IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v167y2022ics0301421522002488.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer preferences for the design of a demand response quota scheme – Results of a choice experiment in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Lehmann, Nico
  • Sloot, Daniel
  • Ardone, Armin
  • Fichtner, Wolf

Abstract

Demand response (DR) programs are increasingly discussed as policy options to facilitate an efficient energy transition. More recently, quota schemes, a novel type of incentive-based DR program that aims to restrict electricity consumption of some household appliances at certain times, have received considerable attention as a tool for preventing local grid congestion. However, little is known about the preferences of household consumers regarding the design of DR programs in general and quota schemes in particular. We examined the preferences of 1034 German consumers using data from a choice experiment. Our model results show that respondents’ choices for quota scheme designs are mainly driven by the time period during which consumption is constrained, followed by the financial compensation. That said, the order of importance reverses if consumers are free to choose whether to participate or not, while the frequency and duration of DR measures remain unimportant. This shift in preferences suggests that preferences for certain DR programs may not necessarily translate into willingness to participate. Sociodemographic characteristics explain these preferences only to a limited extent, with female and older persons and persons currently purchasing green electricity showing a slightly higher willingness to participate. We discuss policy implications arising from these findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2022. "Consumer preferences for the design of a demand response quota scheme – Results of a choice experiment in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:167:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522002488
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421522002488
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Hensher, 2014. "Attribute processing as a behavioural strategy in choice making," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 12, pages 268-289, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. John M. Rose & Michiel C.J. Bliemer, 2014. "Stated choice experimental design theory: the who, the what and the why," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 7, pages 152-177, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Gils, Hans Christian, 2014. "Assessment of the theoretical demand response potential in Europe," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 1-18.
    4. Ahmad Faruqui & Sanem Sergici, 2011. "Dynamic pricing of electricity in the mid-Atlantic region: econometric results from the Baltimore gas and electric company experiment," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 82-109, August.
    5. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth, 2017. "Correlation and scale in mixed logit models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-8.
    6. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    7. Radenković, Miloš & Bogdanović, Zorica & Despotović-Zrakić, Marijana & Labus, Aleksandra & Lazarević, Saša, 2020. "Assessing consumer readiness for participation in IoT-based demand response business models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    8. Boeri, Marco & Longo, Alberto, 2017. "The importance of regret minimization in the choice for renewable energy programmes: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 253-260.
    9. Stephane Hess & David Hensher, 2013. "Making use of respondent reported processing information to understand attribute importance: a latent variable scaling approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 397-412, February.
    10. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John & Greaves, Stephen, 2014. "Hypothetical bias in Stated Choice Experiments: Is it a problem? And if so, how do we deal with it?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 164-177.
    11. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2021. "The limited potential of regional electricity marketing – Results from two discrete choice experiments in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Chorus, Caspar G. & Arentze, Theo A. & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2008. "A Random Regret-Minimization model of travel choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Fosgerau, Mogens & Mabit, Stefan L., 2013. "Easy and flexible mixture distributions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 206-210.
    14. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    15. Anna, Petrenko, 2016. "Мaркування готової продукції як складова частина інформаційного забезпечення маркетингової діяльності підприємств овочепродуктового підкомплексу," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 2(1), March.
    16. Joanna Coast & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Eileen J. Sutton & Susan A. Horrocks & A. Jane Vosper & Dawn R. Swancutt & Terry N. Flynn, 2012. "Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 730-741, June.
    17. Jelke Bethlehem, 2010. "Selection Bias in Web Surveys," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 78(2), pages 161-188, August.
    18. Hess, Stephane & Hensher, David A., 2010. "Using conditioning on observed choices to retrieve individual-specific attribute processing strategies," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 781-790, July.
    19. Anna Kowalska-Pyzalska, 2019. "Do Consumers Want to Pay for Green Electricity? A Case Study from Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, March.
    20. Nilsson, Anders & Lazarevic, David & Brandt, Nils & Kordas, Olga, 2018. "Household responsiveness to residential demand response strategies: Results and policy implications from a Swedish field study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 273-286.
