Skip to content

Water conservation through plumbing and nudging

  • Allcott, H. & Greenstone, M. Is there an energy efficiency gap? J. Econ. Perspective. 263–28 (2012).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Gillingham, K., Keyes, A. & Palmer, K. Advances in evaluating energy efficiency policies and programs. Annu. Rev. Resource. Econ. 10511–532 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Graff Zivin, J. & Novan, K. Upgrading efficiency and behavior: electricity savings from residential weatherization programs. Energy J. 371–23 (2016).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Allcott, H. & Greenstone, M. Measuring the Welfare Effects of Residential Energy Efficiency Programs Working Paper No. 23386 (NBER, 2017); https://doi.org/10.3386/w23386

  • Fowlie, M., Greenstone, M. & Wolfram, C. Do energy efficiency investments deliver? Evidence from the weatherization assistance program. QJ Econ. 1331597–1644 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Liang, J. et al. Do energy retrofits work? Evidence from commercial and residential buildings in Phoenix. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 92726–743 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Davis, LW, Fuchs, A. & Gertler, P. Cash for Coolers: evaluating a large-scale appliance replacement program in Mexico. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 6207–238 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Jacobsen, GD & Kotchen, MJ Are building codes effective at saving energy? Evidence from residential billing data in Florida. Rev. Econ. Stat. 9534–49 (2013).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Levinson, A. How much energy do building energy codes save? Evidence from California houses. Am. Econ. Rev. 1062867–2894 (2016).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Qiu, Y. & Kahn, ME Better sustainability assessment of green buildings with high-frequency data. Nat. Sustain. 1642–649 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Novan, K., Smith, A. & Zhou, T. Residential building codes do save energy: evidence from hourly smart-meter data. Rev. Econ. Stat. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00967 (2020).

  • Kotchen, MJ Longer-run evidence on whether building energy codes reduce residential energy consumption. J. Assoc. Environ. Resource. Econ. 4135–153 (2017).

    Google Scholar

  • Mayer, PW, DeOreo, WB, Towler, E. & Lewis, DM Residential Indoor Water Conservation Study: Evaluation of High Efficiency Indoor Plumbing Fixture Retrofits in Single-Family Homes in the East Bay Municipal Utility District Service Area, Aquacraft, Inc. Water Engineering and Management (2003).

  • Water-Efficient Plumbing Fixtures Reduce Water Consumption and Wastewater Flows (United States General Accounting Office, 2000); https://www.gao.gov/assets/rced-00-232.pdf

  • Residential End Uses of Water (Water Research Foundation, 2016); https://www.circleofblue.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/WRF_REU2016.pdf

  • Price, JI, Chermak, JM & Felardo, J. Low-flow appliances and household water demand: an evaluation of demand-side management policy in Albuquerque, New Mexico. J. Environ. Manage. 13337–44 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Bennear, LS, Lee, JM & Taylor, LO Municipal rebate programs for environmental retrofits: an evaluation of additionality and cost-effectiveness. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 32350–372 (2013).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Allcott, H. Social norms and energy conservation. J. Public Econ. 951082–1095 (2011).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Brent, DA, Cook, JH & Olsen, S. Social comparisons, household water use, and participation in utility conservation programs: evidence from three randomized trials. J. Assoc. Environ. Resource. Econ. 2597–627 (2015).

    Google Scholar

  • Jessoe, K., Lade, GE, Loge, F. & Spang, E. Spillovers from behavioral interventions: experimental evidence from water and energy use. J. Assoc. Environ. Resource. Econ. 8315–346 (2021).

    Google Scholar

  • Andor, MA & Fels, KM Behavioral economics and energy conservation—a systematic review of non-price interventions and their causal effects. Ecol. Econ. 148178–210 (2018).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Ferraro, PJ, Miranda, JJ & Price, MK The persistence of treatment effects with norm-based policy instruments: evidence from a randomized environmental policy experiment. Am. Econ. Rev. 101318–322 (2011).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Bernedo, M., Ferraro, PJ & Price, M. The persistent impacts of norm-based messaging and their implications for water conservation. J. Consum. Policy 37437–452 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Ferraro, PJ & Price, MK Using nonpecuniary strategies to influence behavior: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. Rev. Econ. Stat. 9564–73 (2013).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Allcott, H. & Rogers, T. The short-run and long-run effects of behavioral interventions: experimental evidence from energy conservation. Am. Econ. Rev. 1043003–3037 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Newell, RG & Siikamäki, J. Nudging energy efficiency behavior: the role of information labels. J. Assoc. Environ. Resource. Econ. 1555–598 (2014).

    Google Scholar

  • Gilbert, B. & Graff Zivin, J. Dynamic salience with intermittent billing: evidence from smart electricity meters. J. Econ. Behave. Organ. 107176–190 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Jessoe, K. & Rapson, D. Knowledge is (less) power: experimental evidence from residential energy use. Am. Econ. Rev. 1041417–1438 (2014).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Wichman, CJ Information provision and consumer behavior: a natural experiment in billing frequency. J. Public Econ. 15213–33 (2017).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Costa, DL & Kahn, ME Energy conservation ‘nudges’ and environmentalist ideology: evidence from a randomized residential electricity field experiment. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 11680–702 (2013).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Allcott, H. & Kessler, JB The welfare effects of nudges: a case study of energy use social comparisons. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 11236–276 (2019).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Sunstein, CR The distributional effects of nudges. Nat. Um. Behave. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01236-z (2021).

  • Allcott, H. Site selection bias in program evaluation. QJ Econ. 1301117–1165 (2015).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Nudges that don’t nudge. Nat. Hum. Behave. 4121 (2020).

  • WaterSense (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2021); https://www.epa.gov/watersense/watersense-products

  • Hanna, R., Duflo, E. & Greenstone, M. Up in smoke: the influence of household behavior on the long-run impact of improved cooking stoves. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 880–114 (2016).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Mideksa, TK & Kallbekken, S. The impact of climate change on the electricity market: a review. Energy Policy 383579–3585 (2010).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Deschênes, O. & Greenstone, M. Climate change, mortality, and adaptation: evidence from annual fluctuations in weather in the US. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 3152–185 (2011).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Agarwal, S., Sing, TF & Yang, Y. The impact of transboundary haze pollution on household utilities consumption. Energy Econ. 85104591 (2020).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Schultz, PW, Nolan, JM, Cialdini, RB, Goldstein, NJ & Griskevicius, V. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18429–434 (2007).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Brent, DA et al. What causes heterogeneous responses to social comparison messages for water conservation? Environ. Resource. Econ. 77503–537 (2020).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Agarwal, S., Rengarajan, S., Sing, TF & Yang, Y. Nudges from school children and electricity conservation: evidence from the ‘Project Carbon Zero’ campaign in Singapore. Energy Econ. 6129–41 (2017).

    Article Google Scholar

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.

    BPISSUENEWS