可再生能源的亲社会行为是否取决于来源?

IF 1.3 Q3 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Agricultural and Resource Economics Review Pub Date : 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1017/age.2023.36
Bhagyashree Katare, H. H. Wang, Michael Wetzstein, Yu Jiang, Brandon Weiland
{"title":"可再生能源的亲社会行为是否取决于来源?","authors":"Bhagyashree Katare, H. H. Wang, Michael Wetzstein, Yu Jiang, Brandon Weiland","doi":"10.1017/age.2023.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Facing increasing nonrenewable and environmental concerns with fossil power generation, renewable energy is being supported by government mechanisms. With the power generation cost of renewables generally higher than fossil fuels, determining the optimal level of these mechanisms requires an understanding of households’ prosocial behavior toward renewables. The issue is determining the magnitude households are willing to pay (WTP) for alternative renewables. Our hypothesis is this behavior varies by the type of renewable energy. As a test of this hypothesis, we apply a discrete choice experiment to measure households’ WTP. Results support our hypothesis with a positive WTP for solar energy, leading to a 62% reduction in solar subsidy, and a negative WTP for biomass and wind sources.","PeriodicalId":44443,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural and Resource Economics Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Renewable energy prosocial behavior, is it source dependent?\",\"authors\":\"Bhagyashree Katare, H. H. Wang, Michael Wetzstein, Yu Jiang, Brandon Weiland\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/age.2023.36\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Facing increasing nonrenewable and environmental concerns with fossil power generation, renewable energy is being supported by government mechanisms. With the power generation cost of renewables generally higher than fossil fuels, determining the optimal level of these mechanisms requires an understanding of households’ prosocial behavior toward renewables. The issue is determining the magnitude households are willing to pay (WTP) for alternative renewables. Our hypothesis is this behavior varies by the type of renewable energy. As a test of this hypothesis, we apply a discrete choice experiment to measure households’ WTP. Results support our hypothesis with a positive WTP for solar energy, leading to a 62% reduction in solar subsidy, and a negative WTP for biomass and wind sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44443,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural and Resource Economics Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural and Resource Economics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2023.36\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural and Resource Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2023.36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

面对化石燃料发电越来越多的不可再生和环境问题,可再生能源得到了政府机制的支持。由于可再生能源的发电成本普遍高于化石燃料,要确定这些机制的最佳水平,就必须了解家庭对可再生能源的亲社会行为。问题在于确定家庭愿意为替代性可再生能源支付的金额(WTP)。我们的假设是,这种行为因可再生能源的类型而异。为了验证这一假设,我们采用离散选择实验来衡量家庭的 WTP。结果支持我们的假设,太阳能的 WTP 为正,导致太阳能补贴减少 62%,而生物质能和风能的 WTP 为负。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Renewable energy prosocial behavior, is it source dependent?
Facing increasing nonrenewable and environmental concerns with fossil power generation, renewable energy is being supported by government mechanisms. With the power generation cost of renewables generally higher than fossil fuels, determining the optimal level of these mechanisms requires an understanding of households’ prosocial behavior toward renewables. The issue is determining the magnitude households are willing to pay (WTP) for alternative renewables. Our hypothesis is this behavior varies by the type of renewable energy. As a test of this hypothesis, we apply a discrete choice experiment to measure households’ WTP. Results support our hypothesis with a positive WTP for solar energy, leading to a 62% reduction in solar subsidy, and a negative WTP for biomass and wind sources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: The purpose of the Review is to foster and disseminate professional thought and literature relating to the economics of agriculture, natural resources, and community development. It is published twice a year in April and October. In addition to normal refereed articles, it also publishes invited papers presented at the annual meetings of the NAREA as well as abstracts of selected papers presented at those meetings. The Review was formerly known as the Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
期刊最新文献
A recreation demand model for warmwater fishing in Delaware with welfare effects for improvements in catch rates, species diversity, and water clarity The effects of a universal income transfer on food insecurity within households Do people value farmers markets: A spatial hedonic pricing model approach Do people value farmers markets: A spatial hedonic pricing model approach Renewable energy prosocial behavior, is it source dependent?
×
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