From “Coal to Gas” to “Coal to Biomass”: The Strategic Choice of Social Capital in China

Qiang Wang, Thomas Dogot, Yueling Yang, Jian Jiao, Boyang Shi and Changbin Yin
Additional contact information
Qiang Wang: School of Business Administration, Shandong Women’s University, Jinan 250300, China
Thomas Dogot: Department of Economics and Rural Development, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liège, 5030 Gembloux, Belgium
Yueling Yang: School of Business Administration, Shandong Women’s University, Jinan 250300, China
Jian Jiao: Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
Boyang Shi: Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
Changbin Yin: Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China

Energies, 2020, vol. 13, issue 16, 1-22

Abstract: Currently, the Chinese government is promoting the transformation of clean energy in rural areas to reduce the consumption of coal to cope with the smog. It is mainly based on “coal to gas”. The development of biomass resources in agricultural areas is an alternative means of energy supply. In order to improve rural energy structure, we propose to upgrade “coal to gas” to “coal to biomass” derived from centralized biogas production (CBP) and straw-briquetting fuel (SBF). This study deals with the question of financing such projects. The public–private partnership (PPP) model is seen as a response that can mobilize social capital to finance investments in these new modes of production and energy supply in rural areas. Based on an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the two projects considered above, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was carried out with the assistance of experts in order to clarify the strategic choices which are more suitable for investors. First, we built a PPP strategic-decision model. The decision model was divided into four strategies (pioneering strategy, struggling strategy, conservative strategy and striving strategy) and two development intensities (conservative and proactive). We used this method to construct a SWOT–AHP model of the PPP strategy for CBP and SBF based on the investigation from the experts. The strategic-decision model identified that a pioneering strategy based on opportunity type is promised for SBF, while a more aggressive type strategy in struggling strategy is essential for the CBP. In order to encourage investors to adopt a positive and optimistic attitude towards the two projects, the public authorities have a role of guidance to ensure the mobilization of the social capital necessary for the construction of the projects.

Keywords: public–private partnership (PPP); strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT); analytic hierarchy process (AHP); centralized biogas production (CBP); straw-briquetting fuel (SBF) (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/16/4171/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/16/4171/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:16:p:4171-:d:397901

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().