Measurement of inequality using household energy consumption data in rural China

Wu, Shimei; Zheng, Xunhua; Wei, Chu

doi:10.1038/s41560-017-0003-1

Cited by 171 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rao and Ummel (2017) show that other drivers than income, such as identity, can influence ownership of household appliances and that the influence of income differs by appliance and by region. Wu, Zheng, and Wei (2017) argue that inequality in energy is systematically different from income inequality and that it can provide additional insights on consumption inequality. Differences in electrification rates across countries have been related to the urbanization rate, education level, and the availability of renewable energy sources, with weaker links to per capita GDP and funding availability (Magnani and Vaona 2016).…”

Section: Measuring Inequality In Technologies and Infrastructure Servmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The literature shows many examples of the Gini coefficients and Lorenz curves being used for assessing the inequality of domains other than income, such as: house size (Kohler et al 2017), happiness (Bennett and Nikolaev 2017) solid waste arising from material resource use (Druckman and Jackson 2008), historical (Groot 2010) and future (Zimm and Nakicenovic 2019) carbon emissions, material indicators (e.g. domestic extraction, domestic material consumption and material footprint) and indicators measuring the intensity with which human society uses terrestrial ecosystems (Teixidó-Figueras et al 2016), education (Sauer and Zagler 2014;Vinod, Yan, and Xibo 2001), health (Williams and Cookson 2000), spatial inequity in transportation (Jang et al 2017), internet bandwidth (Hilbert 2016), mobile phones, radios and bikes (Bento 2016), energy (Wu, Zheng, and Wei 2017) and electricity (Jacobson, Milman, and Kammen 2005).…”

Section: Gini Coefficient and Lorenz Curvementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methodological issues in measuring international inequality in technology ownership and infrastructure service use

Zimm

2019

Development Studies Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to technologies, infrastructures and their related services are essential for raising global living standards and human well-being. Several of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) deal with providing access to technologies and service infrastructures to the share of global population so far excluded. At the same time, the SDGs, foremost SDG 10 on reducing inequalities within and among countries, promote a more equitable world, both in terms of inter-as well as intra-national equality. To support monitoring progress towards the SDGs, this paper aims to (1) improve measures of international inequality in terms of basic technologies and infrastructure services associated with the SDGs by explicitly taking into account non-access; and (2) to estimate the international inequality of selected SDG technologies and infrastructure services. It does so by advancing, testing, and applying improved measures of international inequality. The paper shows the discrepancies between accounting and not accounting for nonaccess from an inequality perspective for international inequality for selected technologies (e.g. mobile phones) and infrastructure services (e.g. electricity). By accounting for non-access on the national level, international inequality estimates are improved. Accounting for non-access leads to changes in country rankings, which the development community uses to measure progress in human development.

show abstract

Section: Measuring Inequality In Technologies and Infrastructure Servmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gini Coefficient and Lorenz Curvementioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological issues in measuring international inequality in technology ownership and infrastructure service use

Zimm

2019

Development Studies Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the time and budget constraints, we decided to give up sampling all provinces in China. Instead, we invited scholars with backgrounds or experience in energy economics, agriculture economics, statistics, and field survey to discuss proper sampling selection strategy, and eventually selected 12 representative provinces that vary substantially in terms of energy types, spatial location, climatic conditions and socioeconomic indicators (Wu et al, 2017). These provinces include Hebei, Heilongjiang, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Hubei, Hunan, Guangdong, Sichuan, Yunnan, Shaanxi, and Gansu.…”

Section: Survey Design and Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Excepting designing the questionnaire and training the interviewers, the Department of Energy Economics is also responsible for controlling data quality. For more details on the energy survey design, sampling and implementation, data quality control, and sample representativeness, the reader is referred to the publications by Wu et al (2017), Yu and Guo (2016), and Zheng et al (2014). As mentioned, the survey process should survey 3900 rural households.…”

Section: Survey Design and Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Green transition of energy systems in rural China: National survey evidence of households’ discrete choices on water heaters

Urban

2018

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy systems in rural China are experiencing a transition from traditional fossil fuels to renewables. This paper aims to investigate the potential factors that influence the choices of rural residents regarding water heaters with a focus on the low-carbon transition to solar water heating systems. To this end, a face-to-face questionnaire survey is undertaken with 3404 rural households randomly selected among 12 representative provinces. A comprehensive set of discrete choice modelling approaches were used. The empirical results show that (1) sociodemographic variables have significant effects on residents' first-stage choice of a water heater (to buy or not to buy) but few effects on the second-stage decision to choose electric, LPG, or solar water heaters (which type to buy); (2) information spillover is important to facilitate the usage of water heaters, particularly of solar products; (3) the electricity price, which is regulated at a very low rate, has no apparent effect on the choice of solar water heaters; (4) government subsidy has a significant effect in the first stage but no differentiated effect on the decision choice in the second stage. Policy and managerial implications are presented to speed up the ongoing low-carbon transition of energy systems in China.

show abstract

“…Therefore, the type and amount of household energy consumption have different performance within and across regions and countries [24]; also, understanding the spatial pattern and the underlying drivers of variations of the household energy consumption thus helps to identify challenges and opportunities and provide advice for future policy measures [25]. In China, due to the vast territory and the differences among regional social, environmental, and economic conditions, households have quite different energy use performance [23], such as a result in inequality [26]. Therefore, under such a circumstance, it is critical to conduct a systemic review to illustrate the overall situation as well as the detailed mechanisms of the household energy consumption in China.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Features, Driving Forces and Transition of the Household Energy Consumption in China: A Review

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Household energy consumption has been a major contributor to the increase in global energy demand and carbon emission, and the household sector has also become one of the most crucial factors shaping the management of developments towards sustainability. However, there is still a knowledge gap regarding the household energy consumption in China. Due to the vast territory and the differences among regional conditions, it is critical to conduct a systemic review to illustrate the overall situation as well as the detailed mechanisms of the household energy consumption in China. By employing both qualitative and quantitative methods, two key features of the household energy consumption in China are presented; one is regarding the total amount and the structure of the household energy consumption, and the second is the significant urban-rural gap. The driving forces are investigated from the perspective of external determinants and internal determinants, which consist of seven key factors; finally, the transition roadmap towards the sustainable energy system for the household level are presented based on the text analysis from the four key policy documents. Weaknesses in the current research on the energy geography of household level also exist, such as the lack of single factor research and the lack of integration and comprehensive analysis. Therefore, future studies need to strengthen the research of regional household energy consumption structure, spatial-temporal process, and its motivation mechanism, and sustainable development of energy, so as to explore space-social structure of household energy consumption and spatial-temporal interaction.

show abstract

Measurement of inequality using household energy consumption data in rural China

Cited by 171 publications

References 34 publications

Methodological issues in measuring international inequality in technology ownership and infrastructure service use

Methodological issues in measuring international inequality in technology ownership and infrastructure service use

Green transition of energy systems in rural China: National survey evidence of households’ discrete choices on water heaters

Features, Driving Forces and Transition of the Household Energy Consumption in China: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About