Domestic energy efficiency measures, adopter heterogeneity and policies to induce diffusion

Programmes for carbon emissions reductions invariably require households to adopt energy efficiency measures such as heating controls. Thus, understanding why households adopt efficiency measures and what policies can successfully increase their adoption (induced diffusion), is critical to energy policy. This study addresses these questions by developing research hypotheses grounded in diffusion and finance theory, and the literature on the barriers to energy efficiency. By employing two cross sectional surveys of UK consumers, the adoption of multiple technologies is assessed allowing for a more comprehensive understanding of adopter heterogeneity. The empirics indicate that numerous factors are important in understanding adoption including; inertia, tenure variables, a desire to save money and/or increase comfort, replacement effects, adopter characteristics as prescribed by diffusion theory and policy interventions. In the latter case, investment support schemes appear to have induced diffusion while information based instruments have had no effect.

[1]  W. E. Watkins,et al.  Investment in Energy Efficiency: Do the Characteristics of Firms Matter? , 1998, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[2]  R. Kemp,et al.  Environmental policy and technical change : a comparison of the technological impact of policy instruments , 1995 .

[3]  A. Jaffe,et al.  Environmental Policy and Technological Change , 2002 .

[4]  Vijay Mahajan,et al.  Determination of Adopter Categories by Using Innovation Diffusion Models , 1990 .

[5]  Michael Peters,et al.  Authors The Powergen Energy Monitor 2004 was researched and written by , 2004 .

[6]  W. Golove,et al.  Market barriers to energy efficiency: A critical reappraisal of the rationale for public policies to promote energy efficiency , 1996 .

[7]  Carl Blumstein,et al.  How high are option values in energy-efficiency investments? , 1995 .

[8]  Frank M. Bass,et al.  A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[9]  D. Hosmer,et al.  A comparison of goodness-of-fit tests for the logistic regression model. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  R. Howarth,et al.  ‘Normal’ markets, market imperfections and energy efficiency , 1994 .

[11]  S. Sorrell.  The rebound effect: an assessment of the evidence for economy-wide energy savings from improved energy efficiency , 2007 .

[12]  D. Greene,et al.  Energy efficiency and consumption — the rebound effect — a survey , 2000 .

[13]  M. Einhorn,et al.  Notes - Economic Implications of Mandated Efficiency Standards for Household Appliances , 1982 .

[14]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Energy-Efficiency Investments and Public Policy , 1994 .

[15]  R. Newell,et al.  Information programs for technology adoption: The case of energy-efficiency audits , 2004 .

[16]  P. Stoneman,et al.  The Economics of Technological Diffusion , 2001 .

[17]  B. Boardman.  New directions for household energy efficiency: evidence from the UK , 2004 .

[18]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[19]  G. Metcalf.  Can Irreversibility Explain the Slow Diffusion of Energy Saving Technologies? (with Kevin Hassett) , 1996 .

[20]  P. Geroski.  Models of technology diffusion , 2000 .

[21]  L. Shorrock,et al.  Domestic energy fact file 2003 , 2003 .

[22]  B. Boardman.  Achieving energy efficiency through product policy: the UK experience , 2004 .

[23]  Jörg Peters,et al.  Identifying the Rebound - Evidence from a German Household Panel , 2007 .

[24]  Robert Lowe,et al.  An exploration of the technical feasibility of achieving CO2 emission reductions in excess of 60% within the UK housing stock by the year 2050 , 2005 .

[25]  Marilyn A Brown.  Market failures and barriers as a basis for clean energy policies , 2001 .