Integrated assessment of energy policies: Decomposing top-down and bottom-up

By Christoph Böhringer, Thomos F. Rutherford. 2009

188 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Do homes that are more energy efficient consume less energy?: A structural equation model for England's residential sector (2011, methodology): “…modelling techniques, this section has purposefully been kept brief (Tso & Yau 2007; Swan & V. Ismet Ugursal 2008; Strachan & Kannan 2008; McFarland et al. 2004; Kavgic et al. 2010; Jebaraj & Iniyan 2006; Aydinalp-Koksal & V. Ismet Ugursal 2008; Böhringer & Rutherford 2009; Tuladhar et al. 2009).”
Evaluating the effectiveness of urban energy conservation and GHG mitigation measures: The case of Xiamen city, China (2010, methodology): “…energy-modeling approaches have been used to analyze the future trends of energy demand and GHG emissions and to develop GHG-reduction strategies; these can be categorized into three types: top-down, bottom-up, and hybrid models (Bohringer and Rutherford, 2009; Lin and Huang, 2009; Turton, 2008).”
Distributional and Efficiency Impacts of Clean and Renewable Energy Standards for Electricity (2012, methodology): “Moreover, the bottom-up model involves a large number of bounds on decision variables, and the explicit representation of 19 associated income effects becomes intractable if directly solved within a GE framework (Böhringer and Rutherford, 2009).”