Household reduction of gas consumption in the energy crisis is not explained by individual economic incentives.

IF 9.4 1区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America Pub Date : 2024-11-26 Epub Date: 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1073/pnas.2411740121
Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt, Christoph Feldhaus, Axel Ockenfels, Matthias Sutter
{"title":"Household reduction of gas consumption in the energy crisis is not explained by individual economic incentives.","authors":"Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt, Christoph Feldhaus, Axel Ockenfels, Matthias Sutter","doi":"10.1073/pnas.2411740121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In response to the disruption of gas supplies from Russia following the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, European politicians and public utilities appealed to citizens and customers to conserve natural gas. Moreover, they strengthened economic incentives for gas conservation. In fact, a substantial amount of natural gas was saved during the winter of 2022/23. This raises the question to what extent this success is attributable to government and corporate means to foster energy conservation in the crisis, including energy policies such as the German government's \"gas price brake,\" gas-saving programs launched by public utilities, and consumers' individual pricing schemes. We analyzed the effectiveness of these means using a survey and a field experiment with a German gas supplier and show that, while household savings during the crisis were substantial, economic incentives did not significantly change behavior. Indeed, demand for gas is largely price inelastic. A large majority of consumers do not understand the incentives arising from the gas price brake, and when they do, they do not respond. Likewise, consumers do not react to the design of the utilities' gas-saving program. These findings suggest that i) citizens' response to marginal individual economic incentives contributes little to overall gas savings, and ii) the crisis, along with the extensive societal engagement it generated, likely shifted the public's mindset about energy consumption, making conservation a social priority.</p>","PeriodicalId":20548,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","volume":"121 48","pages":"e2411740121"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2411740121","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In response to the disruption of gas supplies from Russia following the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, European politicians and public utilities appealed to citizens and customers to conserve natural gas. Moreover, they strengthened economic incentives for gas conservation. In fact, a substantial amount of natural gas was saved during the winter of 2022/23. This raises the question to what extent this success is attributable to government and corporate means to foster energy conservation in the crisis, including energy policies such as the German government's "gas price brake," gas-saving programs launched by public utilities, and consumers' individual pricing schemes. We analyzed the effectiveness of these means using a survey and a field experiment with a German gas supplier and show that, while household savings during the crisis were substantial, economic incentives did not significantly change behavior. Indeed, demand for gas is largely price inelastic. A large majority of consumers do not understand the incentives arising from the gas price brake, and when they do, they do not respond. Likewise, consumers do not react to the design of the utilities' gas-saving program. These findings suggest that i) citizens' response to marginal individual economic incentives contributes little to overall gas savings, and ii) the crisis, along with the extensive societal engagement it generated, likely shifted the public's mindset about energy consumption, making conservation a social priority.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家庭在能源危机中减少燃气消耗量的原因并不在于个人的经济动机。
为应对 2022 年乌克兰入侵后俄罗斯天然气供应中断的情况,欧洲政治家和公用事业公司呼吁公民和客户节约天然气。此外,他们还加强了节约天然气的经济激励措施。事实上,2022/23 年冬季节约了大量天然气。这就提出了一个问题,即这一成功在多大程度上归功于政府和企业在危机中促进节能的手段,包括德国政府的 "天然气价格制动 "等能源政策、公用事业公司推出的天然气节约计划以及消费者的个人定价计划。我们通过一项调查和与一家德国天然气供应商的现场实验分析了这些手段的有效性,结果表明,虽然危机期间家庭节约了大量能源,但经济激励措施并没有显著改变人们的行为。事实上,天然气需求在很大程度上缺乏价格弹性。绝大多数消费者并不了解天然气价格制动所带来的激励,即使了解了也不会做出反应。同样,消费者也不会对公用事业公司的节气计划做出反应。这些研究结果表明:i) 公民对个人边际经济激励措施的反应对整体天然气节约的贡献不大;ii) 危机及其引发的广泛社会参与很可能改变了公众的能源消费观念,使节约成为社会的首要任务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.00
自引率
0.90%
发文量
3575
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer-reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), serves as an authoritative source for high-impact, original research across the biological, physical, and social sciences. With a global scope, the journal welcomes submissions from researchers worldwide, making it an inclusive platform for advancing scientific knowledge.
期刊最新文献
Using computational modeling to validate the onset of productive determiner-noun combinations in English-learning children. Global trends in antibiotic consumption during 2016-2023 and future projections through 2030. Magnetic soft microrobots for erectile dysfunction therapy. North Atlantic and the Barents Sea variability contribute to the 2023 extreme fire season in Canada. Stabilizing selection in an identified multisensory neuron in blind cavefish.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1