    21. Maya Abou-Zeid & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 2014. "Hybrid choice models," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 17, pages 383-412, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Kim, Jin-Ho & Shcherbakova, Anastasia, 2011. "Common failures of demand response," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 873-880.
    23. Nicolson, Moira L. & Fell, Michael J. & Huebner, Gesche M., 2018. "Consumer demand for time of use electricity tariffs: A systematized review of the empirical evidence," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 276-289.
    24. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    25. Petr Mariel & David Hoyos & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Thijs Dekker & Klaus Glenk & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Ulf Liebe & Søren Bøye Olsen & Julian Sagebiel & Mara Thiene, 2021. "Environmental Valuation with Discrete Choice Experiments," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, number 978-3-030-62669-3, October.
    26. Aryandoust, Arsam & Lilliestam, Johan, 2017. "The potential and usefulness of demand response to provide electricity system services," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 749-766.
    27. Yilmaz, Selin & Xu, Xiaojing & Cabrera, Daniel & Chanez, Cédric & Cuony, Peter & Patel, Martin K., 2020. "Analysis of demand-side response preferences regarding electricity tariffs and direct load control: Key findings from a Swiss survey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    28. Gyamfi, Samuel & Krumdieck, Susan & Urmee, Tania, 2013. "Residential peak electricity demand response—Highlights of some behavioural issues," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 71-77.
    29. Yamaguchi, Yohei & Chen, Chien-fei & Shimoda, Yoshiyuki & Yagita, Yoshie & Iwafune, Yumiko & Ishii, Hideo & Hayashi, Yasuhiro, 2020. "An integrated approach of estimating demand response flexibility of domestic laundry appliances based on household heterogeneity and activities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    30. Srivastava, Aman & Van Passel, Steven & Kessels, Roselinde & Valkering, Pieter & Laes, Erik, 2020. "Reducing winter peaks in electricity consumption: A choice experiment to structure demand response programs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    31. Hu, Junjie & Morais, Hugo & Sousa, Tiago & Lind, Morten, 2016. "Electric vehicle fleet management in smart grids: A review of services, optimization and control aspects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1207-1226.
    32. Swantje Sundt & Katrin Rehdanz & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2020. "Consumers’ Willingness to Accept Time-of-Use Tariffs for Shifting Electricity Demand," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    33. Alexandra-Gwyn Paetz & Elisabeth Dütschke & Wolf Fichtner, 2012. "Smart Homes as a Means to Sustainable Energy Consumption: A Study of Consumer Perceptions," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 23-41, March.
    34. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2022. "Willingness to pay for regional electricity generation – A question of green values and regional product beliefs?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    35. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    36. Kris Kessels & Carolien Kraan & Ludwig Karg & Simone Maggiore & Pieter Valkering & Erik Laes, 2016. "Fostering Residential Demand Response through Dynamic Pricing Schemes: A Behavioural Review of Smart Grid Pilots in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-21, September.
    37. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth E., 2011. "Recovery of inter- and intra-personal heterogeneity using mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 973-990, August.
    38. Layer, Patrick & Feurer, Sven & Jochem, Patrick, 2017. "Perceived price complexity of dynamic energy tariffs: An investigation of antecedents and consequences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 244-254.
    39. Carolina Afonso & Diana Gavilan & Jesús García-Madariaga & Helena Martins Gonçalves, 2018. "Green Consumer Segmentation: Managerial and Environmental Implications from the Perspective of Business Strategies and Practices," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Antonio Leal-Millan & Marta Peris-Ortiz & Antonio L. Leal-Rodríguez (ed.), Sustainability in Innovation and Entrepreneurship, chapter 0, pages 137-151, Springer.
    40. David Hensher & John Rose & William Greene, 2005. "The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 203-222, May.
    41. Ahmad Faruqui, Sanem Sergici, and Lamine Akaba, 2014. "The Impact of Dynamic Pricing on Residential and Small Commercial and Industrial Usage: New Experimental Evidence from Connecticut," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    42. Christian Schlereth & Bernd Skiera, 2017. "Two New Features in Discrete Choice Experiments to Improve Willingness-to-Pay Estimation That Result in SDR and SADR: Separated (Adaptive) Dual Response," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 829-842, March.
