Hybrid energy–economy models combine the advantages of a technologically explicit bottom–up model with the behavioral realism sought after by top–down models in order to help policymakers assess the likely technology-specific response and economy-wide impact of policies to induce technological change. We use a discrete choice survey to estimate key technology choice parameters for a hybrid model. Two choice experiments are conducted for household energy-related decisions about retrofitting home building structures and choosing a space heating and conditioning system. Based on a discrete choice survey of 625 householders, we estimate a discrete choice model and then demonstrate how its parameters translate into the behavioral parameters of a hybrid model. We then simulate household energy policies, including, individual subsidies and increased regulations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
C. Bohringer, The synthesis of bottom–up and top–down in energy policy modeling, Energy Econ. 20(3) (1998) 233–248.
D. Gately, Individual discount rates and the purchase and utilization of energy-using durables: comment, Bell J. Econ. 11(1) (1980) 372–374.
J.A. Hausman, Individual discount rates and the purchase and utilization of energy-using durables, Bell J. Econ. 10(1) (1979) 33–54.
R.B. Hutton and W.L. Wilkie, Life cycle cost: a new form of consumer information, J. Consum. Res. 6(March) (1980) 349–359.
M. Jaccard, A. Bailie, J. Nyboer, CO2 emission reductions costs in the residential sector: behavioral parameters in a bottom–up simulation model, Energy J. 17(4) (1996) 107–134.
M. Jaccard, J. Nyboer, C. Bataille and B. Sadownik, Modeling the cost of climate policy: distinguishing between alternative cost definitions and long-run cost dynamics, Energy J. 24(1) (2003) 49–73.
H.K. Jacobsen, Integrating the bottom–up and top–down approach to energy–economy modeling: the case of Denmark, Energy Econ. 20(4) (1998) 443–461.
C.C. Koopmans and D.W. te Velde, Bridging the energy efficiency gap: Using bottom–up information in a top–down energy demand model, Energy Econ. 23(1) (2001) 57–75.
A. Loschel, Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey, Ecol. Econ. 43 (2002) 105–126.
Marbek Resource Consultants, Building Table Options Report: Residential Sector, Ottawa, National Climate Change Process, 1999.
J. Nyboer, Simulating evolution of technology: a case study of strategies to control greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. PhD dissertation, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, 1997.
D. Revelt and K. Train, Mixed logit with repeated choices: household’s choices of appliance efficiency level, Rev. Econ. Stat. LXXX(4) (1998) 647–657.
K. Train, Discount rates in consumers’ energy-related decisions: a review of the literature, Energy: Int. J. 10(12) (1985) 1243–1253.
K. Train, Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jaccard, M., Dennis, M. Estimating home energy decision parameters for a hybrid energy—economy policy model. Environ Model Assess 11, 91–100 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-005-9036-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-005-9036-0