IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i11p2694-d1662228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Ecological Decisions of Users of Single-Family Houses in Poland in the Field of Energy Generation

Author

Listed:
  • Łukasz Kuźmiński

    (Department of Process Management, Faculty of Management, Wroclaw University of Economics, 53-345 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Joanna Dynowska

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, Institute of Management and Quality Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Rafał Nagaj

    (Institute of Economics and Finance, University of Szczecin, 70-453 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Sergiy Kozmenko

    (University of Social Sciences, 90-113 Lodz, Poland)

  • Tomasz Norek

    (The Institute of Spatial Management and Socio-Economic Geography, University of Szczecin, 70-453 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Marcin Rabe

    (Management Institute, University of Szczecin, 70-453 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Andrzej Gawlik

    (Faculty of Environmental Management and Agriculture, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, 70-310 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Katarzyna Widera

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Opole University of Technology, 45-758 Opole, Poland)

Abstract

Since the early years of the 21st century, there has been a clear critique of the diotic way of farming in the international scientific arena, emphasizing that the existing models of economic development are exacerbating social inequalities and overexploiting natural resources. At the same time, the literature promotes the implementation of a new way of farming that takes into account environmental, social, and economic concerns. We have brought together new methods and ways of farming in these areas into one broad concept, called the conclusion of sustainable development. Within this concept, particular emphasis has been placed on sustainable energy development, the intensive development of technologies based on renewable energy sources, and the advancement of end-user awareness of modern technologies. The aim of this paper was to identify the factors that determine the ecological attitude of users of single-family houses in Poland when making strategic energy decisions related to the choice of heating devices in a household. To solve this research problem, the authors conducted a nationwide survey on a representative sample of single-family house users. In turn, the results were analyzed using log-linear analysis. The results showed that the determinants of the ecological nature of such energy decisions are primarily the age of the house users and their level of education. It was found that younger people are significantly more likely to think about ecology when making decisions related to how a building is heated than older people. In addition, people with a higher level of education are more likely to think about ecology when making such decisions than those with a lower level of education. Findings showed that the gender of the occupant of a single-family house, as well as the size of the town in which the building is located, have no significant impact on the ecological nature of decisions related to the choice of the method of obtaining energy for home heating. It was also shown that territorial variation, i.e., the region of the country, had no effect on this issue. The identification of socio-demographic determinants of the ecological nature of decisions related to the choice of heating devices in single-family houses in Poland fills the research gap and thus contributes to the literature in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Łukasz Kuźmiński & Joanna Dynowska & Rafał Nagaj & Sergiy Kozmenko & Tomasz Norek & Marcin Rabe & Andrzej Gawlik & Katarzyna Widera, 2025. "Determinants of Ecological Decisions of Users of Single-Family Houses in Poland in the Field of Energy Generation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-24, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:11:p:2694-:d:1662228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/11/2694/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/11/2694/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qun Cheng & Zhaonan Zhang & Yanwei Wang & Lidong Zhang, 2025. "A Review of Distributed Energy Systems: Technologies, Classification, and Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-31, February.
    2. Jefferson, Michael, 2006. "Sustainable energy development: performance and prospects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 571-582.
    3. Kainiemi, Laura & Laukkanen, Minttu & Levänen, Jarkko, 2025. "Multi-sectoral interactions in energy transition: Unveiling tensions between sustainability and justice," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 384(C).
    4. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    5. Emad Kazemzadeh & Narges Salehnia & Yang Yu & Magdalena Radulescu, 2025. "Drivers of Green Growth: Roles of Innovation and Fragility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-32, January.
    6. Paul Glewwe & Margaret Grosh, 2000. "Designing Household Survey Questionnaires for Developing Countries : Lessons from 15 Years of the Living Standards Measurement Study, Volume 2," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15194, April.
    7. Kern, Florian & Smith, Adrian, 2008. "Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4093-4103, November.
    8. Huang, Junbing & Wang, Yajun & Yang, Aiwei & Zhou, Hongxu & Fan, Chuanqi, 2025. "Digitization and industrial low-carbon energy transition in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    9. Saxena, Vivek & Kumar, Narendra & Manna, Saibal & Rajput, Saurabh Kumar & Agarwal, Kusum Lata & Diwania, Sourav & Gupta, Varun, 2025. "Modelling, solution and application of optimization techniques in HRES: From conventional to artificial intelligence," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 380(C).
    10. Madlener, Reinhard & Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid, 2007. "New ways for the integrated appraisal of national energy scenarios: The case of renewable energy use in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6060-6074, December.
