IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v193y2024ics0301421524003306.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lost in transaction?: An institutional analysis of households’ transaction costs from demand-side grid management

Author

Listed:
  • Aasen, Marianne
  • Christensen, Ingrid

Abstract

Better utilization of the electricity grid is urgently called for, and demand-side management (DSM) measures are implemented to influence consumers' electricity consumption to off-peak periods. Little is known about how DSM measures generate private transaction costs for households, being crucial for the effectiveness and fairness of such measures. This article contributes to the energy transition literature by exploring sources of private transaction costs for households from a time-of-use tariff scheme for the grid in Norway. Data from nine group interviews reveal that uncertainty about the transaction (grid capacity), distrust of the transactor (grid provider) and the complexity of the institutional context (uncertainty about the electricity sector) increase transaction costs for households and reduce effectiveness of the tariff. Providing households with information on the reasons and methods for adjusting electricity consumption is essential, including the economic impacts on households of the new tariff. Additionally, households should receive enhanced guidance of technology use and behavior changes. For these two steps to work, trust in energy actors must be strengthened. Lastly, one should pay attention to the potentially undermining effect of such DSM measures on legitimacy of energy policies in general, given the unequal levels of transaction costs depending on households’ capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Aasen, Marianne & Christensen, Ingrid, 2024. "Lost in transaction?: An institutional analysis of households’ transaction costs from demand-side grid management," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:193:y:2024:i:c:s0301421524003306
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2024.114310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421524003306
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2024.114310?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. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    2. Williamson, Oliver E, 1979. "Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractural Relations," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 233-261, October.
    3. Niehans, Jurg, 1971. "Money and Barter in General Equilibrium with Transaction Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(5), pages 773-783, December.
    4. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O'Neill, Eoin, 2019. "An Analysis of the Factors Influencing Transaction Costs in Transferable Development Rights Programmes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 409-419.
    5. Calver, Philippa & Simcock, Neil, 2021. "Demand response and energy justice: A critical overview of ethical risks and opportunities within digital, decentralised, and decarbonised futures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Parag, Yael, 2021. "Which factors influence large households’ decision to join a time-of-use program? The interplay between demand flexibility, personal benefits and national benefits," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    7. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    8. Christensen, Toke Haunstrup & Friis, Freja & Bettin, Steffen & Throndsen, William & Ornetzeder, Michael & Skjølsvold, Tomas Moe & Ryghaug, Marianne, 2020. "The role of competences, engagement, and devices in configuring the impact of prices in energy demand response: Findings from three smart energy pilots with households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    9. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    10. Lundmark, Robert, 2022. "Time-adjusted transaction costs for energy renovations for single-family house-owners," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    11. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    12. Coggan, Anthea & van Grieken, Martijn & Boullier, Alexis & Jardi, Xavier, 2015. "Private transaction costs of participation in water quality improvement programs for Australia’s Great Barrier Reef: Extent, causes and policy implications," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(4), October.
    13. Michael F. Maniates, 2001. "Individualization: Plant a Tree, Buy a Bike, Save the World?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 1(3), pages 31-52, August.
    14. Good, Nicholas & Ellis, Keith A. & Mancarella, Pierluigi, 2017. "Review and classification of barriers and enablers of demand response in the smart grid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 57-72.
    15. Khanna, Nina Zheng & Guo, Jin & Zheng, Xinye, 2016. "Effects of demand side management on Chinese household electricity consumption: Empirical findings from Chinese household survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 113-125.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Salomon Espinosa Diaz & Francesco Riccioli & Francesco Di Iacovo & Roberta Moruzzo, 2023. "Transaction Costs in Agri-Environment-Climate Measures: A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Lapeyre, Renaud & Froger, Géraldine & Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? From discourses to practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 125-133.
    3. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    4. Nantongo, Mary & Vatn, Arild, 2019. "Estimating Transaction Costs of REDD+," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 1-11.
    5. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O’Neill, Eoin, 2018. "Accounting for transaction costs in planning policy evaluation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 263-272.
    6. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    7. Lundmark, Robert, 2022. "Time-adjusted transaction costs for energy renovations for single-family house-owners," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Valentová, Michaela & Horák, Martin & Dvořáček, Lukáš, 2020. "Why transaction costs do not decrease over time? A case study of energy efficiency programmes in Czechia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    9. Valentová, Michaela & Lízal, Lubomír & Knápek, Jaroslav, 2018. "Designing energy efficiency subsidy programmes: The factors of transaction costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 382-391.
    10. Fan, Shengyue & Yang, Jinfei & Liu, Wenwen & Wang, He, 2019. "Institutional Credibility Measurement Based on Structure of Transaction Costs: A Case Study of Ongniud Banner in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 212-225.
    11. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O'Neill, Eoin, 2019. "An Analysis of the Factors Influencing Transaction Costs in Transferable Development Rights Programmes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 409-419.
    12. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    13. DeBoe, Gwendolen & Stephenson, Kurt, 2016. "Transactions costs of expanding nutrient trading to agricultural working lands: A Virginia case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-185.
    14. Sina Shahab & Leonhard K. Lades, 2020. "Sludge and Transaction Costs," Working Papers 202007, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    15. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Hinkel, Jochen & Schlüter, Maja & Hagedorn, Konrad & Bisaro, Sandy & Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Hamidov, Ahmad, 2016. "Transferring Williamson's discriminating alignment to the analysis of environmental governance of social-ecological interdependence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 159-168.
    16. Georgina W. Njiraini & Djiby Racine Thiam & Anthea Coggan, 2017. "The Analysis of Transaction Costs in Water Policy Implementation in South Africa: Trends, Determinants and Economic Implications," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(01), pages 1-30, January.
    17. Nijiraini, Georgina & Thiam, Djiby, 2015. "Estimating transaction costs associated with water policy implementation in South Africa," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212585, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Asai, Masayasu & Moraine, Marc & Ryschawy, Julie & de Wit, Jan & Hoshide, Aaron K. & Martin, Guillaume, 2018. "Critical factors for crop-livestock integration beyond the farm level: A cross-analysis of worldwide case studies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 184-194.
    19. Chen, Ting & Vandendriessche, Frederik, 2023. "Enabling independent flexibility service providers to participate in electricity markets: A legal analysis of the Belgium case," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    20. Jens Abildtrup & Anne Stenger, 2022. "Report on valuation methods," Working Papers hal-04068881, HAL.

    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:193:y:2024:i:c:s0301421524003306. 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.