{"title":"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?","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":"{\"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}","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}
Split Incentives and Endogenous Inattention in Home Retrofits Uptake: a Story of Selection on Unobservables?
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.