评估荷兰ISDE补贴计划的净效应——评估附加性的评估方法的比较

IF 0.4 Q4 ECONOMICS
R. Niessink
{"title":"评估荷兰ISDE补贴计划的净效应——评估附加性的评估方法的比较","authors":"R. Niessink","doi":"10.33423/jabe.v25i3.6198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The national government encourages Dutch households and businesses to use less natural gas and more sustainable heat, which reduces CO2 emissions. The Sustainable Energy Investment Subsidy (Dutch: Investeringssubsidie Duurzame Energie or ISDE), which has been in place since 2016, provides a subsidy for the purchase of solar boilers, heat pumps, biomass boilers and pellet stoves. The scheme is meant for both private individuals and business users. An important element in the evaluation of the ISDE was the ‘additionality’ of the scheme. This was evaluated by the Dutch organization for applied natural scientific research (TNO) in 2018 and by SEO Economic Research (SEO) in 2019. In this paper the evaluation methods are described, compared and critically reviewed in order to identify uncertainties and limitations of the methods and possible improvements. As is evidenced by the fact that different evaluation methods come to very different results for the additionality (percentages) of the ISDE devices, it becomes apparent that the ‘true’ additionality of the ISDE scheme is hard to determine. It depends on many factors elaborated on in this paper. An important limitation in the evaluation is the absence of a control group, which is why was opted for a survey-based method in which questions were asked about what would have happened without ISDE. The reasons for the (mostly) low additionality are (probably to a large extent) related to the evaluation methods used. Several biases in surveys could result in an overestimation of free-riders, in turn indicating a low additional effect. Quantifying free-riders through surveys remains a challenge. It deserves attention to investigate the possibilities to optimize survey questions as much as possible towards this goal. A possible manner to achieve this is by including additional questions about other non-financial motives for installing the appliance and what other policies played a role. Adding a question about the age of the replaced heating installation could help to identify end-of-life replacements, which is nonadditional. This paper shows that explaining the used definition (scope) of additionality in detail is key to let readers interpret results correctly. It also shows that evaluating whether non-financial motives or another policy instrument played a deciding role in the installed appliances is paramount in order to estimate additionality, which is a complex task for which there is no universal solution.","PeriodicalId":43552,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research","volume":"452 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Net Effect of the ISDE Subsidy Scheme in the Netherlands – Comparison of Evaluation Methods to Estimate Additionality\",\"authors\":\"R. Niessink\",\"doi\":\"10.33423/jabe.v25i3.6198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The national government encourages Dutch households and businesses to use less natural gas and more sustainable heat, which reduces CO2 emissions. The Sustainable Energy Investment Subsidy (Dutch: Investeringssubsidie Duurzame Energie or ISDE), which has been in place since 2016, provides a subsidy for the purchase of solar boilers, heat pumps, biomass boilers and pellet stoves. The scheme is meant for both private individuals and business users. An important element in the evaluation of the ISDE was the ‘additionality’ of the scheme. This was evaluated by the Dutch organization for applied natural scientific research (TNO) in 2018 and by SEO Economic Research (SEO) in 2019. In this paper the evaluation methods are described, compared and critically reviewed in order to identify uncertainties and limitations of the methods and possible improvements. As is evidenced by the fact that different evaluation methods come to very different results for the additionality (percentages) of the ISDE devices, it becomes apparent that the ‘true’ additionality of the ISDE scheme is hard to determine. It depends on many factors elaborated on in this paper. An important limitation in the evaluation is the absence of a control group, which is why was opted for a survey-based method in which questions were asked about what would have happened without ISDE. The reasons for the (mostly) low additionality are (probably to a large extent) related to the evaluation methods used. Several biases in surveys could result in an overestimation of free-riders, in turn indicating a low additional effect. Quantifying