Bridging the Energy Efficiency Gap: Policy Insights from Economic Theory and Empirical Evidence
By Kenneth T. Gillingham, Karen L. Palmer. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2014
651 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/88564b82229fdf09825a56540a9f6d5773665fd6
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
- X. Labandeira
- Magali A. Delmas
- A. Ramos
- Robert Metcalfe
- Omar Isaac Asensio
- C. Cattaneo
- Alberto Gago
- Pedro Linares
In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
- X. Labandeira
- A. Ramos
- C. Cattaneo
- Alberto Gago
- Pedro Linares
- Nathan W. Chan
- J. Schleich
- Xavier Gassmann
Citations in the corpus
- Making the implicit explicit: A look inside the implicit discount rate (2016, background): “While in principle, bounded rationality may increase or decrease the IDR, the empirical literature suggests that bounded rationality mostly impedes the adoption of EETs, i.e. increases the IDR (Gerarden et al., 2015a; Gillingham and Palmer, 2014).”
- The Impact of Management Practices on Employee Productivity: A Field Experiment with Airline Captains (2019, background): “…research explores how the principal-agent model can be applied to motivate the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in the residential sector (Gillingham and Palmer, 2014); research of this kind remains to be conducted in commercial sectors despite existing evidence of a correlation between…”
- Economic growth and development with low‐carbon energy (2017, background): “Similarly, energy efficiency standards, planning rules and building codes address behavioral barriers, information asymmetries and other market failures that hold back the uptake of energy efficient technologies (Gillingham and Palmer 2014; Gillingham et al 2009; Howarth and Andersson 1993).”
- A large-scale test of the effects of time discounting, risk aversion, loss aversion, and present bias on household adoption of energy-efficient technologies (2019, methodology): “…decision utility (maximized at the time of technology choice) and experienced utility (experienced after decision is made; Kahnemann et al. 1997; Gillingham and Palmer, 2014).2 Thus, 2 There doesnot seemto exist a clear consensus in the literature as towhether loss aversion is a behavioral…”
- The Microeconomic Theory of the Rebound Effect and Its Welfare Implications (2015, background): “A few papers note that the rebound effect is likely to be welfare improving, barring significant external costs (e.g., Hobbs 1991; Borenstein 2015; Gillingham et al. 2014).”
- The dynamics of behavior change: Evidence from energy conservation (2016, background): “3 can be achieved not only with technological changes in buildings and appliances, but also with behavioral changes in consumption (Asensio and Delmas 2015; Allcott and Mullainathan, 2010; Gillingham and Palmer, 2014; Harding and Hsiaw, 2014).”
- Business models for distributed energy resources: A review and empirical analysis (2017, background): “Businesses that use this model tend not to provide explicit control or dispatch signals, but rather provide “nudges” and targeted incentives to create a response [41,42].”
- Internal and external barriers to energy efficiency: which role for policy interventions? (2019, background): “If consumers lack information on product availability and energy-efficient attributes, such as potential savings, they tend to invest less in energy efficiency technologies (Gillingham and Palmer 2014).”
- The role of information for energy efficiency in the residential sector (2015, positive): “For example, energy prices usually do not internalize environmental (or other) externalities derived from the use of energy and this, in turn, determines excessive pollutant levels or a higher than optimal energy use (Gillingham et al., 2009). If the price of energy does not correspond to the real m”