People’s decisions matter: understanding and addressing energy poverty with behavioral economics

Valle, Nives Della

doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109515

Cited by 71 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Technically speaking, the feasibility of low energy or even net-zero residential buildings has been confirmed [92], as well as the specifications of intervention packages for those already build [93] and guidelines for the implementation of nearly zero-energy neighborhoods [94]. However, action plans for improving the existing building stock still deserve research because of the need to couple construction works and systems enhancement into the daily life of occupants-buildings are usually inhabited and not empty-and the existence of various economic perspectives [95], social habits or behaviors and decision-making capacities [96].…”

Section: The Marginal Implicit Value Of Energy Efficiency In Buildingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the previous section, we described the outstanding increase of the energy performance achieved by the retrofitted buildings within the SINFONIA project. In these cases, however, the decision to participate in the project was made by the owner of the building (either the Municipality or IPES), who allocated the funds, decided on the intervention priorities, and defined the business plan-in some way, overcoming the well-known problem of the split incentive [96]. In fact, the main beneficiaries of the intervention are the tenants, those who, after enduring the hassle of the construction works, will benefit from the renovated apartment through reduced energy expenditures and increased comfort.…”

Section: Householder Priorities In the Decision-making Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Multiple Benefits of Housing Regeneration and Smart City Development: The European Project SINFONIA

Bisello

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The urban energy transition towards more sustainable energy production and consumption systems is at the top of the European Union political agenda. Several demonstration projects are dealing with the deep-energy retrofit of real-estate assets to show how technological and societal innovation can provide new investment opportunities while enhancing citizens’ quality of life by delivering multiple benefits. In this framework, the EU smart city project SINFONIA has developed and tested a new comprehensive framework to define, identify, and evaluate the main multiple benefits expected from similar initiatives. The present contribution reviews the three assessment exercises carried out in the lighthouse city of Bolzano during the project execution, consisting of an investigation of the users’ stated preferences, an evaluation of consumers‘ revealed preferences and a multicriteria analysis of homeowners’ priorities. It offers an overview of the main achievements and sheds light on further investigatory paths applicable to Positive Energy Districts assessment.

show abstract

Section: The Marginal Implicit Value Of Energy Efficiency In Buildingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Householder Priorities In the Decision-making Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Multiple Benefits of Housing Regeneration and Smart City Development: The European Project SINFONIA

Bisello

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as in Aranda et al [69], some solutions are proposed, such as working on the building envelopes, on lighting systems and on energy generation. Nevertheless, less disruptive and low-cost retrofitting solutions (also not linked to solving energy poverty) have been studied by architectural and engineering researchers for years, but they do not seem to constitute the unique response to fuel poverty because, as many authors argue, fuel and energy poverty also involves social, political, and economic concerns [70][71][72][73][74].…”

Section: Mitigation Strategies From Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Future Design Approaches for Energy Poverty: Users Profiling and Services for No-Vulnerable Condition

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analyzing data from the Energy Poverty Observatory in Europe, it emerges that more than 50 million households in the EU live in energy poverty (people that cannot heat their homes during winter; cannot make their homes comfortable during the summer; pay their energy bills late). Research studies realized in the last 20 years highlight that making energy demand efficient and effective is the more significant and socially important the more it is able to involve users who are unable to sustain energy demand. The evolution of the research sees a narrowing of the field of investigation by focusing on the user dimension of energy poverty, stressing the role of citizens not only as consumer but also as producers of solutions to tackle energy poverty, real energy communities of agents. The paper aims to provide a systematic literature review highlighting the major findings of the topic, investigating the relationship between spatial and social issues, and looking at the state of energy poverty by addressing the profiling of users and consequently of services useful to overcome their current vulnerable condition. The paper is structured in two core sections. The first one gives the results of a systematic literature review on the energy/fuel poverty topic, the second one deepens the role of communities and individuals need, crucial in defining new design approaches for supportive solutions to tackle energy poverty.

show abstract

“…The latter phenomenon is known in the literature as the "energy efficiency gap" or "energy paradox" [19,20]. The results of three decades of research have established that the energy paradox is related to market failures (e.g., imperfect information, split incentives, distortion in fuel prices and lack of capital), time and risk preferences, behavioral aspects (e.g., rational inattention, bounded rationality, biased beliefs and heuristic decision-making) and sociodemographic characteristics [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The abovementioned issues acquire even greater importance in the case of vulnerable consumers. This is not only because vulnerable consumers must reduce their energy consumption but also because scarcity affects people's cognitive functioning, changes how they allocate attention and may prevent them from making optimal decisions [30][31][32]. So far, several studies have shed light on the role of poverty (or poverty-related psychological and attitudinal short-fallings) on decision-making processes, e.g., [32][33][34][35][36][37].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Energy Poverty Affect Energy Efficiency Investment Decisions? First Evidence from a Stated Choice Experiment

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy poverty is a multidimensional and continuously growing societal problem, with political roots. In pursuit of mitigating the problem, the European Commission has adopted a bundle of policies, such as consumer protection measures, short-term financial interventions, motivations for energy efficiency (e.g., energy retrofits and replacement of old household appliance) and information campaigns, among others. There is no doubt, however, that increasing the income of vulnerable households would be the most preferred and effective option. Focusing on energy efficiency, a measure typically incorporated in the National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) of many Member States as a means to fight energy poverty, this paper aims to shed light on the need to gradually move towards more localized—not to say personalized—actions. In this direction, a labeled choice-based experiment is used, which involves a hypothetical selection between three alternative energy interventions, i.e., house retrofit, upgrading of heating system and upgrading of household electrical appliances. The research aims to integrate the preferences of households from the choice experiment with indicators of energy poverty and establish a connection between energy poverty and energy efficiency investment decisions. The results demonstrate that households’ preferences are affected by qualitative and quantitative aspects of energy vulnerability and sociodemographic characteristics. Furthermore, vulnerable households seem to be more prone to the so-called “discounting gap”, as previous studies also suggest. These findings are worrisome because, without tailor-made support, these households may never escape the vicious circle of energy poverty. To this end, the survey could provide useful information to policy-makers towards developing more robust policies of energy poverty alleviation.

show abstract

People’s decisions matter: understanding and addressing energy poverty with behavioral economics

Cited by 71 publications

References 87 publications

Assessing Multiple Benefits of Housing Regeneration and Smart City Development: The European Project SINFONIA

Assessing Multiple Benefits of Housing Regeneration and Smart City Development: The European Project SINFONIA

Future Design Approaches for Energy Poverty: Users Profiling and Services for No-Vulnerable Condition

Does Energy Poverty Affect Energy Efficiency Investment Decisions? First Evidence from a Stated Choice Experiment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About