free-riders through surveys remains a challenge. It deserves attention to investigate the possibilities to optimize survey questions as much as possible towards this goal. A possible manner to achieve this is by including additional questions about other non-financial motives for installing the appliance and what other policies played a role. Adding a question about the age of the replaced heating installation could help to identify end-of-life replacements, which is nonadditional. This paper shows that explaining the used definition (scope) of additionality in detail is key to let readers interpret results correctly. It also shows that evaluating whether non-financial motives or another policy instrument played a deciding role in the installed appliances is paramount in order to estimate additionality, which is a complex task for which there is no universal solution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43552,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research\",\"volume\":\"452 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33423/jabe.v25i3.6198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33423/jabe.v25i3.6198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

荷兰政府鼓励荷兰家庭和企业少用天然气,多用可持续供暖,这样可以减少二氧化碳的排放。可持续能源投资补贴(荷兰语:investingssubsidie Duurzame Energie或ISDE)自2016年起实施,为购买太阳能锅炉、热泵、生物质锅炉和颗粒炉提供补贴。该方案适用于个人和企业用户。评估ISDE的一个重要因素是该方案的“附加性”。这是荷兰应用自然科学研究组织(TNO)在2018年和SEO经济研究(SEO)在2019年进行的评估。本文对评估方法进行了描述、比较和批判性审查,以确定方法的不确定性和局限性以及可能的改进。不同的评估方法对ISDE设备的附加性(百分比)得出的结果非常不同,这一事实证明,很明显,ISDE方案的“真正”附加性很难确定。这取决于本文阐述的许多因素。评估的一个重要限制是没有对照组,这就是为什么我们选择了基于调查的方法,在这种方法中,我们询问了如果没有ISDE会发生什么。(大部分)低附加性的原因(可能在很大程度上)与所使用的评价方法有关。调查中的一些偏差可能导致对搭便车者的高估,从而表明附加效应很低。通过调查对搭便车者进行量化仍然是一个挑战。值得注意的是,为了实现这一目标,调查尽可能优化调查问题的可能性。实现这一目标的一种可能方法是,包括关于安装设备的其他非经济动机以及其他哪些政策发挥了作用的附加问题。增加一个关于被更换的加热装置的使用年限的问题,可以帮助识别寿命结束的更换,这是不额外的。本文表明,详细解释附加性的使用定义(范围)是让读者正确解读结果的关键。它还表明,为了估计额外性,评估非金融动机或其他政策工具是否在安装设备中发挥了决定性作用是至关重要的,这是一项复杂的任务,没有普遍的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the Net Effect of the ISDE Subsidy Scheme in the Netherlands – Comparison of Evaluation Methods to Estimate Additionality
The national government encourages Dutch households and businesses to use less natural gas and more sustainable heat, which reduces CO2 emissions. The Sustainable Energy Investment Subsidy (Dutch: Investeringssubsidie Duurzame Energie or ISDE), which has been in place since 2016, provides a subsidy for the purchase of solar boilers, heat pumps, biomass boilers and pellet stoves. The scheme is meant for both private individuals and business users. An important element in the evaluation of the ISDE was the ‘additionality’ of the scheme. This was evaluated by the Dutch organization for applied natural scientific research (TNO) in 2018 and by SEO Economic Research (SEO) in 2019. In this paper the evaluation methods are described, compared and critically reviewed in order to identify uncertainties and limitations of the methods and possible improvements. As is evidenced by the fact that different evaluation methods come to very different results for the additionality (percentages) of the ISDE devices, it becomes apparent that the ‘true’ additionality of the ISDE scheme is hard to determine. It depends on many factors elaborated on in this paper. An important limitation in the evaluation is the absence of a control group, which is why was opted for a survey-based method in which questions were asked about what would have happened without ISDE. The reasons for the (mostly) low additionality are (probably to a large extent) related to the evaluation methods used. Several biases in surveys could result in an overestimation of free-riders, in turn indicating a low additional effect. Quantifying free-riders through surveys remains a challenge. It deserves attention to investigate the possibilities to optimize survey questions as much as possible towards this goal. A possible manner to achieve this is by including additional questions about other non-financial motives for installing the appliance and what other policies played a role. Adding a question about the age of the replaced heating installation could help to identify end-of-life replacements, which is nonadditional. This paper shows that explaining the used definition (scope) of additionality in detail is key to let readers interpret results correctly. It also shows that evaluating whether non-financial motives or another policy instrument played a deciding role in the installed appliances is paramount in order to estimate additionality, which is a complex task for which there is no universal solution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
30.80%
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信