IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i8p4949-4965d38866.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Welfare Evaluation of Electric Universal Service in China: From the Perspective of Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Huiru Zhao

    (School of Economics and Management, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China)

  • Sen Guo

    (School of Economics and Management, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China)

  • Qi Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China)

  • Chunjie Li

    (School of Economics and Management, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China)

Abstract

Electric universal service aims to improve the individual living quality in remote and underdeveloped areas, the implementation of which can promote the sustainable development of people’s lives and the local economy to some extent. A social welfare evaluation model of electric universal service was proposed, which was divided into economic and non-economic welfare evaluation models. After the factors influencing the social welfare sense of electric universal service were identified from the perspective of sustainability, the economic welfare evaluation model was built based on Atkinson’s social welfare function, and the non-economic welfare evaluation model was constructed based on the ideological connotation of prospect theory. Taking Yunnan province in China as the example, a social welfare evaluation of electric universal service was performed. The result shows that the social welfare of electric universal service for Yunnan rural areas has increased by 9.79% from 2006 to 2011, and the “electric service realization degree” is the most sensitive indicator.

Suggested Citation

  • Huiru Zhao & Sen Guo & Qi Zhang & Chunjie Li, 2014. "Social Welfare Evaluation of Electric Universal Service in China: From the Perspective of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(8), pages 1-17, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:8:p:4949-4965:d:38866
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/8/4949/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/8/4949/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wada, Junichiro, 2012. "A divisor apportionment method based on the Kolm–Atkinson social welfare function and generalized entropy," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 243-247.
    2. Trannoy, Alain, 2003. "About the right weights of the social welfare function when needs differ," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 383-387, December.
    3. Olivier Rousse & Benoît Sévi, 2013. "Citizen's participation in permit markets and social welfare under uncertainty," Post-Print halshs-00814000, HAL.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Zaharieva, Anna, 2013. "Social welfare and wage inequality in search equilibrium with personal contacts," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 107-121.
    7. Hanany, Eran, 2008. "The ordinal Nash social welfare function," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(5-6), pages 405-422, April.
    8. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    9. Schlör, Holger & Fischer, Wolfgang & Hake, Jürgen-Friedrich, 2012. "Measuring social welfare, energy and inequality in Germany," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 135-142.
    10. Bruce, Neil & Turnovsky, Stephen J., 2013. "Social security, growth, and welfare in overlapping generations economies with or without annuities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 12-24.
    11. Murakami, Hideki, 2011. "Time effect of low-cost carrier entry and social welfare in US large air markets," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 306-314, May.
    12. Sethuraman, Jay & Teo, Chung-Piaw & Vohra, Rakesh V., 2006. "Anonymous monotonic social welfare functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 232-254, May.
    13. Lipow, Jonathan & Simon, Jay, 2011. "Military reserves and social welfare," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 208-210.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peipei You & Sen Guo & Haoran Zhao & Huiru Zhao, 2017. "Operation Performance Evaluation of Power Grid Enterprise Using a Hybrid BWM-TOPSIS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Sen Guo & Huiru Zhao & Haoran Zhao, 2017. "The Most Economical Mode of Power Supply for Remote and Less Developed Areas in China: Power Grid Extension or Micro-Grid?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Sen Guo & Huiru Zhao & Chunjie Li & Haoran Zhao & Bingkang Li, 2016. "Significant Factors Influencing Rural Residents’ Well-Being with Regard to Electricity Consumption: An Empirical Analysis in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-13, November.

    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. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    2. Rohde, Nicholas & Tang, Kam Ki & D’Ambrosio, Conchita & Osberg, Lars & Rao, Prasada, 2020. "Welfare-based income insecurity in the us and germany: evidence from harmonized panel data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 226-243.
    3. Markus Jäntti & Ravi Kanbur & Milla Nyyssölä & Jukka Pirttilä, 2014. "Poverty and Welfare Measurement on the Basis of Prospect Theory," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 182-205, March.
    4. Walter Bossert & Conchita D'Ambrosio, 2013. "Measuring Economic Insecurity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(3), pages 1017-1030, August.
    5. Steven R. Beckman & Gregory DeAngelo & W. James Smith & Ning Wang, 2016. "Is social choice gender-neutral? Reference dependence and sexual selection in decisions toward risk and inequality," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 191-211, June.
    6. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier & Pinto, Jose Luis, 2015. "Estimating sign-dependent societal preferences for quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 229-243.
    7. Markus Jäntti & Ravi Kanbur & Milla Nyyssölä & Jukka Pirttilä, 2014. "Poverty and Welfare Measurement on the Basis of Prospect Theory," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 182-205, March.
    8. Doctor, Jason N. & Miyamoto, John & Bleichrodt, Han, 2009. "When are person tradeoffs valid?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 1018-1027, September.
    9. Mangaraj, B.K. & Aparajita, Upali, 2020. "Constructing a generalized model of the human development index," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    11. Shoji, Isao & Kanehiro, Sumei, 2016. "Disposition effect as a behavioral trading activity elicited by investors' different risk preferences," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    12. Jonathan Meng & Feng Fu, 2020. "Understanding Gambling Behavior and Risk Attitudes Using Cryptocurrency-based Casino Blockchain Data," Papers 2008.05653, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    13. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    14. Boone, Jan & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim & van Ours, Jan C., 2009. "Experiments on unemployment benefit sanctions and job search behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 937-951, November.
    15. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    16. Jos'e Cl'audio do Nascimento, 2019. "Behavioral Biases and Nonadditive Dynamics in Risk Taking: An Experimental Investigation," Papers 1908.01709, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    17. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    18. Bin Zou, 2017. "Optimal Investment In Hedge Funds Under Loss Aversion," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-32, May.
    19. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    20. Wiafe, Osei K. & Basu, Anup K. & Chen, En Te, 2020. "Portfolio choice after retirement: Should self-annuitisation strategies hold more equities?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 241-255.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:8:p:4949-4965:d:38866. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.