IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v62y2019i5p843-861.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

For what it's worth: evaluating revealed preferences for green certification

Author

Listed:
  • Mallory E. Flowers
  • Daniel C. Matisoff
  • Douglas S. Noonan

Abstract

In a case study that examines the outcomes of a flexible information-based policy, we observe how organizations obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certification. We use a regression discontinuity analysis to identify practices used to upgrade certification tiers. This analysis reveals preferences for green certification strategies and, we argue, intimates the perceived motivations for green certification. We distinguish practices that potentially confer private gains through returns to efficiency and productivity investments, from practices that only provide public benefits. Data show that organizations strategically certify to avoid high-cost resource use, appeal to key stakeholders, and communicate building and organization quality. Builders upgrading to the highest tiers are more likely to deploy practices with private gains. Results suggest a willingness to extend short time horizons associated with energy-efficiency investments in exchange for marketing benefits. Our discussion notes the capacity for certifications to mitigate market barriers associated with the energy-efficiency gap.

Suggested Citation

  • Mallory E. Flowers & Daniel C. Matisoff & Douglas S. Noonan, 2019. "For what it's worth: evaluating revealed preferences for green certification," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(5), pages 843-861, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:62:y:2019:i:5:p:843-861
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2018.1447444
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2018.1447444
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2018.1447444?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:62:y:2019:i:5:p:843-861. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.