The internalization of externalities in the production of electricity: Willingness to pay for the attributes of a policy for renewable energy

Ecological Economics

Volumn 67, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 140-152

  Longo, Alberto ^a   Markandya, Anil ^b,c   Petrucci, Marta ^d  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BATH   (United Kingdom)

^c FONDAZIONE ENI ENRICO MATTEI   (Italy)

^d NERA ECONOMIC CONSULTING   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice experiments; Energy security; Greenhouse gases emissions; Non market valuation; Renewable energy; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; GLOBALIZATION; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 48549090137     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.12.006     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Alberini A., Longo A., and Veronesi M. Basic statistical models for conjoint choice experiments. In: Kanninen B. (Ed). Valuing Environmental Amenities using Choice Experiments: A Common Sense Guide to Theory and Practice (2007), Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 203-228
2. Alvarez-Farizo B., and Hanley N. Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain. Energy Policy 30 2 (2002) 107-116
3. Aravena C., Martinsson P., and Scarpa R. Does money talk? The effect of a monetary attribute on the marginal rate of substitution in a choice experiment. Paper presented at the 3rd World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, Kyoto, Japan, 3-7 July, 2006 (2006)
4. Baarsma, B.E., Berkhout, P.H.G., Hop, J.P., 2005. Valuation of the quality of the electricity grid - power outages have a price too. SEO Discussion Paper 41, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
5. Bateman I.J., Carson R.T., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Ozdemiroglu E., Pearce D.W., Sugden R., and Swanson J. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual (2002), Edward Elgar, Ltd., Cheltenham 458 pp
6. Batley S.L., Colbourne D., Fleming P.D., and Urwin P. Citizen versus consumer: challenges in the UK green power market. Energy Policy 29 6 (2001) 479-487
7. Beenstock M., Goldin E., and Haitovsky Y. Response bias in a conjoint analysis of power outages. Energy Economics 20 2 (1998) 135-156
8. Bergmann A., Hanley N., and Wright R. Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments. Energy Policy 34 9 (2006) 1004-1014
9. Berrens R., Bohara A., Jenkins-Smith H., Silva C., and Weimer D. Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 47 2 (2004) 331-363
10. Blomquist G.C., and Whitehead J.C. Resource quality information and validity of willingness to pay in contingent valuation. Resource and Energy Economics 20 (1998) 179-196
11. Carlsson, F., Martinsson, P., 2004a. Willingness to pay among Swedish households to avoid power outages - a random parameter Tobit model approach. Working Papers in Economics no. 154, Department of Economics, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg.
12. Carlsson, F., Martinsson, P., 2004b. Does it matter when a power outage occurs? - a choice experiment study on the willingness to pay to avoid power outages. Working Papers in Economics no. 155, Department of Economics, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg.
13. Champ P.A. Collecting survey data for nonmarket valuation. In: Champ P.A., Boyle K.J., and Brown T.C. (Eds). A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecth, The Netherlands 59-98
14. Champ P.A., and Bishop R.C. Donation payment mechanisms and contingent valuation: an empirical study of hypothetical bias. Environmental and Resource Economics 19 4 (2001) 383-402
15. Danielson L., Hoban T.J., Van Houtven G., and Whitehead J.C. Measuring the benefits of local public goods: environmental quality in Gaston County, North Carolina. Applied Economics 27 (1995) 1253-1260
16. Davis J. Assessing community preferences for development projects: are willingness-to-pay studies robust to mode effects?. World Development 32 4 (2004) 655-672
17. de Nooij, M., Bijvoet, C.C., Koopmans, C.C. 2005. The value of supply security: the costs of power interruptions: economic input for damage reduction and investment in networks. SEO Discussion Paper 35, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
18. DEFRA. Ancillary Effects of Green House Gas Mitigation Policies (2002), Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs, London October
19. DEFRA. The Social Costs of Carbon (SCC) Review - Methodological Approaches for Using SCC Estimates in Policy Assessment (2004), Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs, London
