Regulators’ and stakeholders’ perspectives in a framework for bioenergy development

• In this study, ten bioenergy crops were evaluated based on local stakeholder and regulator preferences.
• Analytic hierarchy process was used to weight stakeholders’ and regulators’ preferences.
• The corn-soybean-canola rotation was selected based on economic benefits.
• Perennial grasses were selected based on environmental benefits.

In this study, ten bioenergy crop rotations (corn, corn-stover, sorghum, soybean, corn-soybean, corn-soybean-canola, corn-stover-soybean, miscanthus, switchgrass, and sorghum-soybean) were selected based on local stakeholder (economically motivated) and regulator (environmentally motivated) preferences. These crops were implemented on diverse landscapes (agricultural, marginal, and agricultural plus marginal lands) one at time for 17 years using a SWAT model of the Saginaw River Watershed in Michigan. The bioenergy crops were evaluated based on 100 percent, 50 percent, and zero percent weight assigned to both stakeholders’ and regulators’ preferences using analytic hierarchy process (AHP), an optimization and decision-making technique that aims to satisfy multiple conflicting objectives. The corn-soybean-canola rotation was selected in all landscapes based on economic benefits (stakeholders’ preferences). Meanwhile, perennial grasses (miscanthus and switchgrass) were selected based on environmental benefits (regulators’ preferences), because they maintain permanent cover, require fewer inputs than traditional row crops, and are less management intensive. When implementing bioenergy crops on marginal lands, pollution generation greatly increased at the field level, indicating that these lands are likely not viable for bioenergy crop production to meet potential future renewable energy demand.