IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cam/camdae/2434.html

Some searches may not work properly. We apologize for the inconvenience.

   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using rewards and penalties to incentivize energy and water saving behaviour in agriculture – Evidence from a choice experiment in Punjab

Author

Listed:
  • Kaur, S.
  • Pollitt, M. G.

Abstract

The policy of free electricity since 1997 is hugely popular with farmers in Punjab who are its biggest beneficiaries. Successive Governments have either lacked the courage or willingness to pursue market oriented electricity sector reforms even though the adverse con-sequences are increasingly visible. Over the past few decades, experts have expressed concern over the rapidly receding level of the water table and forecast of desertification, as well as the financial burden on the electricity distribution utility and government. Withdrawing free electricity and charging a price for electricity is a huge challenge. This research aims to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for electricity and consider preferences for an annual free electricity limit with reward for meter installation and a novel incentive-penalty scheme designed to reward low consumption and discourage over-consumption. A discrete choice experiment assuming random probit and multinomial logit choice behaviour model is deployed to estimate the model parameters. We find that more than 82% of respondents are willing to accept an entitlement to a free electricity limit – with a reward for consuming less than this – rather than the current policy of free and unmetered electricity. We also find that the WTP for electricity increases with higher entitlements. Considering the WTP alone, the results suggest that increasing the electricity price can be acceptable to farmers. Further research is needed to develop a pricing strategy that considers the inter-relatedness between electricity entitlement, saving incentive and price.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaur, S. & Pollitt, M. G., 2024. "Using rewards and penalties to incentivize energy and water saving behaviour in agriculture – Evidence from a choice experiment in Punjab," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2434, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  • Handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:2434
    Note: mgp20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/research-files/repec/cam/pdf/cwpe2434.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zekri, Slim, 2008. "Using economic incentives and regulations to reduce seawater intrusion in the Batinah coastal area of Oman," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 243-252, March.
    2. Sun, Chuanwang & Lin, Boqiang, 2013. "Reforming residential electricity tariff in China: Block tariffs pricing approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 741-752.
    3. Shah, Tushaar & Scott, Christopher A. & Kishore, Avinash & Sharma, Abhishek, 2004. "Energy-irrigation nexus in South Asia: Improving groundwater conservation and power sector viability," IWMI Research Reports 44557, International Water Management Institute.
    4. Prasanna, Ashreeta & Mahmoodi, Jasmin & Brosch, Tobias & Patel, Martin K., 2018. "Recent experiences with tariffs for saving electricity in households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 514-522.
    5. Blankenship, Brian & Wong, Jason Chun Yu & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2019. "Explaining willingness to pay for pricing reforms that improve electricity service in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 459-469.
    6. Mandy Ryan & Jenny Hughes, 1997. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Assess Women's Preferences for Miscarriage Management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 261-273, May.
    7. Shah, Tushaar & Scott, C. & Kishore, A. & Sharma, A., 2003. "Energy-irrigation nexus in South Asia: Improving groundwater conservation and power sector viability," IWMI Research Reports H033885, International Water Management Institute.
    8. Bose, Ranjan Kumar & Shukla, Megha, 2001. "Electricity tariffs in India: an assessment of consumers' ability and willingness to pay in Gujarat," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 465-478, May.
    9. Bertoldi, Paolo & Rezessy, Silvia & Oikonomou, Vlasis, 2013. "Rewarding energy savings rather than energy efficiency: Exploring the concept of a feed-in tariff for energy savings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 526-535.
    10. Stirling Bryan & Martin Buxton & Robert Sheldon & Alison Grant, 1998. "Magnetic resonance imaging for the investigation of knee injuries: an investigation of preferences," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(7), pages 595-603, November.
    11. Kennedy, Ryan & Mahajan, Aseem & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2019. "Quality of service predicts willingness to pay for household electricity connections in rural India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 319-326.
