Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The value of continuous power supply for Flemish households

Contents:

Author Info

  • Pepermans, Guido

Abstract

This paper estimates the willingness to pay/accept (WTP/WTA) of Flemish households for continuous power supply, based on a stated preference approach. The data were collected via a choice experiment and were then used to estimate a main effects conditional logit model and a random parameter logit model with interaction effects and correlated preferences. Power outages are characterized by 6 attributes: annual frequency, duration, peak or off peak, announced or unannounced, winter or summer and invoice impact. All estimates have the expected sign. The results are used to assess the marginal WTP/WTA for each of these attributes. Overall, the outcome suggests that Flemish households have heterogeneous preferences regarding power outage attributes, and that, due to a status quo bias, only a relatively small share of them is willing to switch to a lower reliability level if this would be compensated by a bill discount.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151100721X
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Policy.

Volume (Year): 39 (2011)
Issue (Month): 12 ()
Pages: 7853-7864

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:12:p:7853-7864

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

Related research

Keywords: Power outage; Willingness to pay; Choice experiment;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840.
  2. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
  3. de Nooij, Michiel & Koopmans, Carl & Bijvoet, Carlijn, 2007. "The value of supply security: The costs of power interruptions: Economic input for damage reduction and investment in networks," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 277-295, March.
  4. Hartman, Raymond S & Doane, Michael J & Woo, Chi-Keung, 1991. "Consumer Rationality and the Status Quo," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 106(1), pages 141-62, February.
  5. Pablo Serra & Gabriel Fierro, 1996. "Outage Cost in Chilean Industry," Documentos de Trabajo 10, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
  6. Woo, Chi-Keung & Pupp, Roger L., 1992. "Costs of service disruptions to electricity consumers," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 109-126.
  7. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2006. "Do Experience and Cheap Talk influence Willingness to Pay in an Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Survey?," Working Papers in Economics 190, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  8. Provencher, Bill & Bishop, R.C.Richard C., 2004. "Does accounting for preference heterogeneity improve the forecasting of a random utility model? A case study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 793-810, July.
  9. Moore, Rebecca, 2008. "Using Attitudes to Characterize Heterogeneous Preferences," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6488, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  10. Douglas W. Caves & Joseph A. Herriges & Robert J. Windle, 1992. "The Cost of Electric Power Interruptions in the Industrial Sector: Estimates Derived from Interruptible Service Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(1), pages 49-61.
  11. Edward Morey & Jennifer Thacher & William Breffle, 2006. "Using Angler Characteristics and Attitudinal Data to Identify Environmental Preference Classes: A Latent-Class Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 91-115, 05.
  12. Chiara M. Travisi & Peter Nijkamp & Raymond J. G. M. Florax, 2004. "A Meta-Analysis of the Willingness to Pay for Reductions in Pesticide Risk Exposure," Working Papers 2004.101, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  13. Caves, Douglas W & Herriges, Joseph A & Windle, Robert J, 1990. "Customer Demand for Service Reliability in the Electric Power Industry: A Synthesis of the Outage Cost Literature," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 79-119, April.
  14. Edward Morey & Kathleen Greer Rossmann, 2003. "Using Stated-Preference Questions to Investigate Variations in Willingness to Pay for Preserving Marble Monuments: Classic Heterogeneity, Random Parameters, and Mixture Models," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 215-229, November.
  15. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2004. "Does it Matter When a Power Outage Occurs? - A Choice Experiment Study on the Willingness to Pay to Avoid Power Outages," Working Papers in Economics 155, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  16. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
  17. Abdullah, Sabah & Mariel, Petr, 2010. "Choice experiment study on the willingness to pay to improve electricity services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4570-4581, August.
  18. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, 03.
  19. Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 2002. "A Review of WTA/WTP Studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 426-447, November.
  20. Ajodhia, Virendra & Hakvoort, Rudi, 2005. "Economic regulation of quality in electricity distribution networks," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 211-221, September.
  21. Hsu, George J. Y. & Chang, Pao-long & Chen, Tser-yieth, 1994. "Various methods for estimating power outage costs : Some implications and results in Taiwan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 69-74, January.
  22. Beenstock, Michael & Goldin, Ephraim & Haitovsky, Yoel, 1998. "Response bias in a conjoint analysis of power outages," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 135-156, April.
  23. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
  24. M. Munasinghe & A. Sanghvi, 1988. "Reliability of Electricity Supply, Outage Costs and Value of Service: An Overview," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 1-18.
  25. Woo, C.K. & Kollman, E. & Orans, R. & Price, S. & Horii, B., 2008. "Now that California has AMI, what can the state do with it?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1366-1374, April.
  26. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:12:p:7853-7864. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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