Vol. 77 No. 3 (2022)
Research Articles

Econometric analysis of choice drivers and willingness to pay for certified forest biomasses for energy

Liam Pippinato
Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin
Stefano Bruzzese
Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin
Raffaele Zanchini
Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin
Francesca Poratelli
Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin
Simone Blanc
Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin
Filippo Brun
Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin

Published 2022-11-25


  • sustainability certification,
  • willingness to pay,
  • quality label,
  • pellet

How to Cite

Pippinato, L., Bruzzese, S., Zanchini, R., Poratelli, F., Blanc, S., & Brun, F. (2022). Econometric analysis of choice drivers and willingness to pay for certified forest biomasses for energy. Italian Review of Agricultural Economics, 77(3), 41–53. https://doi.org/10.36253/rea-13655


In the field of fuels generated from renewable resources, woody biomasses have found fertile ground for labelling. Indeed, several certification schemes have been developed, covering not only the sustainability of forest management, but also the chain of custody, allowing the traceability of products at different stages, from production to purchase. This study aims to investigate whether there is a willingness to pay for forest products for energy purposes with sustainability or quality certifications (FSC, PEFC and ENplus certifications) and what determines it, using pellets as reference product for the study. To do so, an exploratory analysis has been conducted, firstly using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) for a dimensional reduction and, subsequently, an ordered logistic regression. The results show that more than 30% of consumers are mainly willing to pay up to 10% more for PEFC and FSC certified pellets than for non-certified products, indicating a strong attention by consumers towards environmental issues, the quality certifications that can be adopted for pellets, and the attitude of consumers towards local and recycled products.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...


