IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v156y2021ics0301421521003359.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Energy policy trade-offs in Poland: A best-worst scaling discrete choice experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Aruga, Kentaka
  • Bolt, Timothy
  • Pest, Przemysław

Abstract

This study applied a discrete choice experiment using best-worst scaling questions (multi-profile, BWS case 3) to estimate the trade-offs which a sample of the Polish population is willing to make for energy reform regarding carbon reduction. Attributes considered in the study are CO2 emissions reduction, National energy independence, Employment impact, Time needed for policy transition, and Impact on household energy prices. Respondents (n = 639) choose the best and worst of the presented policy options to fit a rank-ordered logit model. This study reveals concern about climate change among respondents, but that they prioritize energy prices and employment in their choice of preferred energy policy with significant variation across groups. A key distinction is revealed in the preferences by age cohort in which youngest (<25years old) respondents had the strongest WTP coefficients, particularly for CO2 and time to transition. Stronger and more urgent desires for CO2 reduction policies were also identified among the decisions of female respondents, those having more education, those without children, and middle and upper income groups. The respondents’ choices also revealed consistent loss aversion in all attributes presented in the choice experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Aruga, Kentaka & Bolt, Timothy & Pest, Przemysław, 2021. "Energy policy trade-offs in Poland: A best-worst scaling discrete choice experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:156:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521003359
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421521003359
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112465?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aizaki, Hideo, 2012. "Basic Functions for Supporting an Implementation of Choice Experiments in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 50(c02).
    2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    3. Peterson, Mark & Feldman, David, 2018. "Citizen preferences for possible energy policies at the national and state levels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 80-91.
    4. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2013. "Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1148-1156.
    5. Azarova, Valeriya & Cohen, Jed & Friedl, Christina & Reichl, Johannes, 2019. "Designing local renewable energy communities to increase social acceptance: Evidence from a choice experiment in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1176-1183.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Milan Ščasný & Iva Zvěřinová & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Eva Kyselá & Katarzyna Zagórska, 2017. "Public acceptability of climate change mitigation policies: a discrete choice experiment," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(0), pages 111-130, June.
    8. Ku, Se-Ju & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2010. "Willingness to pay for renewable energy investment in Korea: A choice experiment study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(8), pages 2196-2201, October.
    9. Manowska, Anna & Osadnik, Katarzyna Tobór & Wyganowska, Małgorzata, 2017. "Economic and social aspects of restructuring Polish coal mining: Focusing on Poland and the EU," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 192-200.
    10. Komarek, Timothy M. & Lupi, Frank & Kaplowitz, Michael D., 2011. "Valuing energy policy attributes for environmental management: Choice experiment evidence from a research institution," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5105-5115, September.
    11. Alberini, Anna & Bigano, Andrea & Ščasný, Milan & Zvěřinová, Iva, 2018. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: What Is the Willingness to Pay to Reduce CO2 Emissions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 171-185.
    12. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xu, Shuling & Yang, Zihan & Deng, Nana & Wang, Bo, 2024. "Residents' willingness to be compensated for power rationing during peak hours based on choice experiment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 367(C).
    2. Rilling, Benedikt & Kurz, Peter & Herbes, Carsten, 2024. "Renewable gases in the heating market: Identifying consumer preferences through a Discrete Choice Experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Faik Bilgili & Masreka Khan & Ashar Awan, 2023. "Is there a gender dimension of the environmental Kuznets curve? Evidence from Asian countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2387-2418, March.
    4. Jonek-Kowalska, Izabela, 2024. "Demonstrating the need for a just transition: Socioeconomic diagnosis of polish cities living on hard coal mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Joanna Krzywda & Dariusz Krzywda & Armenia Androniceanu, 2021. "Managing the Energy Transition through Discourse. The Case of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Dominika P. Brodowicz & Anna Stankowska, 2021. "European Union’s Goals Towards Electromobility: An Assessment of Plans’ Implementation in Polish Cities," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 645-665.
    7. Jia, Zhijie & Liu, Yu & Lin, Boqiang, 2024. "The impossible triangle of carbon mitigation policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    8. Jakub Sokołowski & Piotr Lewandowski & Jan Frankowski, 2023. "How to Prevent Yellow Vests? Evaluating Preferences for a Carbon Tax with a Discrete Choice Experiment," IBS Working Papers 03/2023, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kim, Junghun & Park, Stephen Youngjun & Lee, Jongsu, 2018. "Do people really want renewable energy? Who wants renewable energy?: Discrete choice model of reference-dependent preference in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 761-770.
    2. Kim, Junghun & Seung, Hyunchan & Lee, Jongsu & Ahn, Joongha, 2020. "Asymmetric preference and loss aversion for electric vehicles: The reference-dependent choice model capturing different preference directions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    4. Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Schleich, Joachim & Tu, Gengyang & Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Whittle, Colin, 2022. "Household acceptability of energy efficiency policies in the European Union: Policy characteristics trade-offs and the role of trust in government and environmental identity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. Mattmann, Matteo & Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy, 2016. "Hydropower externalities: A meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 66-77.
    6. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    7. Ruokamo, Enni & Juutinen, Artti & Ashraf, Faisal Bin & Haghighi, Ali Torabi & Hellsten, Seppo & Huuki, Hannu & Karhinen, Santtu & Kopsakangas-Savolainen, Maria & Marttila, Hannu & Pongracz, Eva & Roma, 2024. "Estimating the economic value of hydropeaking externalities in regulated rivers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(PA).
    8. Dombi, Mihály & Kuti, István & Balogh, Péter, 2014. "Sustainability assessment of renewable power and heat generation technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 264-271.
    9. Martínez-Cruz, Adán L. & Núñez, Héctor M., 2021. "Tension in Mexico's energy transition: Are urban residential consumers in Aguascalientes willing to pay for renewable energy and green jobs?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    10. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    11. Shunda, Nicholas, 2009. "Auctions with a buy price: The case of reference-dependent preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 645-664, November.
    12. Koszegi, Botond & Rabin, Matthew, 2004. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt0w82b6nm, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    13. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    14. Grund, Christian & Sliwka, Dirk, 2001. "The Impact of Wage Increases on Job Satisfaction - Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Implications," IZA Discussion Papers 387, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Hong, Yan-Zhen & Su, Yi-Ju & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2023. "Analyzing the relationship between income and life satisfaction of Forest farm households - a behavioral economics approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    16. Erica Mina Okada, 2010. "Uncertainty, Risk Aversion, and WTA vs. WTP," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 75-84, 01-02.
    17. Vishal Gaur & Young-Hoon Park, 2007. "Asymmetric Consumer Learning and Inventory Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 227-240, February.
    18. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2024. "Consideration sets and reference points in a dynamic bargaining game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 381-403.
    19. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    20. Jidong Zhou, 2011. "Reference Dependence and Market Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 1073-1097, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:156:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521003359. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.