Preferences for community renewable energy investments in Europe

被引:46
作者
Cohen, Jed J. [1 ]
Azarova, Valeriya [2 ]
Kollmann, Andrea [1 ]
Reichl, Johannes [1 ]
机构
[1] Johannes Kepler Univ Linz, Energy Inst, Altenberger Str 69, A-4040 Linz, Austria
[2] Univ Munich, Ifo Inst, Leibniz Inst Econ Res, Poschingerstr 5, D-81679 Munich, Germany
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Energy cooperatives; Community investment; Energy citizenship; Energy transition; Choice experiment; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; CHOICE EXPERIMENT; WIND ENERGY; SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE; CITIZEN PARTICIPATION; CONSUMER PREFERENCES; HOUSEHOLD ADOPTION; SOLAR-ENERGY; FARMS; ELECTRICITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105386
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper presents the results of a choice experiment for investments in community renewable energy (CRE) projects administered across 31 European nations. In the sample of 18,037 respondents, a high level of interest in the CRE investments is observed, with 79% of respondents choosing to invest in at least one of the eight investment scenarios shown to them. Along with financial concerns, operational and siting aspects of the investment options are highly relevant to potential investors. Specifically, investments that are administered as an energy cooperative and run by a community organization are preferred to investments administered by utility companies. Heterogeneity across Europe is present in the preference for the installation to be visible from an investor's home, and thereby potentially affect the viewshed but also allow for a perception of self-sufficiency. The results suggest that energy policies hoping to increase the uptake of the CRE model across Europe would do well to focus on supporting local organizations to administer such projects, and to highlight any positive local economic impacts from renewable generation projects to potential investors.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 102 条
[1]   Critical assessment of five methods to correct for endogeneity in discrete-choice models [J].
Angelo Guevara, C. .
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART A-POLICY AND PRACTICE, 2015, 82 :240-254
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2018, OJ L, V328
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2017, PRIMER NONMARKET VAL
[4]   Designing local renewable energy communities to increase social acceptance: Evidence from a choice experiment in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland [J].
Azarova, Valeriya ;
Cohen, Jed ;
Friedl, Christina ;
Reichl, Johannes .
ENERGY POLICY, 2019, 132 :1176-1183
[5]   Exploring the impact of network tariffs on household electricity expenditures using load profiles and socio-economic characteristics [J].
Azarova, Valeriya ;
Engel, Dominik ;
Ferner, Cornelia ;
Kollmann, Andrea ;
Reichl, Johannes .
NATURE ENERGY, 2018, 3 (04) :317-325
[6]   Investigating the importance of motivations and barriers related to microgeneration uptake in the UK [J].
Balcombe, Paul ;
Rigby, Dan ;
Azapagic, Adisa .
APPLIED ENERGY, 2014, 130 :403-418
[7]   Random utility models in marketing research: a survey [J].
Baltas, G ;
Doyle, P .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH, 2001, 51 (02) :115-125
[8]  
Bateman I.J., 2002, EC VALUATION STATED
[9]   Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy [J].
Bauwens, Thomas ;
Devine-Wright, Patrick .
ENERGY POLICY, 2018, 118 :612-625
[10]   Explaining the diversity of motivations behind community renewable energy [J].
Bauwens, Thomas .
ENERGY POLICY, 2016, 93 :278-290