  1. Abdi H., Williams L.J. (2010). Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(4): 433-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/WICS.101
  2. AIEL (2020). Agriforenergy - Rivista Tecnica per l’energia rinnovabile dall’agricoltura e dalle foreste. https://www.aielenergia.it/public/pubblicazioni/A4E_4-2020.pdf.
  3. Associazione Italiana Energie Agroforestali (2021). Agriforenergy - Rivista Tecnica per l’energia rinnovabile dall’agricoltura e dalle foreste. XV(1). https://www.aielenergia.it/paginaSfogliabile.php?num=1_2021
  4. Blanc S., Zanchini R., di Vita G., Brun F. (2021). The role of intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of honey for Italian millennial consumers. British Food Journal, 123(6): 2183-2198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2020-0622/FULL/XML
  5. Bradley P. (2021). An Institutional Economics Framework to Explore Sustainable Production and Consumption. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27: 1317-1339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SPC.2021.02.035
  6. Brosdahl D.J.C., Carpenter J.M. (2011). Shopping orientations of US males: A generational cohort comparison. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(6): 548-554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2011.07.005
  7. Cai Z., Aguilar F.X. (2013). Meta-analysis of consumer’s willingness-to-pay premiums for certified wood products. Journal of Forest Economics, 19(1): 15-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JFE.2012.06.007
  8. Capitello R., Agnoli L., Begalli D. (2016). Drivers of high-involvement consumers’ intention to buy PDO wines: Valpolicella PDO case study. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 96(10): 3407-3417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/JSFA.7521
  9. Carfora V., Cavallo C., Caso D., del Giudice T., de Devitiis B., Viscecchia R., Nardone G., Cicia G. (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and green self-identity within the theory of planned behavior. Food Quality and Preference, 76: 1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2019.03.006
  10. Chaudhary R., Bisai S. (2018). Factors influencing green purchase behavior of millennials in India. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 29(5): 798-812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-02-2018-0023/FULL/XML
  11. Cliff N. (1988). The Eigenvalues-Greater-Than-One Rule and the Reliability of Components. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2): 276-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.276
  12. Dziuban C.D., Shirkey E.C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin, 81(6): 358-361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/H0036316
  13. ENplus (2022). ENPlus certification. https://enplus-pellets.eu/it/
  14. European Commission (2012). Innovating for sustainable growth: a bioeconomy for Europe. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1f0d8515-8dc0-4435-ba53-9570e47dbd51
  15. European Commission (2018). Review of the 2012 European Bioeconomy Strategy - Publications Office of the EU. In Publication Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/8814
  16. Fingerman K.R., Nabuurs G.J., Iriarte L., Fritsche U.R., Staritsky I., Visser L., Mai-Moulin T., Junginger M. (2019). Opportunities and risks for sustainable biomass export from the south-eastern United States to Europe. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 13(2): 281-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/BBB.1845
  17. FSC (2022). Forest Stewardship Council. https://www.pefc.it
  18. García L.Y., Cerda A.A., Lagos R. del P., Muñoz P.I., Muñoz M. (2021). Society’s Willingness to Pay for Certified Dry Firewood Energy in Chile. Frontiers in Energy Research, 9: 271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/FENRG.2021.676654/BIBTEX
  19. Gewers F.L., Ferreira G.R., de Arruda H.F., Silva F.N., Comin C.H., Amancio D.R., Costa L.D.F. (2021). Principal Component Analysis. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3447755
  20. Giampietri E., Bugin G., Trestini S. (2021). On the association between risk attitude and fruit and vegetable consumption: insights from university students in Italy. Agricultural and Food Economics 2021, 9(1): 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/S40100-021-00194-4
  21. Giampietri E., Finco A., del Giudice T. (2016). Exploring consumers’ behaviour towards short food supply chains. British Food Journal, 118(3): 618-631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2015-0168/FULL/XML
  22. Gliem J.A., Gliem R.R. (2003). Calculating, Interpreting, and ReportingCronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficient for Likert-Type Scales. Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education.
  23. Hair J.F., Tatham R.L., Anderson R.E., Black W. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis: International Edition (Pearson, Ed.; 5th Edition). https://www.pearson.com/uk/educators/higher-education-educators/program/Hair-Multivariate-Data-Analysis-International-Edition-5th-Edition/PGM547615.html
  24. Higgins K., Hutchinson W.G., Longo A. (2020). Willingness-to-Pay for Eco-Labelled Forest Products in Northern Ireland: An Experimental Auction Approach. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 87, 101572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOCEC.2020.101572
  25. ISO/IEC 17065:2012 - Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services, 1 (2012). https://www.iso.org/standard/46568.html
  26. ISPRA (2010). Studio sull’utilizzo di biomasse combustibili e biomasse rifiuto per la produzione di energia. https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files/pubblicazioni/rapporti/Rapporto1112010bassa.pdf
  27. ISTAT (2014). L’indagine Istat sui consumi energetici delle famiglie: Principali risultati. https://www4.istat.it/it/files/2014/12/Ungaro.pdf
  28. Kaiser H.F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika 1958, 23(3): 187-200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289233
  29. Kaiser H.F. (1960). The Application of Electronic Computers to Factor Analysis: Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1): 141-151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116
  30. Kaiser H.F., Rice J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark Iv: Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1): 111-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400115
  31. Liobikiene G., Juknys R. (2016). The role of values, environmental risk perception, awareness of consequences, and willingness to assume responsibility for environmentally-friendly behaviour: the Lithuanian case. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(2016): 3413-3422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.049
  32. Luick R., Hennenberg K., Leuschner C., Grossmann M., Jedicke E., Schoof N., Waldenspuhl T. (2022). Primeval, natural and commercial forests in the context of biodiversity and climate protection: Part 2: The Narrative of the Climate Neutrality of Wood as a Resource. Naturschutz Und Landschaftsplanung, 54(1): 22-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1399/NUL.2022.01.02.E