    12. Koichiro Ito & Takanori Ida & Makoto Tanaka, 2018. "Moral Suasion and Economic Incentives: Field Experimental Evidence from Energy Demand," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 240-267, February.
    13. Ram Fishman & Upmanu Lall & Vijay Modi & Nikunj Parekh, 2016. "Can Electricity Pricing Save India’s Groundwater? Field Evidence from a Novel Policy Mechanism in Gujarat," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(4), pages 819-855.
    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. Mahmoodi, Jasmin & Prasanna, Ashreeta & Hille, Stefanie & Patel, Martin K. & Brosch, Tobias, 2018. "Combining “carrot and stick” to incentivize sustainability in households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 31-40.
    2. M. Dinesh Kumar, 2016. "Distressed Elephants: Policy Initiatives for Sustainable Groundwater Management in India," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 5(1), pages 51-62, January.
    3. Sidhu, Balsher Singh & Kandlikar, Milind & Ramankutty, Navin, 2020. "Power tariffs for groundwater irrigation in India: A comparative analysis of the environmental, equity, and economic tradeoffs," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    4. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    5. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    6. Shah, Tushaar, 2009. "Climatic Change and Groundwater: India\u2019s Opportunities for Mitigation and Adaptation," Conference Papers h042693, International Water Management Institute.
    7. Crow, Ben & Singh, Nirvikar, 2009. "The Management of International Rivers as Demands Grow and Supplies Tighten: India, China, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh," Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, Working Paper Series qt48n485pc, Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, UC Santa Cruz.
    8. Wang, Bo & Deng, Nana & Li, Haoxiang & Zhao, Wenhui & Liu, Jie & Wang, Zhaohua, 2021. "Effect and mechanism of monetary incentives and moral suasion on residential peak-hour electricity usage," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Bigerna, Simona & Choudhary, Piyush & Kumar Jain, Nikunj & Micheli, Silvia & Polinori, Paolo, 2022. "Avoiding unanticipated power outages: households’ willingness to pay in India," MPRA Paper 114160, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Kara Hanson & Barbara McPake & Pamela Nakamba & Luke Archard, 2005. "Preferences for hospital quality in Zambia: results from a discrete choice experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 687-701, July.
    11. Brandsma, Jeroen S. & Blasch, Julia E., 2019. "One for all? – The impact of different types of energy feedback and goal setting on individuals’ motivation to conserve electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Özdemir, Semra & Johnson, F. Reed & Hauber, A. Brett, 2009. "Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 894-901, July.
    13. Malik, R. P. S., 2009. "Energy regulations as a demand management option: potentials, problems and prospects," IWMI Books, Reports H042161, International Water Management Institute.
    14. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2006. "Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(8), pages 797-811, August.
    15. Sudatta Ray & Hemant K. Pullabhotla, 2023. "The changing impact of rural electrification on Indian agriculture," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Madeleine King & Jordan Louviere & Rosalie Viney & Angela Yeoh, 2002. "Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 457-465, July.
    17. Stirling Bryan & Lisa Gold & Rob Sheldon & Martin Buxton, 2000. "Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(5), pages 385-395, July.
    18. Chao-yo Cheng & Johannes Urpelainen, 2016. "Unawareness and indifference to economic reform among the public: evidence from India’s power sector reform," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 211-239, August.
    19. Bazilian, Morgan & Rogner, Holger & Howells, Mark & Hermann, Sebastian & Arent, Douglas & Gielen, Dolf & Steduto, Pasquale & Mueller, Alexander & Komor, Paul & Tol, Richard S.J. & Yumkella, Kandeh K., 2011. "Considering the energy, water and food nexus: Towards an integrated modelling approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7896-7906.
    20. Magalhaes, M. & Ringler, C. & Verma, Shilp & Schmitter, Petra, 2021. "Accelerating rural energy access for agricultural transformation: contribution of the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems to transforming food, land and water systems in a climate cri," IWMI Books, Reports H050910, International Water Management Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agriculture; energy water nexus; entitlement; incentive; groundwater; irrigation; electricity consumption; paddy; subsidy; electricity pricing; discrete choice; Punjab;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cam:camdae:2434. 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: Jake Dyer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/ .

    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.