Are consumers willing to pay more for electricity from cooperatives? Results from an online Choice Experiment in Germany

Energy Research and Social Science

Volumn 2, Issue , 2014, Pages 90-101

  Sagebiel, Julian ^a   Müller, Jakob R ^b   Rommel, Jens ^a  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERFURT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Choice Experiments; Cooperatives; Energy transition

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904688530     PISSN: 22146296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2014.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Bundesnetzagentur Monitoringbericht 2012 2013
2. D. Jansen Local utilities in the German electricity market and their role in the diffusion of innovations in energy efficiency and climate change mitigation D. Jansen, K. Ostertag, R. Walz, Sustainability innovations in the electricity sector 2012 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 1 26
3. H.-J. Bontrup, and R.-M. Marquardt Kritisches Handbuch der deutschen Elektrizitatswirtschaft: Branchenentwicklung, Unternehmensstrategien, Arbeitsbeziehungen 2010 Sigma Berlin
4. H. Menke Kooperation in der Energiewirtschaft: Chancen und Grenzen der Rechtsform eG Zeitschrift Fur Das Gesamte Genossenschaftswesen 59 2009 175 179
5. H. Klemisch, and H. Maron Genossenschaftliche Lösungsansätze zur Sicherung der kommunalen Daseinsvorsorge Zeitschrift Fur Das Gesamte Genossenschaftswesen 60 2010 3 13
6. L. Holstenkamp, and S. Ulbrich Bürgerbeteiligung mittels Fotovoltaikgenossenschaften: Marktüberblick und Analyse der Finanzierungsstruktur 2010 Leuphana Universität, Lüneburg Lüneburg
7. H. Degenhart Die Finanzierung von Biomasse-Nahwärme- Genossenschaften: ein Überblick 2010 Leuphana Universität. Lüneburg
8. J. Müller, and J. Rommel Is there a future role for urban electricity cooperatives? The case of Greenpeace Energy J. Ramos-Martín, M. Giampietro, S. Ulgiati, S.G. Bukkens, Can we break the addiction to fossil energy? 2011 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 185 195 Barcelona
9. J. Müller, and L. Holstenkamp Governance and financing of German energy cooperatives 2012 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin
10. J. Müller, and L. Holstenkamp Zum Stand von Energiegenossenschaften in Deutschland. Ein statistischer Überblick zum 31.12.2012 2013 Leuphana Universität, Lüneburg Lüneburg
11. O.E. Williamson The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, relational contracting 1985 Free Press, Collier Macmillan New York, London
12. H. Hansmann The ownership of enterprise 1996 The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA
13. K. Araújo The emerging field of energy transitions: progress,challenges, and opportunities Energy Res Soc Sci 1 2014 112 121
14. S. Strunz The German energy transition as a regime shift Ecol Econ 100 2014 150 158 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.019
15. B.K. Sovacool What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda Energy Res Soc Sci 1 2014 1 29
16. M.R. Greenberg Energy policy and research: the underappreciation of trust Energy Res Soc Sci 1 2014 152 160
17. A. Goldthau Rethinking the governance of energy infrastructure:scale, decentralization and polycentrism Energy Res Soc Sci 1 2014 134 140
18. P.C. Stern Individual and household interactions with energy system: toward integrated understanding Energy Res Soc Sci 1 2014 41 48
19. P. Lehmann, F. Creutzig, M.-H. Ehlers, N. Friedrichsen, C. Heuson, and L. Hirth et al. Carbon lock-out: advancing renewable energy policy in Europe Energies 5 2012 323 354 10.3390/en5020323
20. J. Kaenzig, S.L. Heinzle, and R. Wüstenhagen Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany Energy Policy 53 2013 311 322 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.061
21. G. Seyfang The new economics of sustainable consumption: seeds of change 2011 Palgrave Macmillan Basingstoke
22. A. Bergmann, S. Colombo, and N. Hanley Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments Ecol Econ 65 2008 616 625
23. A. Bergmann, N. Hanley, and R. Wright Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments Energy Policy 34 2006 1004 1014 10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.035