  33. Luo W., Mineo K., Matsushita K., Kanzaki M. (2018). Consumer willingness to pay for modern wooden structures: A comparison between China and Japan. Forest Policy and Economics, 91: 84-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORPOL.2017.12.003
  34. Mehmetoglu M., Jakobsen T.G. (2017). Applied Statistics using STATA: a guide for the Social Sciences (S. Jai, Ed.; First edition). SAGE Publications LTD.
  35. Merlino V.M., Brun F., Versino A., Blanc S. (2020). Milk packaging innovation: Consumer perception and willingness to pay. AIMS Agriculture and Food 2020, 5(2): 307-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3934/AGRFOOD.2020.2.307
  36. Minton A.P., Rose R.L. (1997). The Effects of Environmental Concern on Environmentally Friendly Consumer Behavior: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Business Research, 40(1): 37-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(96)00209-3
  37. Moser A.K. (2016). Consumers’ purchasing decisions regarding environmentally friendly products: An empirical analysis of German consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 31: 389-397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2016.05.006
  38. Nduka E. (2021). How to get rural households out of energy poverty in Nigeria: A contingent valuation. Energy Policy, 149, 112072. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2020.112072
  39. Notaro S., Paletto A. (2021). Consumers’ preferences, attitudes and willingness to pay for bio-textile in wood fibers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58, 102304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETCONSER.2020.102304
  40. Nuramin M.J., Saadun N., Harun Z. (2020). Status and development prospect of fuel pellet industry in Malaysia. The Malaysian Forester, 83(2): 353-371.
  41. Paço A., Lavrador T. (2017). Environmental knowledge and attitudes and behaviours towards energy consumption. Journal of Environmental Management, 197: 384-392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2017.03.100
  42. Paletto A., Notaro S. (2018). Secondary wood manufactures’ willingness-to-pay for certified wood products in Italy. Forest Policy and Economics, 92: 65-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORPOL.2018.04.002
  43. Paluš H., Krahulcová M., Parobek J. (2021). Assessment of Forest Certification as a Tool to Support Forest Ecosystem Services. Forests 2021, 12(3): 300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/F12030300
  44. Panico T., Caracciolo F., Furno M. (2022). Analysing the consumer purchasing behaviour for certified wood products in Italy. Forest Policy and Economics, 136, 102670. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORPOL.2021.102670
  45. Panico T., Pagnani T., Caracciolo F. (2018). Intention to Purchase Sustainable Wood Products: An Empirical Analysis of the Determinants. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 9(4): 342-353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.277727
  46. PEFC (2022). Programme For The Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes. https://www.pefc.it
  47. Perone G. (2019). Economic growth and GHG reduction: a global issue. Italian Review of Agricultural Economics, 74(1): 19-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13128/REA-25477
  48. Pieniak Z., Aertsens J., Verbeke W. (2010). Subjective and objective knowledge as determinants of organic vegetables consumption. Food Quality and Preference, 21(6): 581-588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODQUAL.2010.03.004
  49. Pituch K.A., Stevens J.P. (2012). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences : Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS, Sixth Edition. In Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS, Sixth Edition (5th edition). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315814919
  50. Rahman M., Aziz S., Hughes M. (2020). The product-market performance benefits of environmental policy: Why customer awareness and firm innovativeness matter. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(5): 2001-2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/BSE.2484
  51. Ros J.P.M., Overmars K.P., Stehfest E., Prins A.G., Notenboom J., van Oorschot M. (2010). Identifying the indirect effects of bio-energy production (Vol. 1). Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. www.pbl.nl/en.
  52. StataCorp (2021). Stata17 (No. 17). StataCorp LLC.
  53. Streimikiene D., Balezentis T., Alisauskaite-Seskiene I., Stankuniene G., Simanaviciene Z. (2019). A Review of Willingness to Pay Studies for Climate Change Mitigation in the Energy Sector. Energies 2019, 12(8): 1481. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/EN12081481
  54. Šupín M., Loučanová E., Olšiaková M. (2019). Sustainable bioenergy policy for the period after 2020. 12th International Scientific Conference Digitalisation and Circular Economy: Forestry and Forestry Based Industry Implications. http://www.woodema.org/2019_conference.html
  55. Tan Q., Imamura K., Nagasaka K., Inoue M. (2019). Effects of Eco-Label Knowledge on Chinese Consumer Preferences for Certified Wood Flooring: A Case Study in Chongqing City. Forest Products Journal, 69(4): 329-336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13073/FPJ-D-19-00017
  56. Teisl M.F. (2003). What We May Have Is a Failure to Communicate*: Labeling Environmentally Certified Forest Products. Forest Science, 49(5): 668-680. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351154529-28
  57. Tikina A.V., Innes J.L. (2008). A framework for assessing the effectiveness of forest certification. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 38(6): 1357-1365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/X08-011/ASSET/IMAGES/X08-011T2H.GIF
  58. United Nations Environment Programme (2018). Buying for a Better World A Guide on Sustainable Procurement for the UN System ITC International Training Centre (Vol. 1). https://www.ungm.org/Areas/Public/Downloads/BFABW_Final_web.pdf
  59. Vásquez Lavin F., Barrientos M., Castillo Á., Herrera I., Ponce Oliva R.D. (2020). Firewood certification programs: Key attributes and policy implications. Energy Policy, 137, 111160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2019.111160
  60. Wan M., Zhang Y., Ye W. (2018). Consumer Willingness-to-Pay a Price Premium for Eco-Friendly Children’s Furniture in Shanghai and Shenzhen, China. Forest Products Journal, 68(3): 317-327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13073/FPJ-D-17-00050
  61. Welford R. (1995). Environmental strategy and sustainable development: the corporate challenge for the twenty-first century. Routledge.
  62. Williams R.A., Quiroz C. (2020). Ordinal Regression Models (Atkinson P., Delamont S., Cernat A., Sakshaug J.W., Williams R.A. eds.). SAGE Research Methods Foundations.
  63. Wooldridge J.M. (2012). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach (South-Western Publications, Ed.; Sixth Edition, Vol. 1). https://www.amazon.it/Introductory-Econometrics-Approach-Jeffrey-Wooldridge/dp/1111531048
  64. Zhang X., Dong F. (2020). Why Do Consumers Make Green Purchase Decisions? Insights from a Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020, 17(18): 6607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH17186607