Willingness to pay for energy-saving measures in residential buildings

By S. Banfi, M. Farsi, Massimo Filippini, Martin Jakob. 2007

540 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This paper uses a choice experiment to evaluate the consumers' willingness to pay for energy-saving measures in Switzerland's residential buildings. These measures include air renewal (ventilation) systems and insulation of windows and facades. Two groups of respondents consisting respectively of 163 apartment tenants and 142 house owners were asked to choose between their housing status quo and each one of the several hypothetical situations with different attributes and prices. The estimation method is based on a fixed-effects logit model. The results suggest that the benefits of the energy-saving attributes are significantly valued by the consumers. These benefits include both individual energy savings and environmental benefits as well as comfort benefits namely, thermal comfort, air quality and noise protection.

Subfields: Building and Construction, Economics and Econometrics, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5688ba17f8dcc46137379282265795efc339603c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Building and Construction

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Citations in the corpus

Factors Influencing Willingness-to-Pay for the Energy Star Label (2010, background): “Research has shown that consumers value energy saving measures (Banfi et al., 2008); however, in many instances the amount consumers are willing to pay for the energy efficient products is not as high as economic theory might predict (Howarth and Anderson, 1993).”
The Value of Domestic Building Energy Efficiency – Evidence from Ireland (2013, background): “One of the first studies was by Banfi et al. (2008), who examine households’ willingness-to-pay for more energy efficient buildings in Switzerland, based on a choice experiment, rather than market data.”
Willingness to Pay for Energy Conservation and Free-Ridership on Subsidization: Evidence from Germany (2009, background): “Depending on the respective retrofit option, roughly 50% of the western households have a WTP ≥ observed cost, validating a similar result that was observed by Banfi et al. (2008). The abscissas of Figure 2 shows the hidden cost as a percent of the observed cost for two commonly chosen retrofit comb”
Homeowners' preferences for adopting innovative residential heating systems: A discrete choice analysis for Germany (2012, methodology): “For example, Banfi et al. (2008) investigated the WTP for energysaving measures in Swiss residential buildings by means of a choice experiment.”
Capturing the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency Investments (2015, background): “They indicate that there is a willingness to pay more for a house with implemented EE measures (Banfi et al. 2008; Brounen & Kok, 2011; Hyland et al. 2013; Cajias & Piazolo, 2012; Kahn & Kok, 2012; Cerin et al. 2014).”
Modelling decisions on energy-efficient renovations: A review (2014, background): “Technical options Understanding decisions Incentive instruments Models and simulation Technical options Understanding decisions Incentive instruments Models and simulation [49][47] [48][50] [51][52] [56][58][67] [73][66][41] [42][59][60] [61] [63][68] [67][73] [66][69][70] [71] [49][75] [58][68] [76”
Determinants and policy implications for household electricity-saving behaviour: Evidence from Beijing, China (2011, background): “Some studies also put target on energy-saving measures for assessment of household electricity-saving behaviour (e.g., Banfi and Farsi, 2008).”
Nudging Energy Efficiency Behavior: The Role of Information Labels (2014, unknown): “Banfi et al. (2008) employs a choice experiment to estimate a fixed effects logit model of willingness to pay for energy-saving measures in Switzerland’s residential buildings.”
Household perceptions of climate change and preferences for mitigation action: the case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in Australia (2011, background): “, 2001), installation of energy saving technology (Banfi et al., 2008; Poortinga et al., 2003; Sadler, 2003), imposition of a fuel surcharge (Viscusi and Zeckhauser, 2006) through to climate change policy in general (Cameron, 2005).”
The Price of Policy Risk - Empirical Insights from Choice Experiments with European Photovoltaic Project Developers (2012, unknown): “, 1996), transportation economics (Hensher, 1994; Hensher, 2010; Train andWilson, 2008) and energy efficiency research (Banfi et al., 2008; Moxnes, 2004; Poortinga et al., 2003).”