20. Doane M.J., Hartman R.S., and Woo C.K. Households' perceived value of service reliability: an analysis of contingent valuation data. The Energy Journal 9 (1988) 135-150
21. Doane M.J., Hartman R.S., and Woo C.K. Household preference for interruptible rate options and the revealed value of service reliability. The Energy Journal 9 (1988) 121-134
22. DTI. Energy White Paper - Our Energy Future - Creating a Low Carbon Economy (2003), Department of Trade and Industry, London
23. DTI. Quarterly Energy Prices (2005), National Statistics Publication, Department of Trade and Industry, London
24. DTI. Secretary of State's First Report to Parliament on Security of Gas and Electricity Supply in Great Britain (2005), Department of Trade and Industry, London
25. Ek K. Public and private attitudes towards ''green'' electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 33 13 (2005) 1677-1689
26. European Commission. White paper of energy policy. Com 95 (1995) 682 Final, Brussels
27. European Commission. Energy for the future: Renewable Source of Energy, White Paper for a Community Strategy and Action Plan, Com(97) final (26/11/1997), Brussels (1997)
28. European Commission. Externalities of fuel cycles 'ExternE' Project. National Implementation Programme. DGXII, Science, Research and Development, JOULE (1998)
29. European Commission. ExternE externalities of energy. Methodology Update. Office of Publications for the European Communities, EC - DG XII, Brussels vol 7 (1999)
30. European Commission. Green paper: towards a European strategy for the security of energy supply. Com 769 (2000) Final, Brussels
31. European Commission. Community guidelines on state aid for environmental protection. Official Journal C 037 (2001) 0003-0015 Brussels
32. European Commission. External costs: research results on socio-environmental damages due to electricity and transport. Directorate-General for Research, Directorate J-Energy, Brussels (2003)
33. European Commission. ExternE - externalities of energy: methodology 2005 update. Directorate-General for Research, Sustainable Energy Systems, Brussels (2005)
34. ExternE-Pol. Externalities of energy: extension of accounting framework and policy applications. Final Technical Report, August (2005)
35. Farhar B.C. Willingness to pay for electricity from renewable resources: a review of utility market research. NREL/TP-550-26148, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO (1999)
36. Farhar B.C., and Houston A. Willingness to pay for electricity from renewable energy. NREL/TP-460-21216, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO (1996)
37. Farhar B.C., and Coburn T. Colorado homeowner preferences on energy and environmental policy. NREL/TP-550-25285, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO (1999)
38. Fouquet R. The United Kingdom demand for renewable electricity in a liberalized market. Energy Policy 26 4 (1998) 281-293
39. Freeman M.A. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values Theory and Methods. Second Edition (2003), Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DC
40. In: Friedrich R., and Bickel P. (Eds). Environmental External Costs of Transport (2001), Springer-Verlag, New York
41. Goett A.A., Hudson K., and Train K.E. Customers' choice among retail energy suppliers: the willingness-to-pay for service attributes. Energy Journal 21 4 (2000) 1-28
42. Haab T.C., and McConnell K.E. Valuing environmental and natural resources. The Econometrics of Non-market Valuation. New Horizons in Environmental Economics (2002), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
43. Hanley N., and Nevin C. Appraising renewable energy developments in remote communities: the case of the North Assynt Estate, Scotland. Energy Policy 27 9 (1999) 527-547
44. Hanley N., Wright R.E., and Adamowicz W. Using choice experiments to value the environment: design issues, current experience and future prospects. Environmental and Resource Economics 11 (1998) 413-428
45. Hanley N., Mourato S., and Wright R.E. Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation?. Journal of Economic Surveys 15 3 (2001) 435-462
46. Hartman R.S., Doane M.J., and Woo C.K. Consumer rationality and the status quo. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics 106 (1991) 141-162
47. Holmes T.P., and Adamowicz W. Attribute-based methods. In: Champ P.A., Boyle K.J., and Brown T.C. (Eds). A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
48. IEA, 2003. Electricity Statistics. International Energy Agency Energy Statistics available at http://www.iea.org/textbase/stats/electricityresult.asp.