    11. Nam, Hyun-Jung & Ryu, Doojin, 2025. "Does international trade moderate economic development’s impact on income inequality in the EU?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Bożena Gajdzik & Rafał Nagaj & Radosław Wolniak & Dominik Bałaga & Brigita Žuromskaitė & Wiesław Wes Grebski, 2024. "Renewable Energy Share in European Industry: Analysis and Extrapolation of Trends in EU Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-38, May.
    13. Paul Glewwe & Margaret Grosh, 2000. "Designing Household Survey Questionnaires for Developing Countries : Lessons from 15 Years of the Living Standards Measurement Study, Volume 3," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15195, April.
    14. Ai, Hongshan & Tan, Xiaoqing & Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Emrouznejad, Ali & Liu, Fan & Song, Malin, 2025. "Renewable energy transition and sustainable development: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    15. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    16. Ciupuliga, A.R. & Cuppen, E., 2013. "The role of dialogue in fostering acceptance of transmission lines: the case of a France–Spain interconnection project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 224-233.
    17. Islam, Hasibul, 2025. "Nexus of economic, social, and environmental factors on sustainable development goals: The moderating role of technological advancement and green innovation," Innovation and Green Development, Elsevier, vol. 4(1).
    18. Dieter Helm, 2005. "The Assessment: The New Energy Paradigm," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 21(1), pages 1-18, Spring.
    19. Vera, Ivan & Langlois, Lucille, 2007. "Energy indicators for sustainable development," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 875-882.
    20. Bera, Subhasis & Syed, Qasim Raza & Rahut, Dil Bahadur, 2025. "Drivers of residential energy intensity convergence: A dynamic panel data analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 316(C).
    21. Kauko, Hanne & Delgado, Benjamín Manrique & Backe, Stian & Sartori, Igor, 2025. "Reducing electricity demand and enhancing heat supply flexibility through energy efficiency and district heating," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    22. Marcin Rabe & Dalia Streimikiene & Yuriy Bilan, 2019. "The Concept of Risk and Possibilities of Application of Mathematical Methods in Supporting Decision Making for Sustainable Energy Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, February.
    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. Mark Dean & Anja Sautmann, 2021. "Credit Constraints and the Measurement of Time Preferences," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(1), pages 119-135, March.
    2. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    3. Shi, Yun & Cui, Xiangyu & Zhou, Xunyu, 2020. "Beta and Coskewness Pricing: Perspective from Probability Weighting," SocArXiv 5rqhv, Center for Open Science.
    4. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    5. Nathalie Spittler & Ganna Gladkykh & Arnaud Diemer & Brynhildur Davidsdottir, 2019. "Understanding the Current Energy Paradigm and Energy System Models for More Sustainable Energy System Development," Post-Print hal-02127724, HAL.
    6. Barik, Debasis & Desai, Sonalde & Vanneman, Reeve, 2018. "Economic Status and Adult Mortality in India: Is the Relationship Sensitive to Choice of Indicators?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 176-187.
    7. Van Landeghem, Bert & Vandeplas, Anneleen, 2018. "The relationship between status and happiness: Evidence from the caste system in rural India," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 62-71.
    8. Daniel Woods & Mustafa Abdallah & Saurabh Bagchi & Shreyas Sundaram & Timothy Cason, 2022. "Network defense and behavioral biases: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 254-286, February.
    9. Yayan Hernuryadin & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Time Preferences of Food Producers: Does “Cultivate and Grow” Matter?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(1), pages 132-148.
    10. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Meier, Stephan & Sprenger, Charles D., 2013. "Discounting financial literacy: Time preferences and participation in financial education programs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 159-174.
    12. Leandro De Magalhães & Dongya Koh & Raül Santaeulàlia-Llopis, 2016. "Consumption and Expenditure in Sub-Saharan Africa," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 16/677, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK, revised 07 Oct 2016.
    13. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver & Wiercinski, Ben, 2017. "The Relationship between Farmers' Shock Experiences and their Uncertainty Preferences - Experimental Evidence from Mexico," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 256212, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    14. Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2021. "Adoption of retrofit measures among homeowners in EU countries: The effects of access to capital and debt aversion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    15. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Xiaowei Yang & Jianmin Gao & Zhongliang Zhou & Jue Yan & Sha Lai & Yongjian Xu & Gang Chen, 2016. "Assessing the Effects of the New Cooperative Medical Scheme on Alleviating the Health Payment-Induced Poverty in Shaanxi Province, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, July.
    17. Leandro DE MAGALHÃES & Dongya KOH & Räul SANTAEULILA-LLOPIS, 2019. "The Cost of Consumption Smoothing: Less Schooling and less Nutrition," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(3), pages 181-208, September.
    18. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    19. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Marc A. Ragin & Justin R. Sydnor, 2020. "Linking subjective and incentivized risk attitudes: The importance of losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 187-206, April.
    20. Tristan Le Cotty & Elodie Maître d’Hôtel & Raphael Soubeyran & Julie Subervie, 2018. "Linking Risk Aversion, Time Preference and Fertiliser Use in Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(11), pages 1991-2006, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:11:p:2694-:d:1662228. 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.