IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i12p3006-d1673148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying Social Benefits of Virtual Power Plants (VPPs) in South Korea: Contingent Valuation Method

Author

Listed:
  • Dongnyok Shim

    (Department of Advanced of Industry Fusion, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

This study is one of the first empirical attempts to quantify the social benefit of virtual power plants (VPPs) in South Korea using the contingent valuation method (CVM). As Korea pursues its ambitious carbon neutrality goal by 2050, VPPs have emerged as a critical technology for managing the intermittency of renewable energy sources and ensuring grid stability. Despite their recognized technical potential, the social and economic value of VPPs remains largely unexplored. Through a nationwide survey of 1105 households, we employed a double-bounded dichotomous choice spike model to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for government-led VPP implementation. The analysis revealed two distinct dimensions influencing VPP valuation: electricity bill perceptions and electricity generation mix preferences. Results indicated that Korean households exhibited significant but heterogeneous WTP for VPP implementation, with unconditional mean annual WTP ranging from KRW 23,474 to KRW 26,545 per household. Notably, support for renewable energy transition showed stronger positive effects on WTP compared to nuclear expansion preferences, suggesting VPPs are primarily valued as renewable energy enablers. The substantial spike probability (32–34%) indicated that approximately one-third of the population has zero WTP, highlighting challenges in introducing novel energy technologies. Key determinants of positive WTP included perceived fairness of electricity pricing, support for market-based mechanisms, and preferences for transitioning from coal and nuclear to renewables. These findings provide critical policy insights for VPP deployment strategies, suggesting the need for phased implementation, targeted communication emphasizing renewable integration benefits, and coordination with broader electricity market reforms. The study contributes to energy transition economics literature by demonstrating how public preferences for emerging grid technologies are shaped by both economic considerations and environmental values.

