DDRIG in DRMS: Policy Interactions and Consumer Decision-making in the Market for Energy-Efficient Products.

提供信息和财政奖励是能源效率政策的重要组成部分。前者解决的问题是市场无法提供关于购买节能产品的成本和收益的完整信息，而后者解决的问题是消费者没有充分了解环境产品和服务的社会价值。利用经济学和心理学的见解，本研究试图理解为什么使用信息提供和财政激励作为工具的计划无法缩小“能源效率差距”，即美国家庭实际采用节能技术与期望采用节能技术之间的差距。本研究开发了干预措施，提供了购买节能产品的成本节约和排放效益的信息，同一产品的折扣，或两者兼而有之，并剖析了这些干预措施的行为影响。因此，这项工作具有以下更广泛的影响：通过减少能源使用来改善社会福利，这节省了消费者的钱并缓解了人为的气候变化；通过更好地把握科学素养的驱动因素和障碍，促进科学进步。本研究探讨了能源效率差距的两种解释：1)同时使用多种政策工具时政策相互作用的可能性；2)政策选择不仅影响人们最终做出的选择，而且影响人们做出选择的过程。这些解释导致了一个理论上有动机的研究设计，包括一个在线调查实验，在这个实验中，受访者被随机分配到不同的处理中，这些处理改变了代表不同政策组合的信息和激励。调查对象对节能产品的需求，并收集其决策和决策预测因素的其他数据，包括其人口统计、行为、认知和态度特征的数据。调查结果与实际购买决定相关联，以激励受访者的选择的现实性。结果为导致对节能产品需求增加的干预措施提供了见解。干预措施包括信息和激励之间的相互作用，例如关于购买节能产品的排放影响的信息是否可以有效地补充成本信息，以及促使受访者考虑其偏好是否可以增加对能源效率的需求。通过探索不同的政策选择和政策反应背后的潜在行为机制，本项目为政策设计提供了信息。它还为政策执行提供指导，并有助于更深入地了解受政策影响的消费者决策。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Information provision and financial incentives are important components of energy efficiency policy. The former addresses the failure of the market to provide complete information on the costs and benefits of purchasing energy-efficient products, while the latter addresses the fact that consumers do not capture the full social value of environmental goods and services. Using insights from economics and psychology, this research seeks to understand why programs using information provision and financial incentives as tools have been unable to close the “energy efficiency gap,” the gap between actual and desired adoption of energy-efficient technology, among households in the United States. This research develops interventions that provide information on the cost-savings and emissions benefits of purchasing an energy-efficient product, discounts on that same product, or both, and dissects the behavioral effects of those interventions. As a result, this work has the following broader impacts: improved societal welfare through energy use reduction, which saves consumers money and mitigates anthropogenic climate change; and promotion of the progress of science through an enhanced grasp on the drivers of, and obstacles to scientific literacy.This research investigates two explanations for the energy efficiency gap: 1) the possibility of policy interactions when multiple policy instruments are simultaneously used; and 2) the possibility that policy choice not only impacts the final choices people make but also the process through which people make choices. These explanations lead to a theoretically motivated research design that consists of an online survey-experiment in which respondents are randomized into different treatments that vary the information and incentives representing different policy mixes. Respondents’ demand for an energy-efficient product is elicited, and other data on their decision-making and predictors of their decision-making are collected, including data on their demographic, behavioral, cognitive, and attitudinal characteristics. Survey responses are linked to actual purchase decisions to incentivize the realism of respondents’ choices. Results give insights into interventions leading to increase in demand for an energy-efficient product. Interventions include interactions between information and incentives, such as whether information on the emissions impact of purchasing energy-efficient products can effectively supplement cost information, and whether prompting respondents to deliberate over their preferences can increase demand for energy efficiency. By exploring different policy options and potential behavioral mechanisms behind policy responses, this project informs policy design. It also advances guidance on policy implementation and contributes to a deeper understanding of consumer decision-making as affected by policies.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.