IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i7p3557-3566.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unintended anchors: Building rating systems and energy performance goals for U.S. buildings

Author

Listed:
  • Klotz, Leidy
  • Mack, Daniel
  • Klapthor, Brent
  • Tunstall, Casey
  • Harrison, Jennilee

Abstract

In the U.S., where buildings account for 40% of energy use, commercial buildings use more energy per unit area than ever before. However, exemplary buildings demonstrate the feasibility of much better energy performance at no additional first cost. This research examines one possible explanation for this inconsistency. The aim is to investigate whether the anchoring bias, which refers to our tendency to gravitate towards a pre-defined standard regardless of its relevance, influences energy performance goals in building design. The scope examines professionals who help set energy performance goals for U.S. buildings. Prior to being asked to set an energy performance goal, these professionals were randomly directed to one of three series of questions. One series set an anchor of 90% energy reduction beyond standard practice, one set a 30% anchor, and one set no anchor. Respondents exposed to the 90% anchor, and respondents exposed to no anchor at all, set higher energy performance goals than respondents exposed to the 30% anchor. These results suggest that building rating systems that only reward incremental energy improvements may inadvertently create anchors, thereby discouraging more advanced energy performance goals and inhibiting energy performance that is technically and economically feasible.

Suggested Citation

  • Klotz, Leidy & Mack, Daniel & Klapthor, Brent & Tunstall, Casey & Harrison, Jennilee, 2010. "Unintended anchors: Building rating systems and energy performance goals for U.S. buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3557-3566, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:7:p:3557-3566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00114-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Moxnes, Erling, 2004. "Estimating customer utility of energy efficiency standards for refrigerators," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 707-724, December.
    2. Kenneth Gillingham & Richard G. Newell & Karen Palmer, 2009. "Energy Efficiency Economics and Policy," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 597-620, September.
    3. Cass R. Sunstein & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    4. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    6. Turrentine, Tom & Kurani, Kenneth S, 2007. "Car buyers and fuel economy?," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt56x845v4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    7. Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy-efficiency gap What does it mean?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(10), pages 804-810, October.
    8. Turrentine, Thomas S. & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2007. "Car buyers and fuel economy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1213-1223, February.
    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. Loonen, R.C.G.M. & Trčka, M. & Cóstola, D. & Hensen, J.L.M., 2013. "Climate adaptive building shells: State-of-the-art and future challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 483-493.
    2. Heather Klemick & Elizabeth Kopits & Ann Wolverton, 2015. "The Energy Efficiency Paradox: A Case Study of Supermarket Refrigeration System Investment Decisions," NCEE Working Paper Series 201503, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Jun 2015.
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:2:p:130:d:63198 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:eee:rensus:v:82:y:2018:i:p3:p:3952-3961 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Nora Harris & Tripp Shealy & Leidy Klotz, 2016. "Choice Architecture as a Way to Encourage a Whole Systems Design Perspective for More Sustainable Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Melo, A.P. & Cóstola, D. & Lamberts, R. & Hensen, J.L.M., 2014. "Development of surrogate models using artificial neural network for building shell energy labelling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 457-466.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Buildings Anchoring Cognitive Bias;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:38:y:2010:i:7:p:3557-3566. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.