24. B. Roe, M.F. Teisl, A. Levy, and M. Russell US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity Energy Policy 29 2001 917 925
25. A. Gracia, J. Barreiro-Hurlé, and L. Pérez y Pérez Can renewable energy be financed with higher electricity prices? Evidence from a Spanish region Energy Policy 50 2012 784 794 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.028
26. S.-J. Ku, and S.-H. Yoo Willingness to pay for renewable energy investment in Korea: a choice experiment study Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14 2010 2196 2201 10.1016/j.rser.2010.03.013
27. J. Yoo, and R.C. Ready Preference heterogeneity for renewable energy technology Energy Econ 42 2014 101 114 10.1016/j.eneco.2013.12.007
28. A. Longo, A. Markandya, and M. Petrucci The internalization of externalities in the production of electricity: willingness to pay for the attributes of a policy for renewable energy Ecol Econ 67 2008 140 152
29. A.M. Borchers, J.M. Duke, and G.R. Parsons Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source? Energy Policy 35 2007 3327 3334
30. J. Meyerhoff, C. Ohl, and V. Hartje Landscape externalities from onshore wind power Energy Policy 38 2010 82 92
31. A. Dimitropoulos, and A. Kontoleon Assessing the determinants of local acceptability of wind-farm investment: a choice experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands Energy Policy 37 2009 1842 1854
32. J. Ladenburg, and A. Dubgaard Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in Denmark Energy Policy 35 2007 4059 4071 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.01.023
33. B. Álvarez-Farizo, and N. Hanley Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain Energy Policy 30 2002 107 116
34. R. Scarpa, and K. Willis Willingness-to-pay for renewable energy: primary and discretionary choice of British households' for micro-generation technologies Energy Econ 32 2010 129 136
35. M. Soliño External benefits of biomass-e in Spain: an economic valuation Bioresour Technol 101 2010 1992 1997
36. M. Soliño, M.X. Vázquez, and A. Prada Social demand for electricity from forest biomass in Spain: does payment periodicity affect the willingness to pay? Energy Policy 37 2009 531 540 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.002
37. C.C. Michelsen, and R. Madlener Homeowners' preferences for adopting innovative residential heating systems: a discrete choice analysis for Germany Energy Econ 34 2012 1271 1283 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.06.009
38. M. Achtnicht Do environmental benefits matter? Evidence from a choice experiment among house owners in Germany Ecol Econ 70 2011 2191 2200 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.06.026
39. G.A. Akerlof The market for "Lemons": quality uncertainty and the market mechanism Q J Econ 84 1970 488 10.2307/1879431
40. M.C. Jensen, and W.H. Meckling Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure J Financ Econ 3 1976 305 360
41. Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy. Eckpunkte für die Reform des EEG; n.d.
42. J.R. Müller, and T. Talaulicar Founding context and ex ante governance: towards an explanatory model on the performance of energy cooperatives in Germany Paper presented at the EURAM conference Rotterdam, Netherlands, 6-8 June 2012 2012
43. Greenpeace Energy eG Greenpeace Energy eG: an overview 2014
44. M. Hanisch, and J. Rommel Support for famers' cooperatives: EU synthesis and comparative analysis report "Internal Governance," Wageningen 2012
45. J.O. Müller Voraussetzungen und Verfahrensweisen bei der Errichtung von Genossenschaften in Europa vor 1900 1976 Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Göttingen
46. J. Gros Die Genossenschaft der Zukunft aus Sicht des Verbandes Zeitschrift Fur Das Gesamte Genossenschaftswesen 59 2009 95 105
47. G. Draheim Die Genossenschaft als Unternehmungstyp 1955 Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Göttingen
48. M. Hanisch, J. Rommel, and M. Müller The cooperative yardstick revisited: panel evidence from the European dairy sectors J Agric Food Ind Organ 11 2013 151 162
