Trade-offs in energy policy: Evidence from a best-worst discrete choice experiment in Pakistan

Abstract

This study evaluates preference for energy reforms among a sampled group of participants in Pakistan, focusing on coal-dependent regions and transition-vulnerable groups to reduce CO₂ emissions using a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment. We examined five key policy attributes: CO₂ emission reduction, energy independence, employment impact, transition time, and changes in energy price. The findings reveal a modest willingness to pay for reducing CO₂ emissions (0.47 % of energy bills per 1 % reduction) and other policy attributes, though effect sizes are small compared to economic priorities like employment and affordability. Subgroup analysis identifies demographic variations in these trade-offs within the sample. Meanwhile, survey participants exhibited significant sensitivity to potential increases in energy bills, with affordability concerns outweighing environmental preference in most subgroups. This study contributes to the literature by quantifying preferences for energy transition attributes among a sampled Pakistani population using a BWS choice experiment, offering insights for policymakers in similar developing economies. The study recommends diversifying energy sources, including nuclear and hydro-energy, as a strategic approach to balance environmental goals with economic priorities for transition-vulnerable groups in Pakistan (e.g., coal-region residents, unemployed respondents). However, these recommendations are indicative and should be validated through broader engagement and research before nationwide implementation.