Hypothetical Market Familiarity and the Disconnect Between Stated and Observed Values for Green Energy

Authors

  • Charles Sims Utah State University

Abstract

Participation rates and utility premiums for green power programs are generally less than implied by contingent valuation studies. This study compares open-ended and dichotomous-choice responses with actual participation rates of a green power program to examine the effect of hypothetical market familiarity. Traditionally, respondents are asked to value a renewable energy “block” which represents a quality improvement in a percentage of a good. When placed in a more familiar market setting, stated values are more closely aligned with premiums currently charged.  Participation rates remain exaggerated indicating responses are viewed as a vote in favor of or against cleaner energy sources.  Keywords: Contingent valuation; green energy programs; renewable energy blocks; scope effects; coal-fired power plants; single-bounded dichotomous choice JEL Classifications: H41; Q42; Q51

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Charles Sims, Utah State University

Charles Sims is an assistant professor in the Department of Applied Economics at Utah State University, 3530 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322.

Downloads

Published

2012-12-01

How to Cite

Sims, C. (2012). Hypothetical Market Familiarity and the Disconnect Between Stated and Observed Values for Green Energy. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 3(1), 10–19. Retrieved from https://econjournals.com./index.php/ijeep/article/view/311

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2013)

Section

Articles

License

Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously , that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, without the written consent of the Publisher. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.