Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

"Wild" tariff schemes: Evidence from the Republic of Georgia

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11230%2F22%3A10448846" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11230/22:10448846 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Nalezeny alternativní kódy

    RIV/00216208:11690/22:10448846

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=fe~f8o3_pB" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=fe~f8o3_pB</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106030" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106030</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    "Wild" tariff schemes: Evidence from the Republic of Georgia

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    Consumers often struggle to grasp complicated pricing plans, including increasing block rate (IBR) schemes, which have been used for decades by utilities in many parts of the world. The assumption that they encourage conservation has, however, recently been challenged (Ito, 2014). We take advantage of the unique IBR tariffs for electricity in the Republic of Georgia-where &quot;overage&quot; is penalized more heavily than in conventional IBRs-to ask whether consumers respond to price, and to which price specifically.Based on the data from several waves of the Georgia Household Budget Survey, we find evidence of &quot;notches,&quot; namely missing probability mass on the right of the lowest block cutoff and a spike in the frequency of monthly consumption to the left of it. This is in contrast with the &quot;bunching&quot; pattern predicted by Borenstein (2009) when demand is not completely inelastic, and with the empirical evidence in Borenstein (2009) and Ito (2014).During our study period (2012-2019), the tariffs were revised-both downwards and upwards-to a different extent in different blocks and at different times across the regions of the country. We devise difference-indifference study designs that exploit such natural experiments, finding that consumption did increase when the tariffs were reduced and fell when they were raised. Ours is one of the few studies that exploits quasi experimental conditions to examine whether the response to price changes is symmetric. We find that it is, in that the implied price elasticity of electricity demand is in both cases 0.3.Finally, we fit an electricity demand function, which results in an even stronger price elasticity (-0.5). Households seem to respond to the actual, average price (here equal to the marginal price) rather than to expected price. Our estimates of the price elasticity bode well for a carbon tax, an energy tax, or simple tariff increases to help curb imports of gas-fired electricity from neighboring countries.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    "Wild" tariff schemes: Evidence from the Republic of Georgia

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    Consumers often struggle to grasp complicated pricing plans, including increasing block rate (IBR) schemes, which have been used for decades by utilities in many parts of the world. The assumption that they encourage conservation has, however, recently been challenged (Ito, 2014). We take advantage of the unique IBR tariffs for electricity in the Republic of Georgia-where &quot;overage&quot; is penalized more heavily than in conventional IBRs-to ask whether consumers respond to price, and to which price specifically.Based on the data from several waves of the Georgia Household Budget Survey, we find evidence of &quot;notches,&quot; namely missing probability mass on the right of the lowest block cutoff and a spike in the frequency of monthly consumption to the left of it. This is in contrast with the &quot;bunching&quot; pattern predicted by Borenstein (2009) when demand is not completely inelastic, and with the empirical evidence in Borenstein (2009) and Ito (2014).During our study period (2012-2019), the tariffs were revised-both downwards and upwards-to a different extent in different blocks and at different times across the regions of the country. We devise difference-indifference study designs that exploit such natural experiments, finding that consumption did increase when the tariffs were reduced and fell when they were raised. Ours is one of the few studies that exploits quasi experimental conditions to examine whether the response to price changes is symmetric. We find that it is, in that the implied price elasticity of electricity demand is in both cases 0.3.Finally, we fit an electricity demand function, which results in an even stronger price elasticity (-0.5). Households seem to respond to the actual, average price (here equal to the marginal price) rather than to expected price. Our estimates of the price elasticity bode well for a carbon tax, an energy tax, or simple tariff increases to help curb imports of gas-fired electricity from neighboring countries.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    50201 - Economic Theory

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    <a href="/cs/project/GX19-26812X" target="_blank" >GX19-26812X: Excelence v ekonomickém výzkumu energetické efektivity a modelování dopadů - FE3M</a><br>

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2022

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    Energy Economics

  • ISSN

    0140-9883

  • e-ISSN

    1873-6181

  • Svazek periodika

    110

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    June 2022

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    NL - Nizozemsko

  • Počet stran výsledku

    23

  • Strana od-do

    106030

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    000803795000004

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-85129381975