Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable energy: A meta-regression analysis

Resource and Energy Economics

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 93-109

  Ma, Chunbo ^a   Rogers, Abbie A ^a   Kragt, Marit E ^a,b   Zhang, Fan ^a   Polyakov, Maksym ^a   Gibson, Fiona ^a   Chalak, Morteza ^a   Pandit, Ram ^a   Tapsuwan, Sorada ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^b CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

Green electricity; Meta regression; Renewable energy; Valuation; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION; ENERGY UTILIZATION; GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES; RESOURCE VALUATION;

GREEN ELECTRICITY; INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGES; META-REGRESSION; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR RENEWABLE ENERGIES; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY ESTIMATES;

ECONOMICS;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; META-ANALYSIS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 84938095484     PISSN: 09287655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2015.07.003     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Abdullah S. Willingness to Pay for Renewable Energy Options in Developing Countries: The Case of Kenya 2009, (Doctoral Dissertation), Department of Economics and International Development, University of Bath, Bath.
2. Aldy J.E., Kotchen M.J., Leiserowitz A.A. Willingness to pay and political support for a US national clean energy standard. Nat. Clim. Change 2012, 2(8):596-599.
3. Aravena C., Hutchinson W.G., Longo A. Environmental pricing of externalities from different sources of electricity generation in Chile. Energy Econ. 2012, 34(4):1214-1225.
4. Bateman I.J., Carson R.T., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Özdemiroglu E., Pearce D., Sugden R., Swanson J. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual 2002, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
5. Batley S.L., Colbourne D., Fleming P.D., Urwin P. Citizen versus consumer: challenges in the UK green power market. Energy Policy 2001, 29(6):479-487.
6. Begg C.B., Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994, 50:1088-1101.
7. Begg C.B., Berlin J.A. Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data. J. R. Stat. Soc. 1988, 151:419-445.
8. Bigerna S., Polinori P. Italian Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Renewable Energy Sources. USAEE-IAEE Working Paper 2011, 11-94.
9. Bloom P.N., Novelli W.D. Problems and challenges in social marketing. J. Mark. 1981, 79-88.
10. Bollino C.A. The willingness to pay for renewable energy sources: the case of Italy with socio-demographic determinants. Energy J. 2009, 30(2):81-96.
11. Borchers A.M., Duke J.M., Parsons G.R. Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source?. Energy Policy 2007, 35(6):3327-3334.
12. Boyle K.J., Johnson F.R., McCollum D.W., Desvousges W.H., Dunford R.W., Hudson S.P. Valuing public goods: discrete versus continuous contingent-valuation responses. Land Econ. 1996, 72(3):381-396.
13. Byrnes B., Jones C., Goodman S. Contingent valuation and real economic commitments: evidence from electric utility green pricing programmes. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 1999, 42(2):149-166.
14. Cicia G., Cembalo L., Del Giudice T., Palladino A. Fossil energy versus nuclear, wind, solar and agricultural biomass: insights from an Italian national survey. Energy Policy 2012, 42:59-66.
15. Egger M., Smith G.D., Schneider M., Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Br. Med. J. 1997, 315:629-634.
16. Ek K. Public and private attitudes towards green electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 2005, 33(13):1677-1689.
17. Farhar B. Willingness to Pay for Electricity from Renewable Resources: A Review of Utility Market Research, NREL/TP.550.26148 1999, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, USA, Golden, CO.
18. Feenstra R.C., Inklaar R., Timmer M.P. The Next Generation of the Penn World Table 2013, Available for download at www.ggdc.net/pwt.
19. Field A.P., Gillett R. How to do a meta-analysis. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 2010, 63(3):665-694.
20. Glass G.V. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educ. Res. 1976, 10:3-8.
21. Gracia A., Barreiro-Hurlé J., Pérez y Pérez L. Can renewable energy be financed with higher electricity prices? Evidence from a Spanish region. Energy Policy 2012, 50:784-794.
22. Hanemann M., Labandeira X., Loureiro M.L. Climate change, energy and social preferences on policies: exploratory evidence for Spain. Clim. Res. 2011, 48(2-3):343-348.
23. Hanley N., Nevin C. Appraising renewable energy developments in remote communities: the case of the North Assynt Estate, Scotland. Energy Policy 1999, 27(9):527-547.
24. Higgins J.P.T., Thompson S.G. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat. Med. 2004, 23:1663-1682.
25. Hite D., Duffy P., Bransby D., Slaton C. Consumer willingness-to-pay for biopower: results from focus groups. Biomass Bioenergy 2008, 32(1):11-17.
26. IPCC Summary for policymakers. Climate Change 2014. Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2014, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom/New York, NY, USA. O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, J.C. Minx (Eds.).
27. Ivanova G. Queensland Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources 2005, Australia New Zealand Society for Ecological Economics (ANZSEE) Conference, Massey University, New Zealand.
28. Ivanova G. Are consumers' willing to pay extra for the electricity from renewable energy sources? An example of Queensland, Australia. Int. J. Renew. Energy Res. 2012, 2(4):758-766.
29. Kaenzig J., Heinzle S.L., Wüstenhagen R. Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany. Energy Policy 2013, 53:311-322.
30. Kim J., Park J., Kim H., Heo E. Assessment of Korean customers' willingness to pay with RPS. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16(1):695-703.
