IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_8948.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of a Competitive Energy Rebate Program

Author

Listed:
  • Chi L. Ta

Abstract

Rebates that reward economic agents if they meet a minimum conservation threshold are a popular policy to encourage energy conservation. However, most threshold-based rebates are structured such that they do not encourage reduction beyond the threshold. In this paper, I show theoretically that programs with the additional feature that households compete to win rebates can effectively encourage further conservation among those who can meet the threshold reduction. The theory also identifies factors that determine the effectiveness of the program. I then exploit a unique confidential dataset of monthly residential electricity use with over 45 million observations to estimate the overall effect of a Vietnamese electricity rebate program with this competitive element. Next, I empirically test the model’s predictions. I find that the program reduces electricity consumption by 18%, nearly double the threshold level of 10%. Interestingly, the program's effect persists for at least twelve months after it ends, which has important implications for the cost-effectiveness of such interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Chi L. Ta, 2021. "Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of a Competitive Energy Rebate Program," CESifo Working Paper Series 8948, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_8948
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp8948.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Warlters, Michael, 2012. "The marginal cost of public funds and tax reform in Africa," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 58-72.
    2. Alec Brandon & John A. List & Robert D. Metcalfe & Michael K. Price & Florian Rundhammer, 2019. "Testing for crowd out in social nudges: Evidence from a natural field experiment in the market for electricity," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(12), pages 5293-5298, March.
    3. Lucas W. Davis & Alan Fuchs & Paul Gertler, 2014. "Cash for Coolers: Evaluating a Large-Scale Appliance Replacement Program in Mexico," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 207-238, November.
    4. Catherine Wolfram & Orie Shelef & Paul Gertler, 2012. "How Will Energy Demand Develop in the Developing World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(1), pages 119-138, Winter.
    5. Meredith Fowlie & Michael Greenstone & Catherine Wolfram, 2018. "Do Energy Efficiency Investments Deliver? Evidence from the Weatherization Assistance Program," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(3), pages 1597-1644.
    6. Hunt Allcott & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2015. "Evaluating Behaviorally Motivated Policy: Experimental Evidence from the Lightbulb Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2501-2538, August.
    7. Salvador Barrios & Jonathan Pycroft & Bert Saveyn, 2013. "The marginal cost of public funds in the EU: the case of labour versus green taxes," Taxation Papers 35, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    8. Francisco Costa & François Gerard, 2021. "Hysteresis and the Welfare Effect of Corrective Policies: Theory and Evidence from an Energy-Saving Program," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1705-1743.
    9. Arik Levinson, 2016. "How Much Energy Do Building Energy Codes Save? Evidence from California Houses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 2867-2894, October.
    10. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W., 2022. "Design-based analysis in Difference-In-Differences settings with staggered adoption," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 62-79.
    11. Kleven, Henrik Jacobsen & Kreiner, Claus Thustrup, 2006. "The marginal cost of public funds: Hours of work versus labor force participation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 1955-1973, November.
    12. Katrina Jessoe & David Rapson, 2014. "Knowledge Is (Less) Power: Experimental Evidence from Residential Energy Use," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1417-1438, April.
    13. Sun, Liyang & Abraham, Sarah, 2021. "Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 175-199.
    14. Andrew Goodman-Bacon, 2018. "Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing," NBER Working Papers 25018, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1082-1095, October.
    16. Koichiro Ito, 2015. "Asymmetric Incentives in Subsidies: Evidence from a Large-Scale Electricity Rebate Program," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 209-237, August.
    17. Hunt Allcott & Todd Rogers, 2014. "The Short-Run and Long-Run Effects of Behavioral Interventions: Experimental Evidence from Energy Conservation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 3003-3037, October.
    18. Sébastien Houde & Joseph E. Aldy, 2017. "Consumers' Response to State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Programs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 227-255, November.
    19. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1082-1095.
