Split Incentives and Endogenous Inattention in Home Retrofits Uptake: a Story of Selection on Unobservables?

Stefano Cellini
{"title":"Split Incentives and Endogenous Inattention in Home Retrofits Uptake: a Story of Selection on Unobservables?","authors":"Stefano Cellini","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3933339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers have tested for imperfect information in rental sector and housing-induced returns heterogeneity among occupiers by estimating cross-sectional single-equation models. This approach leads to the estimation of conspicuous wedges in insulation investment propensity between tenants vs owner-occupiers (≥ 20 percentage points) and low-return vs high-return dwellings households (0.10-0.20pp) in the UK. I complement these findings by analysing their sensitivity to assumptions on unobservables à la Oster (2019) and Cinelli and Hazlett (2020). According to the former’s parametrization, under equally strong observables and unobservables, the effect of split incentives on loft/wall insulation investment can be up to 40%/26% lower, while the effect of housing choices is unaltered. Instead, the latter’s strategy suggests that an equal selection scenario would reduce by at least 60% the split incentives estimates, whereas non-random housing would just cause the estimates to drop by less than one third. Hence, I quantify how easily research conclusions may be severely affected by a certain degree of selection and offer some convenient tools to integrate in the assessment of the sources of under-retrofitting with cross-sectional data.","PeriodicalId":400187,"journal":{"name":"EnergyRN: Energy Economics (Topic)","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EnergyRN: Energy Economics (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3933339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Researchers have tested for imperfect information in rental sector and housing-induced returns heterogeneity among occupiers by estimating cross-sectional single-equation models. This approach leads to the estimation of conspicuous wedges in insulation investment propensity between tenants vs owner-occupiers (≥ 20 percentage points) and low-return vs high-return dwellings households (0.10-0.20pp) in the UK. I complement these findings by analysing their sensitivity to assumptions on unobservables à la Oster (2019) and Cinelli and Hazlett (2020). According to the former’s parametrization, under equally strong observables and unobservables, the effect of split incentives on loft/wall insulation investment can be up to 40%/26% lower, while the effect of housing choices is unaltered. Instead, the latter’s strategy suggests that an equal selection scenario would reduce by at least 60% the split incentives estimates, whereas non-random housing would just cause the estimates to drop by less than one third. Hence, I quantify how easily research conclusions may be severely affected by a certain degree of selection and offer some convenient tools to integrate in the assessment of the sources of under-retrofitting with cross-sectional data.
家庭改造吸收中的分裂激励和内生忽视:一个关于不可观察的选择的故事?
研究人员通过估计横截面单方程模型,检验了租赁部门的不完全信息和住房诱发的租户回报异质性。这种方法导致了对英国租户与自住业主(≥20个百分点)和低回报与高回报住宅家庭(0.10-0.20个百分点)之间绝缘投资倾向的明显楔形的估计。我通过分析它们对不可观测假设的敏感性来补充这些发现(la Oster(2019)和Cinelli和Hazlett(2020))。根据前者的参数化,在同样强的可观察性和不可观察性条件下,分割激励对阁楼/墙壁保温投资的影响最高可降低40%/26%,而住房选择的影响不变。相反,后者的策略表明,在平等选择的情况下,分配激励的估计值至少会降低60%,而非随机住房只会导致估计值下降不到三分之一。因此,我量化了研究结论如何容易受到一定程度的选择的严重影响,并提供了一些方便的工具,以便与截面数据整合在改造不足来源的评估中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信