Do Consumers Respond to Marginal or Average Price? Evidence from Nonlinear Electricity Pricing

By Koichiro Ito. 2014

893 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Electrical and Electronic Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/be51320543fca29b882e735d20cd2a96ea68b3b8

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

In Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Citations in the corpus

From Fog to Smog: the Value of Pollution Information (2019, background): “…such as food nutritional contents (Bollinger, Leslie and Sorensen, 2011), insurance policy costs (Kling et al., 2012), vehicle fuel economy (Allcott, 2013), retirement savings (Bernheim, Fradkin and Popov, 2015), taxation (Chetty, Looney and Kroft, 2009), and energy prices (Shin, 1985; Ito, 2014).”
Saving Power to Conserve Your Reputation? The Effectiveness of Private versus Public Information (2012, neutral): “However, if consumers receive bills with separate marginal and fixed charges or if they respond to average rather than marginal electricity prices (Ito, 2014), then this is no longer the case and conservation is still optimal.”
Durable goods and long-run electricity demand: : Evidence from air conditioner purchase behavior (2014, background): “This lies near the range of estimates from the literature (e.g. Reiss and White, 2005; Ito, 2014; Jessoe and Rapson, 2014).”
The Long-Run Dynamics of Electricity Demand: Evidence from Municipal Aggregation (2020, background): “Papers outside of the dynamic panel literature typically estimate only short-run or static price elasticities.4 Ito (2014) uses quasi-experimental variation by comparing households located near a boundary between two California utilities, which vary in when and by how much they change prices.”
Consumer Inattention and Bill-Shock Regulation (2015, background): “I show an equivalence result: neither inattention nor bill-shock regulation affects substantive market outcomes.”
Cellular Service Demand: Biased Beliefs, Learning, and Bill Shock (2015, background): “Related work provides evidence that individual labor choices (Liebman and Zeckhauser 2004) and electricity consumption choices (Ito 2010) respond to average prices rather than marginal prices.”
Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel quantile regression models (2020, neutral): “Thus, it appears that substantial peak load reductions can in fact be achieved from TOU pricing (Jessoe and Rapson (2014), Ito (2014)).”