49. International Cooperative Alliance. Co-operative identity, values & principles; n.d.
50. H. Bonus The cooperative association as a business enterprise: a study in the economics of transactions J Inst Theor Econ 142 1986 310 339
51. F. Chaddad, and C. Iliopoulos Control rights, governance, and the costs of ownership in agricultural cooperatives Agribusiness 29 2013 3 22 10.1002/agr.21328
52. R.H. Coase The nature of the firm Economica 4 1937 386 405 10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x
53. E.G. Furubotn, and R. Richter Institutions and economic theory: the contribution of the new institutional economics 2nd ed. 2005 University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor
54. R.H. Coase The problem of social cost J Law Econ 3 1960 1
55. O.E. Williamson Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives Admin Sci Q 36 1991 269 296 10.2307/2393356
56. F.R. Chaddad, and M.L. Cook Understanding new cooperative models: an ownership-control rights typology Appl Econ Perspect Policy 26 2004 348 360 10.1111/j.1467-9353.2004.00184.x
57. C. Cornforth The governance of cooperatives and mutual associations: a paradox perspective Ann Public Coop Econ 75 2004 11 32
58. J. Laurinkari Principles of the cooperative system E. Dülfer, J. Laurinkari, International handbook of cooperative organizations 1994 Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Göttingen 708 716
59. J. Bijman, C. Iliopoulos, K.J. Poppe, C. Gijselinckx, K. Hagedorn, and M. Hanisch et al. Support for farmers' cooperatives: final report, Wageningen 2012
60. W.J. Baumol On the proper cost tests for natural monopoly in a multiproduct industry Am Econ Rev 67 1977 809 822
61. M. Granovetter The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited Sociol Theory 1 1983 201 233
62. K. Remoundou, Y. Kountouris, and P. Koundouri Is the value of an environmental public good sensitive to the providing institution? Resour Energy Econ 34 2012 381 395 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2012.03.002
63. D. Bougherara, and G. Ducos Farmers' preferences over conservation contract flexibility and duration: an estimation of the effect of transaction costs using choice experiment Presented at 1. Journée de l'ESNIE Paris 2006
64. C. Reise, Ulf Liebe, and O. Mußhoff Präferenzen von Landwirten bei der Gestaltung von Substratlieferverträgen für Biogasanlagen: ein Choice-Experiment German J Agric Econ 61 2012 162 177
65. G.K. Abebe, J. Bijman, R. Kemp, O. Omta, and A. Tsegaye Contract farming configuration: smallholders' preferences for contract design attributes Food Policy 40 2013 14 24 10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.01.002
66. M. Hanisch, C. Kimmich, J. Rommel, and J. Sagebiel Coping with power scarcity in an emerging megacity: a consumers' perspective from Hyderabad Int J Global Energy Issues 33 2010 189 204
67. K. Rommel, M. Hanisch, K. Deb, and J. Sagebiel Consumer preferences for improvements of power supply quality: results from a choice experiment in Hyderabad, India and implications for energy policy Paper presented at the European conference of the IAEE 25-28 August 2010, Vilnius, Lithuania 2010
68. K.J. Lancaster A new approach to consumer theory J Polit Econ 74 1966 132
69. S. Rosen Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition J Polit Econ 82 1974 34 55
70. L.L. Thurstone A law of comparative judgment Psychol Rev 34 1927 273 286
71. C.F. Manski The structure of random utility models Theor Decis 8 1977 229 254
72. D. McFadden Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior P. Zarembka, Frontiers in econometrics 1974 Academic Press New York 105 142
73. J.J. Louviere, and G. Woodworth Design and analysis of simulated consumer choice or allocation experiments: an approach based on aggregate data J Mark Res 20 1983 350 367
74. D.A. Hensher Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay Transport Res B: Meth 44 2010 735 752 10.1016/j.trb.2009.12.012
