An empirical study on the rebound effect considering capital costs

By Ken-ichi Mizobuchi. 2008

168 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Automotive Engineering, Management Science and Operations Research, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9466bf3f408265982f94294574adf4178142659b

How researchers see this paper

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

In Automotive Engineering

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

Citations in the corpus

Household Adoption of Water-Efficient Equipment: The Role of Socio-Economic Factors, Environmental Attitudes and Policy (2010, background): “Recent evidence seems to indicate that the rebound effect on energy use is limited: 0-15% on data from the Netherlands (Berkhout, Muskens and Velthuijsen, 2000), 0-6% on data from Sweden (Brännlund, Ghalwash and Nordström, 2007) whereas Japanese household data indicate a rebound effect of the magnit”
An empirical study of direct rebound effect for passenger transport in urban China (2012, methodology): “For simplicity, in this study we employ the linear approximation of the AIDS (LA-AIDS) model (Deaton and Muellbauer, 1980) by following Brännlund et al. (2007) and Mizobuchi (2008).”
A new approach to measuring the rebound effect associated to energy efficiency improvements: An application to the US residential energy demand (2015, background): “In addition, it should be pointed out that our results are even lower than those obtained in several papers -such as Lenzen and Dey (2002), Alfredsson (2004) or Mizobuchi (2008)- that also get large direct and indirect rebound effects, even reaching effects larger than 100%, i.e. backfire outcomes.”
“Rebound” Effects from Increased Energy Efficiency: A Time to Pause and Reflect (2013, background): “Henly et al.’s formulation (later applied more recently by Mizobuchi, 2008) builds investment costs (the price of an appliance as a capital or durable good) into the long-run own price elasticity of energy service demand which (set against reduced operating costs of a more efﬁcient appliance) they…”
Does the Circular Economy Grow the Pie? The Case of Rebound Effects From Smartphone Reuse (2018, background): “Among these, capital and product expenditures usually play a big role (Mizobuchi, 2008).”
Consumer End-Use Energy Efficiency and Rebound Effects (2014, background): “However, researchers who investigate how capital costs affect the rebound effect find, not surprisingly, that the higher capital cost of efficient technologies may lower the extent of the direct and indirect rebound effects (44, 84, 94, 95).”
The foundations of the environmental rebound effect and its contribution towards a general framework (2016, background): “509 However, the progressive inclusion of capital costs in rebound studies (Mizobuchi, 2008; Nässén and 510 Holmberg, 2009) and macroeconomic effects related to negative income, competitiveness and 511 disinvestment (Turner, 2009) has brought up capricious results in the form of ‘negative rebound…”
Energy Efficiency: Economics and Policy (2010, background): “At the macroeconomic level, significant rebound levels have also been estimated: Barker et al (2007) provided 19% for the UK, Mizobuchi (2008) 27% in Japan, and Hanley et al (2009) 50% in the short term and 130% in the long term for Scotland.”
Missing carbon reductions? Exploring rebound and backfire effects in UK households (2010, methodology): “Neither of these findings take account of capital costs, and when Mizobuchi (2008) extended the study to do so, the rebound effect was estimated to be reduced to around 27%.”
Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for U.S. households with input–output analysis Part 1: Theoretical framework (2013, methodology): “…capital cost of ef ﬁ cient technologies may lower the extent of the direct and indirect rebound effects (Chitnis et al., 2012; Henly et al., 1988; Mizobuchi, 2008; Nässén and Holmberg, 2009; Wirl, 1997) although methods for incorporation of capital costs in energy demand and energy service…”
Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for UKhouseholds (2012, methodology): “These estimates are larger than many in the literature, although smaller than those by Brannlund et al (2007) and Mizobuchi (2008). Net substitution across all commodities accounts for between two thirds and three quarters of the total rebound for electricity and gas, but only one fifth for vehicle ”
Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for U.S. households with input-output analysis. Part 2: Simulation (2013, result): “…that the efficiency investment has no incremental capital cost (or has the same capital cost) compared to a conventional technology, and so our estimates form an upper bound of the indirect rebound effect (Chitnis et al., 2012; Henly et al., 1988; Mizobuchi, 2008; Nässén and Holmberg, 2009).”
Absolute versus Relative Environmental Sustainability (2013, unknown): “An indirect rebound effect may also occur when cost reduction induced by increased eco-efficiency leads to increased spending in other consumer categories (Mizobuchi 2008).”
National and Sub-national Policies and Institutions (2014, methodology): “(Mizobuchi, 2008) finds a 37% 43 effect for the Japanese household sector using a simulation model.”
What if consumers decided to all 'go green'? Environmental rebound effects from consumption decisions (2013, unknown): “…1998; Lenzen et al., 2004; Weber and Perrels, 2000; Reinders et al., 2003) Few studies explicitly or implicitly estimate the magnitude of the indirect rebound eﬀect (Chalkley et al., 2001; Lenzen and Dey, 2002; Alfredsson, 2004; Brannlund et al., 2007; Mizobuchi, 2008; Druckman et al., 2011).”