The cost-effectiveness of energy technology upgrade programs critically depends on free riding . This paper assesses ex ante the effects of free riding on the cost-effectiveness of a rebate program that promotes the adoption of energy-efficient heating systems , relying on contingent valuation choice experiments carried out through identical representative surveys in eight EU Members States. The analysis distinguishes between strong and weak free riders: strong free riders already plan to adopt a new heating system in the next five years; weak free riders decide to purchase once propositioned with an attractive technology package (and therefore do not require a rebate to adopt). The reservation rebates for incentivized adopters (those who decide to adopt because of a rebate) differ substantially across countries. On average, they amount to approximately 40% of the heating system's purchasing price, suggesting generally high opportunity costs for premature upgrades. The reservation rebate and weak free-ridership vary with income, risk and time preferences, and environmental identity. At a rebate level that corresponds to half the purchase price of the offered heating system, the estimated share of free riders exceeded 50% for most countries, with a typically higher share of weak free riders than strong free riders. Specific rebate cost estimates (in €/tCO 2 ) differ considerably across countries, suggesting that cooperation can yield budgetary benefits.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olsthoorn et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: