1932

Abstract

This article presents a critical assessment of 40 years of research that may be brought under the umbrella of energy efficiency, spanning different aggregations and domains—from individual producing and consuming agents to economy-wide effects to the role of innovation to the influence of policy. After 40 years of research, energy efficiency initiatives are generally perceived as highly effective. Innovation has contributed to lowering energy technology costs and increasing energy productivity. Energy efficiency programs in many cases have reduced energy use per unit of economic output and have been associated with net improvements in welfare, emission reductions, or both. Rebound effects at the macro level still warrant careful policy attention, as they may be nontrivial. Complexity of energy efficiency dynamics calls for further methodological and empirical advances, multidisciplinary approaches, and granular data at the service level for research in this field to be of greatest societal benefit.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-084937
2021-10-18
2024-06-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/energy/46/1/annurev-environ-012320-084937.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-084937&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1. 
    Rubin ES, Cooper RN, Frosch RA, Lee TH, Marland G et al. 1992. Realistic mitigation options for global warming. Science 257:5067148–266
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2. 
    NRC (Natl. Res. Counc.) 2010. Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use Washington, DC: The National Academies Press https://doi.org/10.17226/12794
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  3. 3. 
    Azevedo IML. 2014. Consumer end-use energy efficiency and rebound effects. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 39:393–418
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4. 
    Srinivasan S, Mosdale R, Stevens P, Yang C 1999. Fuel cells: reaching the era of clean and efficient power generation in the twenty-first century. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 24:281–328
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5. 
    Koomey JG, Matthews HS, Williams E 2013. Smart everything: Will intelligent systems reduce resource use?. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 38:311–43
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6. 
    Kononov Y. 1990. Impact of economic restructuring of energy efficiency in the USSR. Annu. Rev. Energy 15:505–12
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7. 
    Friedmann R, Sheinbaum C. 1998. Mexican electric end-use efficiency: experiences to date. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 23:225–52
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8. 
    Schipper L, Howarth R, Geller H. 1990. United States energy use from 1973 to 1987: the impacts of improved efficiency. Annu. Rev. Energy 15:455–504
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9. 
    Nadel S. 2002. Appliance and equipment efficiency standards. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 27:159–92
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10. 
    Berndt ER. 1978. Aggregate energy, efficiency, and productivity measurement. Annu. Rev. Energy 3:225–73
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11. 
    Rosenfeld A. 1999. The art of energy efficiency: protecting the environment with better technology. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 24:33–82
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12. 
    Jaskow P. 1995. Utility-subsidized energy-efficiency programs. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 20:526–34
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13. 
    Patterson MG. 1996. What is energy efficiency? Concepts, indicators and methodological issues. Energy Policy 24:5377–90
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14. 
    Cleveland CJ, Kaufmann RK, Stern DI. 2000. Aggregation and the role of energy in the economy. Ecol. Econ. 32:2301–17
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15. 
    Pérez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, Velázquez D. 2013. Revisiting energy efficiency fundamentals. Energy Effic 6:2239–54
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 16. 
    Ball WH. 1961. Thermal insulation in dwellings. Can. Build. Dig.1961–04 https://doi.org/10.4224/40000774
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  17. 17. 
    Carlsson B, Elmroth A, Engvall PA. 1980. Airtightness and thermal insulation: building design solutions Stockholm: Swedish Counc. Build. Res. D37:1980. https://www.aivc.org/resource/airtightness-and-thermal-insulation-building-design-solutions
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 18. 
    Chan NW, Gillingham K. 2015. The microeconomic theory of the rebound effect and its welfare implications. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2:1133–59
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19. 
    Meier AK. 1982. Supply curves of conserved energy. PhD Thesis Univ. Calif. Berkeley:
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20. 
    Blumstein C, Stoft SE. 1995. Technical efficiency, production functions and conservation supply curves. Energy Policy 23:9765–68
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21. 
    Rosenfeld A, Atkinson C, Koomey J, Meier A, Mowris RJ, Price L. 1993. Conserved energy supply curves for U.S. buildings. Contemp. Econ. Policy 11:145–68
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 22. 