    43. Dütschke, Elisabeth & Paetz, Alexandra-Gwyn, 2013. "Dynamic electricity pricing—Which programs do consumers prefer?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 226-234.
    44. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    45. Richard C. Ready & Patricia A. Champ & Jennifer L. Lawton, 2010. "Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 363-381.
    46. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, 2019. "Cheap talk efficacy under potential and actual Hypothetical Bias: A meta-analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 22-35.
    47. Katrin Demmelhuber & Florian Englmaier & Felix Leiss & Sascha Möhrle & Andreas Peichl & Theresa Schröter, 2020. "Homeoffice vor und nach Corona: Auswirkungen und Geschlechterbetroffenheit," ifo Schnelldienst Digital, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(14), November.
    48. Maria Kamargianni & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Amalia Polydoropoulou, 2014. "Incorporating social interaction into hybrid choice models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1263-1285, November.
    49. Anna Kowalska-Pyzalska, 2016. "What makes consumers adopt to innovative energy services in the energy market?," HSC Research Reports HSC/16/09, Hugo Steinhaus Center, Wroclaw University of Technology.
    50. Parrish, Bryony & Heptonstall, Phil & Gross, Rob & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2020. "A systematic review of motivations, enablers and barriers for consumer engagement with residential demand response," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    2. Will, Christian & Lehmann, Nico & Baumgartner, Nora & Feurer, Sven & Jochem, Patrick & Fichtner, Wolf, 2022. "Consumer understanding and evaluation of carbon-neutral electric vehicle charging services," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    3. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2021. "The limited potential of regional electricity marketing – Results from two discrete choice experiments in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2022. "Willingness to pay for regional electricity generation – A question of green values and regional product beliefs?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    5. Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Campbell, Danny, 2014. "Behavioral implications of providing real incentives in stated choice experiments," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 102-116.
    6. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    7. Sridhar, Araavind & Honkapuro, Samuli & Ruiz, Fredy & Stoklasa, Jan & Annala, Salla & Wolff, Annika & Rautiainen, Antti, 2023. "Residential consumer preferences to demand response: Analysis of different motivators to enroll in direct load control demand response," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    9. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    10. Jourdain, Damien & Lairez, Juliette & Striffler, Bruno & Lundhede, Thomas, 2022. "A choice experiment approach to evaluate maize farmers’ decision-making processes in Lao PDR," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    11. Nikolas Schöne & Kathrin Greilmeier & Boris Heinz, 2022. "Survey-Based Assessment of the Preferences in Residential Demand Response on the Island of Mayotte," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-30, February.
    12. Patrick Ludwig & Christian Winzer, 2022. "Tariff Menus to Avoid Rebound Peaks: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment with Swiss Customers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Paul Hindley & O. Ashton Morgan, 2023. "The Role of Respondent Certainty and Attribute Non-Attendance on the Willingness to Pay for the Attributes of Recyclable Aluminum Bottled Water," Working Papers 23-06, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    14. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.
    15. Kemperman, Astrid, 2021. "A review of research into discrete choice experiments in tourism: Launching the Annals of Tourism Research Curated Collection on Discrete Choice Experiments in Tourism," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    16. Mokas, Ilias & Lizin, Sebastien & Brijs, Tom & Witters, Nele & Malina, Robert, 2021. "Can immersive virtual reality increase respondents’ certainty in discrete choice experiments? A comparison with traditional presentation formats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    17. Dudinskaya, Emilia Cubero & Naspetti, Simona & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2020. "Using eye-tracking as an aid to design on-screen choice experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    18. Erlend Dancke Sandorf & Danny Campbell, 2019. "Accommodating satisficing behaviour in stated choice experiments," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(1), pages 133-162.
    19. Logar, Ivana & Brouwer, Roy & Campbell, Danny, 2020. "Does attribute order influence attribute-information processing in discrete choice experiments?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    20. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1), March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:167:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522002488. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.