Suggested Citation

  • Dongnyok Shim, 2025. "Quantifying Social Benefits of Virtual Power Plants (VPPs) in South Korea: Contingent Valuation Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:12:p:3006-:d:1673148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/12/3006/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/12/3006/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stamatios Ntanos & Grigorios Kyriakopoulos & Miltiadis Chalikias & Garyfallos Arabatzis & Michalis Skordoulis, 2018. "Public Perceptions and Willingness to Pay for Renewable Energy: A Case Study from Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Kyu-Won Hwang & Jaekyun Ahn & Chul-Yong Lee, 2023. "Analysis of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Community Solar Business Using Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Behnaz Behi & Ali Baniasadi & Ali Arefi & Arian Gorjy & Philip Jennings & Almantas Pivrikas, 2020. "Cost–Benefit Analysis of a Virtual Power Plant Including Solar PV, Flow Battery, Heat Pump, and Demand Management: A Western Australian Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-24, May.
    4. Jeffrey K. Lazo & William D. Schulze & Gary H. McClelland & James K. Doyle, 1992. "Can Contingent Valuation Measure Nonuse Values?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(5), pages 1126-1132.
    5. W. David Eberle & F. Gregory Hayden, 1991. "Critique of Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Methods for Valuing Natural Resources and Ecosystems," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 649-687, September.
    6. Ian J. Bateman & Ian H. Langford & Alistair Munro & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2000. "Estimating Four Hicksian Welfare Measures for a Public Good: A Contingent Valuation Investigation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(3), pages 355-373.
    7. Cameron Trudy Ann & Quiggin John, 1994. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up Questionnaire," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 218-234, November.
    8. Wafa Nafkha-Tayari & Seifeddine Ben Elghali & Ehsan Heydarian-Forushani & Mohamed Benbouzid, 2022. "Virtual Power Plants Optimization Issue: A Comprehensive Review on Methods, Solutions, and Prospects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    9. Chung, Ji-Bum & Kim, Eun-Sung, 2018. "Public perception of energy transition in Korea: Nuclear power, climate change, and party preference," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 137-144.
    10. Dongnyok Shim & Seung Wan Kim & Jörn Altmann, 2018. "Strategic management of residential electric services in the competitive market: Demand-oriented perspective," Energy & Environment, , vol. 29(1), pages 49-66, February.
    11. Zhongmin, Xu & Guodong, Cheng & Zhiqiang, Zhang & Zhiyong, Su & Loomis, John, 2003. "Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 345-358, March.
    12. Li, Yang & Ma, Wenjie & Li, Yuanzheng & Li, Sen & Chen, Zhe & Shahidehpour, Mohammad, 2025. "Enhancing cyber-resilience in integrated energy system scheduling with demand response using deep reinforcement learning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 379(C).
    13. W. George Hutchinson & Susan M. Chilton & John Davis, 1995. "Measuring Non‐Use Value Of Environmental Goods Using The Contingent Valuation Method: Problems Of Information And Cognition And The Application Of Cognitive Questionnaire Design Methods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 97-112, January.
    14. Wiser, Ryan H., 2007. "Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 419-432, May.
    15. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Guo, Xiurui & Liu, Haifeng & Mao, Xianqiang & Jin, Jianjun & Chen, Dongsheng & Cheng, Shuiyuan, 2014. "Willingness to pay for renewable electricity: A contingent valuation study in Beijing, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 340-347.
    17. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    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. Soliño, Mario & Vázquez, María X. & Prada, Albino, 2009. "Social demand for electricity from forest biomass in Spain: Does payment periodicity affect the willingness to pay?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 531-540, February.
    2. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    3. Lee, Juyong & Cho, Youngsang, 2020. "Estimation of the usage fee for peer-to-peer electricity trading platform: The case of South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    4. Kim, GwanSeon & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Interis, Matthew G., 2012. "A Method for Improving Welfare Estimates from Multiple-Referendum Surveys," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-12, August.
    5. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    6. Deutschmann, Joshua W. & Postepska, Agnieszka & Sarr, Leopold, 2021. "Measuring willingness to pay for reliable electricity: Evidence from Senegal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    8. Gebretsadik, Kidanemariam Abreha & Romstad, Eirik, 2020. "Climate and farmers’ willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    9. Kwideok Han & Jeffrey Vitale & Yong-Geon Lee & Inbae Ji, 2022. "Measuring the Economic Value of the Negative Externality of Livestock Malodor in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-13, August.
    10. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    11. Dahal, Ram P. & Grala, Robert K. & Gordon, Jason S. & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Munn, Ian A., 2018. "Estimating the willingness to pay to preserve waterfront open spaces using contingent valuation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 614-626.
    12. Neil B. Niman, 1995. "Picking Winners And Losers In The Global Technology Race," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(3), pages 77-87, July.
    13. Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    14. Michaël Schwarzinger & Fabrice Carrat & Stéphane Luchini, 2009. ""If you have the flu symptoms, your asymptomatic spouse may better answer the willingness-to-pay question". Evidence from a double-bounded dichotomous choice model with heterogeneous anchori," Post-Print inserm-00636179, HAL.
    15. Lee, Juyong & Cho, Youngsang, 2018. "Inconvenience cost of mobile communication failure: The case of South Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 241-252.
    16. Cooper, Joseph C. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Signorello, Giovanni, 2001. "One-and-One-Half Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt09c663b2, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    17. Hermann Donfouet & P. Jeanty & P.-A. Mahieu, 2014. "Dealing with internal inconsistency in double-bounded dichotomous choice: an application to community-based health insurance," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 317-328, February.
    18. Giffoni, Francesco & Florio, Massimo, 2023. "Public support of science: A contingent valuation study of citizens' attitudes about CERN with and without information about implicit taxes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    19. Kai-Lih Chen, 1999. "Measuring values of wetlands in Taiwan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 2(1), pages 65-89, March.
    20. Joseph C. Cooper & Michael Hanemann & Giovanni Signorello, 2002. "One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 742-750, 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:12:p:3006-:d:1673148. 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.