    McKinsey & Co 2007. Reducing the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost? U.S. Greenhouse Gas Abatement Mapping Initiative. Executive Report Chicago: McKinsey & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23. 
    Jaffe AB, Stavins RN. 1994. The energy-efficiency gap: What does it mean?. Energy Policy 22:10804–10
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24. 
    Rosenow J, Bayer E. 2017. Costs and benefits of energy efficiency obligations: a review of European programmes. Energy Policy 107:53–62
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25. 
    Tirole J. 2008. Some economics of global warming. Riv. Polit. Econ. 98:69–42
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26. 
    Stern DI. 2012. Modeling international trends in energy efficiency. Energy Econ 34:62200–8
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27. 
    Ang BW. 2004. Decomposition analysis for policymaking in energy: Which is the preferred method?. Energy Policy 32:91131–39
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 28. 
    Ang BW. 2006. Monitoring changes in economy-wide energy efficiency: from energy-GDP ratio to composite efficiency index. Energy Policy 34:5574–82
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 29. 
    Goh T, Ang BW. 2019. Tracking economy-wide energy efficiency using LMDI: approach and practices. Energy Effic 12:4829–47
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30. 
    Saunders H. 2013. Historical evidence for energy efficiency rebound in 30 US sectors and a toolkit for rebound analysts. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 80:71317–30
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31. 
    Belzer DB. 2014. A comprehensive system of energy intensity indicators for the U.S.: methods, data and key trends. Tech. Rep. 22267 Pac. Northwest Natl. Lab. Richland, WA: https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-22267.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32. 
    IEA (Int. Energy Agency) 2019. Market report series: energy efficiency 2019Rep., IEA, Paris https://webstore.iea.org/market-report-series-energy-efficiency-2019
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33. 
    Fouquet R, Pearson PJG. 1998. A thousand years of energy use in the United Kingdom. Energy J 19:41–41
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34. 
    Bolt J, van Zanden JL. 2014. The Maddison Project: collaborative research on historical national accounts. Econ. Hist. Rev. 67:3627–51
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35. 
    Csereklyei Z, Rubio-Varas MM, Stern DI. 2016. Energy and economic growth: the stylized facts. Energy J 37:2223–55
    [Google Scholar]
  36. [Google Scholar]
  37. 37. 
    Carter SB, Gartner SS, Haines MR, Olmstead AL, Sutch R, Wright G. 2001. Historical Statistics of the United States 2001 Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press https://hsus.cambridge.org/HSUSWeb/toc/hsusHome.do
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 38. 
    Fouquet R. 2008. Heat, Power and Light Revolutions in Energy Services Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 39. 
    Kander P, Malanima A, Warde P 2013. Power to the People: Energy in Europe Over the Last Five Centuries Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40. 
    Fouquet R, Pearson PJG. 2012. The long run demand for lighting: elasticities and rebound effects in different phases of economic development. Econ. Energy Environ. Policy 1:183–110
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41. 
    Mundaca L, Markandya A, Nørgaard J. 2013. Walking away from a low-carbon economy? Recent and historical trends using a regional decomposition analysis. Energy Policy 61:1471–80
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 42. 
    Marcotullio PJ, Schulz NB. 2007. Comparison of energy transitions in the United States and developing and industrializing economies. World Dev 35:101650–83
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43. 
    Ezcurra R. 2007. Distribution dynamics of energy intensities: a cross-country analysis. Energy Policy 35:105254–59
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44. 
    Mulder P, de Groot HLF. 2012. Structural change and convergence of energy intensity across OECD countries, 1970–2005. Energy Econ 34:61910–21
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 45. 
    van Benthem A. 2015. Energy leapfrogging. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ 2:193–132
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 46. 
    Hart R. 2018. Rebound, directed technological change, and aggregate demand for energy. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 89:218–34
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47. 
    Sutherland R. 1991. Market barriers to energy-efficiency investments. Energy J 12:315–34
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 48. 
    Golove WH, Eto JH. 1996. Market barriers to energy efficiency: a critical reappraisal of the rationale for public policies to promote energy efficiency. Rep. LBL-38059 Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. Berkeley, CA: https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-38059.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49. 
