Skip to main content

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

5. Consumer (Co-)Ownership and Behaviour: Economic Experiments as a Tool for Analysis

verfasst von : Özgür Yildiz, Julian Sagebiel

Erschienen in: Energy Transition

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Across Europe and worldwide, the sustainable transition of energy systems from fossil fuels towards renewables and higher energy efficiency led to the emergence of business models involving citizens. This involvement included participation in renewable energy project planning and financing with self-consumption having either a subordinate or no importance at all as well as business models that explicitly foster consumer (co-)ownership that confers ownership rights in renewable projects to prosumers in a local or regional area. Proponents of these business models have identified positive aspects such as changes in individual consumption behaviour towards improved energy efficiency through the assistance and advice on the adoption of environmental friendly technologies and energy efficiency measures. However, methodological concerns on these results remain as a clear examination of the causal effects of belonging to consumer (co-)owned energy initiative on energy use requires collecting experimental or quasi-experimental data which has not been done so far. The aim of this chapter therefore is twofold: First, we provide an overview on existing studies related to the behaviour of members of consumer (co-)owned models (CCOM). Second, starting from this short review, we will assess the potential contribution of experimental methods for the analysis of the behaviour of CCOM members and give recommendations for further experimental research.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1

See, for example, Rogers et al. 2008 for England, Bomberg and McEwen 2012 for Scotland, Dóci and Vasileiadou 2015 for the Netherlands and Germany, and Yildiz et al. 2015 for Germany.

 
Literatur
  1. Akasiadis, C., Savvakis, N., Mamakos, M., Hoppe, T., Coenen, F. H., Chalkiadakis, G., et al. (2017). Analyzing statistically the energy consumption and production patterns of European REScoop members. Discussion paper presented at 9th International Exergy, Energy and Environment Symposium, IEEES 2017—Split, Croatia. https://​research.​utwente.​nl/​en/​publications/​analyzing-statistically-the-energy-consumption-and-production-pat, accessed 17 February 2018.
  2. Bauwens, T. (2016). Explaining the diversity of motivations behind community renewable energy. Energy Policy, 93, 278–290.View Article
  3. Bauwens, T., & Eyre, N. (2017). Exploring the links between community-based governance and sustainable energy use: Quantitative evidence from Flanders. Ecological Economics, 137, 163–172.View Article
  4. Becker, S., & Naumann, M. (2017). Energy democracy: Mapping the debate on energy alternatives. Geography Compass, 11(8), e12321.View Article
  5. Ben-Akiva, M. E., & Lerman, S. R. (1985). Discrete choice analysis: Theory and application to travel demand (Vol. 9). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  6. Bomberg, E., & McEwen, N. (2012). Mobilizing community energy. Energy Policy, 51, 435–444.View Article
  7. Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  8. Costa, D. L., & Kahn, M. E. (2013). Energy conservation “nudges” and environmentalist ideology: Evidence from a randomized residential electricity field experiment. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(3), 680–702.View Article
  9. Dóci, G., & Vasileiadou, E. (2015). “Let’s do it ourselves” individual motivations for investing in renewables at community level. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 49, 41–50.View Article
  10. Fisher, R. A. (1937). The design of experiments. Edinburgh and London: Oliver and Boyd.
  11. Gleerup, M., Larsen, A., Leth-Petersen, S., & Togeby, M. (2010). The effect of feedback by text message (SMS) and email on household electricity consumption: Experimental evidence. The Energy Journal, 113–132.
  12. Haney, A. B., & Pollitt, M. G. (2013). New models of public ownership in energy. International Review of Applied Economics, 27(2), 174–192.View Article
  13. Höfer, H. H., & Rommel, J. (2015). Internal governance and member investment behavior in energy cooperatives: An experimental approach. Utilities Policy, 36, 52–56.View Article
  14. Holstenkamp, L., Centgraf, S., Dorniok, D., Kahla, F., Masson, T., Müller, J. R., Radtke, J., & Yildiz, Ö. (2017). Bürgerenergiegesellschaften in Deutschland. In L. Holstenkamp & J. Radtke (Eds.), Handbuch Energiewende und Partizipation (pp. 1057–1076). Wiesbaden: Springer.
  15. Holstenkamp, L., & Kahla, F. (2016). What are community energy companies trying to accomplish? An empirical investigation of investment motives in the German case. Energy Policy, 97, 112–122.View Article
  16. Knoefel, J., Sagebiel, J., Yildiz, Ö., Müller, J. R., & Rommel, J. (2018). A consumer perspective on corporate governance in the energy transition: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in Germany. Energy Economics (Article in press). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eneco.​2018.​08.​025.View Article
  17. Koirala, B. P., Koliou, E., Friege, J., Hakvoort, R. A., & Herder, P. M. (2016). Energetic communities for community energy: A review of key issues and trends shaping integrated community energy systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 56, 722–744.View Article
  18. Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157.View Article
  19. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior in Zembreka. Frontiers in Economics, 105–142.
  20. Radtke, J. (2014). A closer look inside collaborative action: Civic engagement and participation in community energy initiatives. People, Place & Policy Online, 8(3), 235–248.View Article
  21. Rogers, J. C., Simmons, E. A., Convery, I., & Weatherall, A. (2008). Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects. Energy Policy, 36(11), 4217–4226.View Article
  22. Rommel, J., Radtke, J., von Jorck, G., Mey, F., & Yildiz, Ö. (2018). Community renewable energy at a crossroads: A think piece on degrowth, technology, and the democratization of the German energy system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197 (Part 2), 1746-1753.
  23. Rommel, J., Sagebiel, J., & Müller, J. R. (2016). Quality uncertainty and the market for renewable energy: Evidence from German consumers. Renewable Energy, 94, 106–113.View Article
  24. Roth, L., Lowitzsch, J., Yildiz, Ö., & Hashani, A. (2018). Does (co-)ownership in renewables matter for an electricity consumer’s demand flexibility? Empirical evidence from Germany. Energy Research & Social Science, 46, 169-182. 
  25. Sagebiel, J., Müller, J. R., & Rommel, J. (2014). Are consumers willing to pay more for electricity from cooperatives? Results from an online choice experiment in Germany. Energy Research & Social Science, 2, 90–101.View Article
  26. Salm, S., Hille, S. L., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2016). What are retail investors’ risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany. Energy Policy, 97, 310–320.View Article
  27. Sorrell, S. (2007). Improving the evidence base for energy policy: The role of systematic reviews. Energy Policy, 35(3), 1858–1871.View Article
  28. Yildiz, Ö. (2014). Financing renewable energy infrastructures via financial citizen participation—The case of Germany. Renewable Energy, 68, 677–685.View Article
  29. Yildiz, Ö., Rommel, J., Debor, S., Holstenkamp, L., Mey, F., Müller, J. R., et al. (2015). Renewable energy cooperatives as gatekeepers or facilitators? Recent developments in Germany and a multidisciplinary research agenda. Energy Research & Social Science, 6, 59–73.View Article
Metadaten
Titel
Consumer (Co-)Ownership and Behaviour: Economic Experiments as a Tool for Analysis
verfasst von
Özgür Yildiz
Julian Sagebiel
Copyright-Jahr
2019
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93518-8_5

Premium Partner