31. Koetse M., Florax R., Groot H. Consequences of effect size heterogeneity for meta-analysis: a Monte Carlo study. Stat. Methods Appl. 2010, 19(2):217-236.
32. Komarek T.M., Lupi F., Kaplowitz M.D. Valuing energy policy attributes for environmental management: Choice experiment evidence from a research institution. Energy Policy 2011, 39(9):5105-5115.
33. Kontogianni A., Tourkolias C., Skourtos M. Renewables portfolio, individual preferences and social values towards RES technologies. Energy Policy 2013, 55:467-476.
34. Kosenius A.K., Ollikainen M. Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources. Energy Policy 2013, 62:1148-1156.
35. Ma C., Burton M. The Public's Preference For Green Power in Australia 2014, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Conference, Port Maquarie.
36. MacMillan D., Hanley N., Lienhoop N. Contingent valuation: environmental polling or preference engine?. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 60(1):299-307.
37. Moomaw W., Yamba F., Kamimoto M., Maurice L., Nyboer J., Urama K., Weir T. Introduction. IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation 2011, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom/New York, NY, USA. O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, K. Seyboth, P. Matschoss, S. Kadner, T. Zwickel, P. Eickemeier, G. Hansen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow (Eds.).
38. Morrison M., Bennett J., Blamey R., Louviere J. Choice modelling and tests of benefit transfer. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2002, 84(1):161-170.
39. Navrud S., Bråten K.G. Consumers' preferences for green and brown electricity: a choice modelling approach. Rev. D'écon. Polit. 2007, 117(5):795-811.
40. Nelson J.P., Kennedy P.E. The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: an assessment. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2009, 42:345-377.
41. Nomura N., Akai M. Willingness to pay for green electricity in Japan as estimated through contingent valuation method. Appl. Energy 2004, 78(4):453-463.
42. Odam N. Developing Infant Technologies in Mature Industries: A Case Study on Renewable Energy 2011, University of Stirling, Scotland.
43. Roe B., Teisl M.F., Levy A., Russell M. US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity. Energy Policy 2001, 29(11):917-925.
44. Rosenthal R. Effect sizes: Pearson' correlation, its display via the BESD, and alternative indices. Am. Psychol. 1991, 46:1086-1087.
45. Rothschild M.L. Marketing communications in nonbusiness situations or why it's so hard to sell brotherhood like soap. J. Mark. 1979, 11-20.
46. Soliño M., Vázquez M., Prada A. Social demand for electricity from forest biomass in Spain: does payment periodicity affect the willingness to pay?. Energy Policy 2009, 37:531-540.
47. Soliño M., Farizo B.A., Campos P. The influence of home-site factors on residents' willingness to pay: an application for power generation from scrubland in Galicia, Spain. Energy Policy 2009, 37(10):4055-4065.
48. Stanley T.D. Wheat from chaff: meta-analysis as quantitative literature review. J. Econ. Perspect. 2001, 15:131-150.
49. Stanley T.D., Doucouliagos H., Giles M., Heckemeyer J.H., Johnston R.J., Laroche P., Nelson J.P., Paldam M., Poot J., Pugh G., Rosenberger R.S., Rost K. Meta-analysis of economics research reporting guidelines. J. Econ. Surv. 2013, 27(2):390-394.
50. Stanley T.D. Beyond publication bias. J. Econ. Surv. 2005, 19:309-345.
51. Stanley T.D. Meta-regression methods for detecting and estimating empirical effects in the presence of publications election. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 2008, 70(1):103-127.
52. Stanley T.D., Rosenberger R.S. Are Recreational Values Systematically Underestimated? Reducing Publication Selection Bias for Benefit Transfer. Paper Presented at the Oregon State MAER-Net Colloquium 2009, October 2.
53. Steichen T.J. Tests for publication bias in meta-analysis. Stata Tech. Bull. 1998, 41:9-15.
54. Sundt S., Rehdanz K. Consumer's Willingness to Pay for Green Electricity: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature, Kiel Working Papers 1931 2014, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
55. Susaeta A., Lal P., Alavalapati J., Mercer E. Random preferences towards bioenergy environmental externalities: a case study of woody biomass based electricity in the Southern United States. Energy Econ. 2011, 32:1111-1118.
56. Thompson S.G., Sharp S.J. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat. Med. 1999, 18:2693-2708.
57. Train K., Weeks M. Discrete choice models in preference space and willingness-to-pay space. Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics 2005, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston. A. Alberini, R. Scarpa (Eds.).
58. Wei M., Patadia S., Kammen D.M. Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: how many jobs can the clean energy industry generate in the US?. Energy Policy 2010, 38(2):919-931.
59. Welsh M.P., Poe G.L. Elicitation effects in contingent valuation: comparisons to a multiple bounded discrete choice approach. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 1998, 36:170-185.
60. Wiener J.L., Doescher T.A. A framework for promoting cooperation. J. Mark. 1991, 55:38-47.
61. Yoo S.H., Kwak S.Y. Willingness to pay for green electricity in Korea: a contingent valuation study. Energy Policy 2009, 37(12):5408-5416.
62. Zarnikau J. Consumer demand for 'green power' and energy efficiency. Energy Policy 2003, 31(15):1661-1672.
63. Zhang L., Wu Y. Market segmentation and willingness to pay for green electricity among urban residents in China: the case of Jiangsu Province. Energy Policy 2012, 51:514-523.
64. Zografakis N., Sifaki E., Pagalou M., Nikitaki G., Psarakis V., Tsagarakis K.P. Assessment of public acceptance and willingness to pay for renewable energy sources in Crete. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14(3):1088-1095.