49. JESS. Joint Energy Security of Supply Working Group - Second Report (2003), Department of Trade and Industry. http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/jess/reports.shtml February http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/jess/reports.shtml
50. Johnson R.F., and Desvousges W.H. Estimating stated preferences with rated-pair data: environmental, health, and employment effects of energy programs. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34 1 (1997) 79-99
51. Krewitt W. External costs of energy - do the answers match the questions? Looking back at 10 years of ExternE. Energy Policy 30 (2002) 839-848
52. Krupnick A., Alberini A., Cropper M.L., Simon N., O'Brien B., Goeree R., and Heintzelman M. Age, health, and the willingness to pay for mortality risk reductions: a contingent valuation survey of Ontario residents. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 24 (2002) 161-186
53. Layton D.F., and Moeltner K. The cost of power outages to heterogeneous households. In: Scarpa R., and Alberini A. (Eds). Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics (2005), Springer, Dordrecht 35-54
54. Li H., Berrens R.P., Bohara A.K., Jenkins-Smith H.C., Silva C.L., and Weimer D.L. Would developing country commitments affect US households support for a modified Kyoto protocol?. Ecological Economics 48 (2004) 329-343
55. Louviere J.J., Hensher D.A., and Swait J.D. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications (2000), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
56. Markandya, A., 2003. Expected external costs and their structure characterizing electricity options and their role in the strategic assessment of these options. Conference on Electric Power Supply in the 21st Century, Warsaw.
57. McFadden D.L. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice analysis. In: Zarembka P. (Ed). Frontiers in Econometrics (1974), New York Academic Press, New York 105-142
58. Menges R., Schroeder C., and Traub S. Altruism, warm glow and the willingness-to-donate for green electricity: an artefactual field experiment. Environmental and Resource Economics 31 4 (2005) 431-458
59. Mitchell R.C., and Carson R.T. Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method (1989), Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
60. NewExt. New elements for the assessment of external costs from energy technologies. Final Report to the European Commission, DG Research (2004)
61. OECD. Ancillary benefits and costs of greenhouse gas mitigation. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris (2000)
62. Office for National Statistics. Employee jobs by industry 1978-2005. London (2005). http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/tsdataset.asp?vlnk=341
63. Pearce D.W., Cline W.R., Achanta A.N., Fankhauser S., Pachauri R.K., Tol R.S.J., and Vellinga P. The social costs of climate change: greenhouse damage and the benefits of control. In: Bruce J.P., Lee H., and Haites E.F. (Eds). Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions-Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 179-224
64. Popp D. Altruism and the demand for environmental quality. Land Economics 77 3 (2001) 339-349
65. Roe B., Teisl M.F., Levy A., and Russell M. US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity. Energy Policy 29 11 (2001) 917-925
66. Tol R.S.J. The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties. Energy Policy 33 (2005) 2064-2074
67. Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 342 pp
68. Turner R.K., Pearce D., and Bateman I. Environmental Economics: An Elementary Introduction (1994), Prentice Hall, London 328 pp
69. Veisten K., Hoen H.F., Navrud S., and Strand J. Scope insensitivity in contingent valuation of complex environmental amenities. Journal of Environmental Management 73 (2004) 317-331
70. Viscusi W.K., Magat W.A., and Huber J. Pricing environmental health risks: survey assessment of risk-risk and risk-dollar tradeoffs for chronic bronchitis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 21 (1991) 32-51
71. Wiser R. Using Contingent Valuation to Explore Willingness to Pay for Renewable Energy: A Comparison of Collective and Voluntary Payment Vehicles (2003), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL-53239, Berkeley
72. Witzke H.P., and Urfei G. Willingness to pay for environmental protection in Germany: coping with the regional dimension. Regional Studies 35 3 (2001) 207-214
73. Woo C.-K., Pupp R., Flaim T., and Mango R. How much do electric customers want to pay for reliability? New evidence on an old controversy. Energy Systems and Policy 15 (1991) 145-159
74. Zarnikau J. Consumer demand for 'green power' and energy efficiency. Energy Policy 31 15 (2003) 1661-1672