75. J.J. Murphy, P.G. Allen, T.H. Stevens, and D. Weatherhead A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation Environ Resour Econ 30 2005 313 325 10.1007/s10640-004-3332-z
76. J.J. Louviere, D.A. Hensher, J.D. Swait, and W. Adamowicz Stated choice methods: analysis and applications, 4. print 2006 Cambridge Univ. Press Cambridge
77. J.K. Magidson, and J.K. Vermunt Removing the scale factor confound in multinomial logit choice models to obtain better estimates of preference Sawtooth software conference proceedings 2007
78. D.G. Fiebig, M.P. Keane, J. Louviere, and N. Wasi The generalized multinomial logit model: accounting for scale and coefficient heterogeneity Mark Sci 29 2010 393 421 10.1287/mksc.1090.0508
79. S. Hess, and J.M. Rose Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models? Transportation 39 2012 1225 1239 10.1007/s11116-012-9394-9
80. W.H. Greene, and D.A. Hensher Revealing additional dimensions of preference heterogeneity in a latent class mixed multinomial logit model Appl Econ 45 2013 1897 1902 10.1080/00036846.2011.650325
81. J.M. Rose, and M.C. Bliemer Stated preference experimental design strategies Handbook of transport modelling 2008 Elsevier Oxford 151 180
82. D.J. Street, and L. Burgess The construction of optimal stated choice experiments: theory and methods 2007 Wiley-Interscience Hoboken, NJ
83. D.J. Street, L. Burgess, and J.J. Louviere Quick and easy choice sets: constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiments Int J Res Mark 22 2005 459 470 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.09.003
84. J. Coast, H. Al-Janabi, E.J. Sutton, S.A. Horrocks, A.J. Vosper, and D.R. Swancutt et al. Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations Health Econ 21 2012 730 741 10.1002/hec.1739
85. M. Olson The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups 1965 Harvard Univ. Press Cambridge, MA
86. M.L. Cook The future of U.S. agricultural cooperatives: a neo-institutional approach Am J Agric Econ 77 1995 1153 1159
87. M. Domínguez-Torreiro, and M. Soliño Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas Ecol Econ 70 2011 2523 2531 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011. 08.021
88. D. Marsh, L. Mkwara, and R. Scarpa Do respondents perception of the status quo matter in non-market valuation with choice experiments? An application to New Zealand freshwater streams Sustainability 3 2011 1593 1615 10.3390/su3091593
89. M.R. Banzhaf, F.R. Johnson, and K.E. Matthews Opt-out alternatives and anglers' stated preferences J. Bennett, R. Blamey, The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation 2001 Eward Elgar PUblishing Limited Cheltenham, UK
90. D. Hensher, N. Shore, and K. Train Households' willingness to pay for water service attributes Environ Resour Econ 32 2005 509 531 10.1007/s10640-005-7686-7
91. ChoiceMetrics NGene 1.1.1 user manual & reference guide 2012 ChoiceMetrics Pty. Ltd. Sydney
92. A. Deaton The analysis of household surveys: a microeconometric approach to development policy 1997 World Bank Publications Washington
93. J. Anderson, S.V. Burks, J. Carpenter, L. Götte, K. Maurer, and D. Nosenzo et al. Self-selection and variations in the laboratory measurement of other-regarding preferences across subject pools: evidence from one college student and two adult samples Exp Econ 16 2013 170 189 10.1007/s10683-012-9327-7
94. F. Exadaktylos, A.M. Espín, and P. Brañas-Garza Experimental subjects are not different Sci Rep 3 2013 1213 10.1038/srep01213
95. G.W. Harrison, and J.A. List Field experiments J Econ Lit 42 2004 1009 1055 10.1257/0022051043004577
96. J.N. Druckman, and C.D. Kam Students as experimental participants Cambridge handbook of experimental political science 2011 Cambridge University Press New York 41 57
97. G.T. Henry Practical sampling 1990 Sage Publications Newbury Park
98. A.R. Hole A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures Health Econ 16 2007 827 840 10.1002/hec.1197