.3421 | 0.3388 | 0.3813 | 0.3645 | ||||
22 | 0.3087 | 0.3019 | 0.1383 | 0.3140 | 0.3413 | 0.3636 | 0.3335 | ||||
23 | 0.3935 | 0.3597 | 0.1493 | 0.3735 | 0.3733 | 0.4263 | 0.3664 | ||||
24 | 0.3404 | 0.3645 | 0.2049 | 0.4006 | 0.3883 | 0.4045 | 0.3615 | ||||
25 | 0.3371 | 0.3489 | 0.2334 | 0.4066 | 0.3786 | 0.4164 | 0.3726 | ||||
26 | 0.4441 | 0.4593 | 0.2153 | 0.4021 | 0.4133 | 0.4756 | 0.4599 | ||||
27 | 0.3866 | 0.4336 | 0.1911 | 0.3252 | 0.3486 | 0.3904 | 0.3986 | ||||
no linear relationship | weak dependence | moderate dependence | quite a strong relationship | very strong dependence | statistically significant coefficients | ||||||
<0.2 | 0.2–0.4 | 0.4–0.7 | 0.7–0.9 | >0.9 | p ≤ 0.05 |
Items * | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | |||||
18 | 0.6028 | ||||||||||||||
19 | 0.5700 | 0.7171 | |||||||||||||
20 | 0.4124 | 0.3803 | 0.4579 | ||||||||||||
21 | 0.5733 | 0.5529 | 0.5827 | 0.4718 | |||||||||||
22 | 0.5333 | 0.5331 | 0.5825 | 0.3866 | 0.6474 | ||||||||||
23 | 0.5254 | 0.5449 | 0.5404 | 0.4126 | 0.6199 | 0.7870 | |||||||||
24 | 0.5021 | 0.4113 | 0.4962 | 0.4245 | 0.4866 | 0.5440 | 0.5092 | ||||||||
25 | 0.5061 | 0.4025 | 0.4712 | 0.4285 | 0.5032 | 0.5203 | 0.4928 | 0.8577 | |||||||
26 | 0.5208 | 0.4516 | 0.4613 | 0.3412 | 0.4819 | 0.5009 | 0.5182 | 0.5466 | 0.5735 | ||||||
27 | 0.5020 | 0.4286 | 0.4299 | 0.3660 | 0.4817 | 0.4556 | 0.5140 | 0.5329 | 0.5313 | 0.7133 | |||||
no linear relationship | weak dependence | moderate dependence | quite a strong relationship | very strong dependence | statistically significant coefficients | ||||||||||
<0.2 | 0.2–0.4 | 0.4–0.7 | 0.7–0.9 | >0.9 | p ≤ 0.05 |
Voivodeship | Number of RES Installations | Only Own Funds | Share of Public Funds |
---|---|---|---|
podlaskie | 37 | 9 | 28 |
podkarpackie | 62 | 25 | 37 |
Warmińsko–mazurskie | 25 | 16 | 9 |
lubelskie | 65 | 16 | 49 |
świętokrzyskie | 55 | 21 | 34 |
Total | 244 | 87 | 157 |
Items 1 | Z | p-Value | Items * | Z | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.3399 | 0.7339 | 15 | −0.5425 | 0.5875 |
2 | 0.3787 | 0.7049 | 16 | −0.0076 | 0.9940 |
3 | −0.6827 | 0.4948 | 17 | 1.2631 | 0.2066 |
4 | −0.1629 | 0.8706 | 18 | 1.2706 | 0.2039 |
5 | −1.2820 | 0.1998 | 19 | 1.0406 | 0.2981 |
6 | 0.4289 | 0.6680 | 20 | 0.4289 | 0.6680 |
7 | −2.9967 | 0.0027 * | 21 | 1.2877 | 0.1979 |
8 | −0.9165 | 0.3594 | 22 | 1.9505 | 0.0511 |
9 | 0.0748 | 0.9404 | 23 | 0.8768 | 0.3806 |
10 | 0.6950 | 0.4871 | 24 | 1.4704 | 0.1415 |
11 | −0.8626 | 0.3884 | 25 | 1.4051 | 0.1600 |
12 | −1.2810 | 0.2002 | 26 | 0.0284 | 0.9773 |
13 | −1.5007 | 0.1334 | 27 | 1.6901 | 0.0910 |
14 | −0.9553 | 0.3394 |
Items 1 | H Test Result | Items 1 | H Test Result |
---|---|---|---|
1 | H (4, N = 519) = 11.328 p = 0.0231 * | 15 | H (4, N = 519) = 15.280 p = 0.0042 * |
2 | H (4, N = 519) = 19.902 p = 0.0005 * | 16 | H (4, N = 519) = 24.769 p = 0.0001 * |
3 | H (4, N = 519) = 10.913 p = 0.0275 * | 17 | H (4, N = 519) = 6.3411 p = 0.1751 |
4 | H (4, N = 519) = 11.029 p = 0.0262 * | 18 | H (4, N = 519) = 1.506 p = 0.8256 |
5 | H (4, N = 519) = 10.002 p = 0.0404 * | 19 | H (4, N = 519) = 7.590 p = 0.1078 |
6 | H (4, N = 519) = 18.16 p = 0.0011 * | 20 | H (4, N = 519) = 8.568 p = 0.0729 |
7 | H (4, N = 519) = 5.692 p = 0.2234 | 21 | H (4, N = 519) = 11.527 p = 0.0212 * |
8 | H (4, N = 519) = 7.871 p = 0.0964 | 22 | H (4, N = 519) = 4.324 p = 0.3639 |
9 | H (4, N = 519) = 10.958 p = 0.0270 * | 23 | H (4, N = 519) = 7.035 p = 0.1340 |
10 | H (4, N = 519) = 15.093 p = 0.0045 * | 24 | H (4, N = 519) = 8.246 p = 0.0830 |
11 | H (4, N = 519) = 9.060 p = 0.0596 | 25 | H (4, N = 519) = 8.860 p = 0.0647 |
12 | H (4, N = 519) = 4.174 p = 0.3830 | 26 | H (4, N = 519) = 9.104 p = 0.0586 |
13 | H (4, N = 519) = 8.523627 p = 0.0742 | 27 | H (4, N = 519) = 5.855 p = 0.2102 |
14 | H (4, N = 519) = 10.391 p = 0.0343 * |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Przygodzka, R.; Badora, A.; Kud, K.; Mioduszewski, J.; Woźniak, M.; Stec, A. The Importance of Public Sources of Financing the Development of Renewable Energy in Agriculture, Using the Example of Eastern Poland. Energies 2024, 17, 3682. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153682
Przygodzka R, Badora A, Kud K, Mioduszewski J, Woźniak M, Stec A. The Importance of Public Sources of Financing the Development of Renewable Energy in Agriculture, Using the Example of Eastern Poland. Energies. 2024; 17(15):3682. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153682
Chicago/Turabian StylePrzygodzka, Renata, Aleksandra Badora, Krzysztof Kud, Jarosław Mioduszewski, Marian Woźniak, and Artur Stec. 2024. "The Importance of Public Sources of Financing the Development of Renewable Energy in Agriculture, Using the Example of Eastern Poland" Energies 17, no. 15: 3682. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153682
APA StylePrzygodzka, R., Badora, A., Kud, K., Mioduszewski, J., Woźniak, M., & Stec, A. (2024). The Importance of Public Sources of Financing the Development of Renewable Energy in Agriculture, Using the Example of Eastern Poland. Energies, 17(15), 3682. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153682