    20. Paul J. Ferraro & Michael K. Price, 2013. "Using Nonpecuniary Strategies to Influence Behavior: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 64-73, March.
    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. Ta, Chi L., 2024. "Do conservation contests work? An analysis of a large-scale energy competitive rebate program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    2. Ta, Chi L., 2020. "Does Competition for Energy Conservation Rebates Work?," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304245, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Omar Isaac Asensio & Olga Churkina & Becky D. Rafter & Kira E. O’Hare, 2024. "Housing policies and energy efficiency spillovers in low and moderate income communities," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 7(5), pages 590-601, May.
    4. Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan, 2020. "Energy efficiency as a credence good: A review of informational barriers to energy savings in the building sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. Spandagos, Constantine & Baark, Erik & Ng, Tze Ling & Yarime, Masaru, 2021. "Social influence and economic intervention policies to save energy at home: Critical questions for the new decade and evidence from air-condition use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    6. Jakob Enlund & David Andersson & Fredrik Carlsson, 2023. "Individual Carbon Footprint Reduction: Evidence from Pro-environmental Users of a Carbon Calculator," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 86(3), pages 433-467, November.
    7. Praveen K. Kopalle & Jesse Burkhardt & Kenneth Gillingham & Lauren S. Grewal & Nailya Ordabayeva, 2024. "Delivering affordable clean energy to consumers," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 1452-1474, October.
    8. Cardella, Eric & Ewing, Brad & Williams, Ryan Blake, 2018. "Green is Good – The Impact of Information Nudges on the Adoption of Voluntary Green Power Plans," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266583, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    9. Jessoe, Katrina & Lade, Gabriel E. & Loge, Frank & Spang, Edward, 2021. "Residential water conservation during drought: Experimental evidence from three behavioral interventions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    10. Francisco Costa & François Gerard, 2021. "Hysteresis and the Welfare Effect of Corrective Policies: Theory and Evidence from an Energy-Saving Program," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1705-1743.
    11. Singhal, Puja & Pahle, Michael & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Levesque, Antoine & Sommer, Stephan & Berneiser, Jessica, 2022. "Beyond good faith: Why evidence-based policy is necessary to decarbonize buildings cost-effectively in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    12. Fang, Ximeng & Goette, Lorenz & Rockenbach, Bettina & Sutter, Matthias & Tiefenbeck, Verena & Schoeb, Samuel & Staake, Thorsten, 2023. "Complementarities in behavioral interventions: Evidence from a field experiment on resource conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    13. Andor, Mark A. & Fels, Katja M., 2018. "Behavioral Economics and Energy Conservation – A Systematic Review of Non-price Interventions and Their Causal Effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 178-210.
    14. Chantal Toledo, 2016. "Do Environmental Messages Work on the Poor? Experimental Evidence from Brazilian Favelas," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 37-83.
    15. Andor, Mark Andreas & Götte, Lorenz & Price, Michael Keith & Schulze Tilling, Anna & Tomberg, Lukas, 2023. "Differences in how and why social comparisons and real-time feedback impact resource use: Evidence from a field experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 1059, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    16. John A. List & Robert D. Metcalfe & Michael K. Price & Florian Rundhammer, 2017. "Harnessing Policy Complementarities to Conserve Energy: Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2017-05, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    17. Andor, Mark A. & Gerster, Andreas & Peters, Jörg & Schmidt, Christoph M., 2020. "Social Norms and Energy Conservation Beyond the US," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    18. Stojanovski, Ognen & Leslie, Gordon W. & Wolak, Frank A. & Huerta Wong, Juan Enrique & Thurber, Mark C., 2020. "Increasing the energy cognizance of electricity consumers in Mexico: Results from a field experiment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    19. Koichiro Ito & Shuang Zhang, 2020. "Do Consumers Distinguish Fixed Cost from Variable Cost? “Schmeduling" in Two-Part Tariffs in Energy," NBER Working Papers 26853, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Werner, Peter & Riedl, Arno, 2018. "The role of experiments for policy design," Research Memorandum 022, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    energy conservation;

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • L98 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Government Policy
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ces:ceswps:_8948. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.