Will South Korean Residential Consumers Accept the Renewable Heat Incentive Scheme? A Stated Preference Approach

In South Korea, renewable energy policy is mainly focused on electricity and tends to neglect renewable heat (RH). However, for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the heating sector must sharply switch from its use of conventional fuels to renewable sources. The South Korean Government is considering an RH incentive (RHI) program with financial and policy support schemes and is thus demanding information about residential consumers’ acceptance of the RHI program to expand the use of RH. Therefore, this study looked into residential consumers’ acceptance of the introduction of the RHI program by applying contingent valuation (CV). For this purpose, a CV survey of 600 interviewees was conducted using a dichotomous choice question format that asked a respondent if she/he is willing to pay a given amount. Furthermore, among the various dichotomous choice question formats, the one-and-one-half-bounded format, which is considered desirable in terms of efficiency as well as consistency, was applied. One point to note in analyzing the CV responses was that not a few interviewees had zero willingness to pay (WTP). Thus, a spike model was employed to deal with the dichotomous choice CV data with a number of zero observations. The results revealed that the household mean WTP amounted to KRW 5753 (USD 5.35) per year. If we look at this value from a national perspective, it is worth KRW 113.63 billion (USD 105.61 million) per year. This value corresponds to the economic value or benefits that the introduction of an RHI program provides to the South Korean people each year and needs to be compared to the costs that the introduction of RHI will incur.

[1]  Seul-Ye Lim,et al.  External benefits of waste-to-energy in Korea: A choice experiment study , 2014 .

[2]  R. Brent Applied Cost-benefit Analysis , 1996 .

[3]  Jungwoo Shin,et al.  The economic value of South Korea׳s renewable energy policies (RPS, RFS, and RHO): A contingent valuation study , 2015 .

[4]  S. Yoo,et al.  Using a spike model to deal with zero response data from double bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys , 2002 .

[5]  Maurizio Repetto,et al.  Optimal integration of solar energy in a district heating network , 2015 .

[6]  Sung-Yoon Huh,et al.  Enhancing public acceptance of renewable heat obligation policies in South Korea: Consumer preferences and policy implications , 2015, Energy Economics.

[7]  Burton C. English,et al.  Willingness to pay for E85 from corn, switchgrass, and wood residues , 2010 .

[8]  Ian H. Rowlands,et al.  Visualizing social acceptance research , 2018, Energy Research & Social Science.

[9]  Seung-Hoon Yoo,et al.  WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR GREEN ELECTRICITY IN KOREA: A CONTINGENT VALUATION STUDY , 2009 .

[10]  Xiaoli Zhao,et al.  Public preferences for biomass electricity in China , 2018, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

[11]  Hyo-Jin Kim,et al.  South Korean Household’s Willingness to Pay for Replacing Coal with Natural Gas? A View from CO2 Emissions Reduction , 2017 .

[12]  Claudia Schwirplies Citizens' Acceptance of Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation: A Survey in China, Germany, and the U.S. , 2018 .

[13]  J. M. Clancy,et al.  Modelling national policy making to promote bioenergy in heat, transport and electricity to 2030 – Interactions, impacts and conflicts , 2018, Energy Policy.

[14]  P. Connor,et al.  The development of renewable heating policy in the United Kingdom , 2015 .

[15]  I. Krinsky,et al.  On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities , 1986 .

[16]  G. Mihalakakou,et al.  Social acceptance of renewable energy projects: A contingent valuation investigation in Western Greece , 2018 .

[17]  Georgios Tsantopoulos,et al.  Public attitudes towards photovoltaic developments: Case study from Greece , 2014 .

[18]  Min-Kyu Lee,et al.  Willingness to pay for replacing traditional energies with renewable energy in South Korea , 2017 .

[19]  B. Kriström Spike Models in Contingent Valuation , 1997 .

[20]  Edward E. Leamer,et al.  Report of the NOOA Panel on Contingent Valuation , 1993 .

[21]  G. Mihalakakou,et al.  Social acceptance of renewable energy sources: A review of contingent valuation applications , 2014 .

[22]  Wenjing Yang,et al.  Non-market valuation of consumer benefits towards the assessment of energy efficiency gap , 2019, Energy and Buildings.

[23]  Jungwoo Shin,et al.  Consumer preference and willingness to pay for a renewable fuel standard (RFS) policy: Focusing on ex-ante market analysis and segmentation , 2017 .

[24]  Ryan Wiser,et al.  Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles , 2002 .

[25]  P. Lal,et al.  Random preferences towards bioenergy environmental externalities: A case study of woody biomass based electricity in the Southern United States , 2011 .

[26]  Tapas K. Mallick,et al.  Is Renewable Heat Incentive the future , 2013 .

[27]  M. Hanemann,et al.  One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation , 2001, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[28]  Karin Ericsson,et al.  Devising renewable heat policy: Overview of support options , 2013 .

[29]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Chapter 17 Contingent Valuation , 2005 .

[30]  Anabela Botelho,et al.  Social sustainability of renewable energy sources in electricity production: An application of the contingent valuation method , 2016 .

[31]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses , 1984 .

[32]  J. McCluskey,et al.  Willingness to pay for a second-generation bioethanol: A case study of Korea , 2019, Energy Policy.