Discrete-continuous models of residential energy demand: A comprehensive review

IF 2.6 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Michael Hanemann , Xavier Labandeira , José M. Labeaga , Felipe Vásquez-Lavín
{"title":"Discrete-continuous models of residential energy demand: A comprehensive review","authors":"Michael Hanemann ,&nbsp;Xavier Labandeira ,&nbsp;José M. Labeaga ,&nbsp;Felipe Vásquez-Lavín","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2024.101426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper reviews forty years of research applying econometric models of discrete-continuous choice to analyze residential demand for energy. The review is primarily from the perspective of economic theory. We examine how well the utility-theoretic models developed in the literature match data that is commonly available on residential energy use, and we highlight the modeling challenges that have arisen through efforts to match theory with data. The literature contains two different formalizations of a corner solution. The first, by Dubin and McFadden (1984) and Hanemann (1984), models an extreme corner solution, in which only one of the discrete choice alternatives is chosen. While those papers share similarities, they also have some differences which have not been noticed or exposited in the literature. Subsequently, a formulation first implemented by Wales and Woodland (1983) and extended by Kim et al. (2002) and Bhat (2008) models a general corner solution, where several but not all of the discrete choice alternatives are chosen. Seventeen papers have employed one or another of these models to analyze residential demand for fuels and/or energy end uses in a variety of countries. We review issues that arose in these applications and identify some alternative model formulations that can be used in future work on residential energy demand.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"77 ","pages":"Article 101426"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765524000022/pdfft?md5=2c28b8d331581decc8ca73e0b70bc7ce&pid=1-s2.0-S0928765524000022-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resource and Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765524000022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reviews forty years of research applying econometric models of discrete-continuous choice to analyze residential demand for energy. The review is primarily from the perspective of economic theory. We examine how well the utility-theoretic models developed in the literature match data that is commonly available on residential energy use, and we highlight the modeling challenges that have arisen through efforts to match theory with data. The literature contains two different formalizations of a corner solution. The first, by Dubin and McFadden (1984) and Hanemann (1984), models an extreme corner solution, in which only one of the discrete choice alternatives is chosen. While those papers share similarities, they also have some differences which have not been noticed or exposited in the literature. Subsequently, a formulation first implemented by Wales and Woodland (1983) and extended by Kim et al. (2002) and Bhat (2008) models a general corner solution, where several but not all of the discrete choice alternatives are chosen. Seventeen papers have employed one or another of these models to analyze residential demand for fuels and/or energy end uses in a variety of countries. We review issues that arose in these applications and identify some alternative model formulations that can be used in future work on residential energy demand.

住宅能源需求的离散-连续模型:全面回顾
本文回顾了四十年来应用离散-连续选择计量经济学模型分析居民能源需求的研究成果。本文主要从经济理论的角度进行回顾。我们考察了文献中建立的效用理论模型与通常可用的住宅能源使用数据的匹配程度,并强调了理论与数据匹配过程中出现的建模挑战。文献中包含两种不同的角解决方案形式。第一种是 Dubin 和 McFadden(1984 年)以及 Hanemann(1984 年)提出的极端拐角解决方案模型,即只选择离散选择中的一种。虽然这两篇论文有相似之处,但它们也有一些不同之处,而这些不同之处尚未在文献中得到注意或阐述。随后,Wales 和 Woodland(1983 年)首先提出了一个公式,Kim 等人(2002 年)和 Bhat(2008 年)对其进行了扩展,建立了一个一般拐角解模型,在这个模型中,会选择多个离散选择方案,但不会选择所有方案。有 17 篇论文采用了这些模型中的一种或另一种来分析各国居民对燃料和/或能源终端用途的需求。我们回顾了这些应用中出现的问题,并确定了一些可用于未来住宅能源需求研究的替代模型公式。
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
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Resource and Energy Economics provides a forum for high level economic analysis of utilization and development of the earth natural resources. The subject matter encompasses questions of optimal production and consumption affecting energy, minerals, land, air and water, and includes analysis of firm and industry behavior, environmental issues and public policies. Implications for both developed and developing countries are of concern. The journal publishes high quality papers for an international audience. Innovative energy, resource and environmental analyses, including theoretical models and empirical studies are appropriate for publication in Resource and Energy Economics.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信