    Lovins AB. 2005. Taxonomy for breaking through the economic limits of energy efficiency. Energy Effic. Taxon. Overview Encycl. Energy 2:383–401
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50. 
    Sanstad AH, Howarth RB. 1994. ‘Normal’ markets, market imperfections and energy efficiency. Energy Policy 22:10811–18
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 51. 
    Sorrell S, O'Malley E, Schleich J, Scott S 2004. The Economics of Energy Efficiency: Barriers to Cost-Effective Investment Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 52. 
    Allcott H, Greenstone M. 2017. Measuring the welfare effects of residential energy efficiency programs NBER Work. Pap. 23386
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 53. 
    Fowlie M, Greenstone M, Wolfram C 2018. Do energy efficiency investments deliver? Evidence from the weatherization assistance program. Q. J. Econ. 133:31597–644
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 54. 
    Gillingham K, Keyes A, Palmer K. 2018. Advances in evaluating energy efficiency policies and programs. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 10:511–32
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 55. 
    Fouquet R. 2018. Consumer surplus from energy transitions. Energy J 39:3167–88
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56. 
    Allcott H, Greenstone M. 2012. Is there an energy efficiency gap?. J. Econ. Perspect. 26:13–28
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57. 
    Kahneman D, Thaler RH. 2006. Anomalies: utility maximization and experienced utility. J. Econ. Perspect. 20:1221–34
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 58. 
    Wilson C, Dowlatabadi H. 2007. Models of decision making and residential energy use. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 32:169–203
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 59. 
    Gillingham K, Newell R, Palmer K. 2006. Energy efficiency policies: a retrospective examination. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 31:161–92
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60. 
    Nadel S. 2003. Appliance & equipment efficiency standards in the US: accomplishments, next steps and lessons learned Paper presented at eceee Summer Study on Energy Efficiency https://www.eceee.org/static/media/uploads/site-2/library/conference_proceedings/eceee_Summer_Studies/2003c/Panel_1/1045nadel/paper.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61. 
    Ürge-Vorsatz D, Novikova A, Köppel S, Boza-Kiss B. 2009. Bottom-up assessment of potentials and costs of CO2 emission mitigation in the buildings sector: insights into the missing elements. Energy Effic 2:4293–316
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62. 
    Lin J. 2002. Appliance efficiency standards and labeling programs in China. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 27:349–67
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 63. 
    Roy J, Chakravarty D, Dasgupta S, Chakraborty D, Pal S, Ghosh D. 2018. Where is the hope? Blending modern urban lifestyle with cultural practices in India. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 31:February96–103
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 64. 
    Cao X, Dai X, Liu J. 2016. Building energy-consumption status worldwide and the state-of-the-art technologies for zero-energy buildings during the past decade. Energy Build 128:198–213
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 65. 
    Greening L, Sanstad A, McMahon J, Wenzel T, Pickle S. 1996. Retrospective analysis of national energy efficiency standards for refrigerators. Proceedings of the ACEEE Summer Study of Energy Efficiency in Buildings, 9.101–9.109 Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/1996/data/papers/SS96_Panel9_Paper11.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 66. 
    Dale L, Antinori C, McNeil M, McMahon J, Berkeley L 2002. Retrospective evaluation of declining price for energy efficient appliances. Proceedings of the ACEEE Summer Study of Energy Efficiency in Buildings, 9.55–9.70 Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2002/data/papers/SS02_Panel9_Paper05.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  67. 67. 
    Grubb M, Hourcade JC, Neuhoff K. 2014. Planetary Economics: Energy, Climate Change and the Three Domains of Sustainable Development Abingdon, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68. 
    Knittel CR. 2011. Automobiles on steroids: product attribute trade-offs and technological progress in the automobile sector. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:73368–99
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 69. 
    Barbieri N. 2015. Investigating the impacts of technological position and European environmental regulation on green automotive patent activity. Ecol. Econ. 117:140–52
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 70. 
    Newell RG, Jaffe AB, Stavins RN. 1999. The induced innovation hypothesis and energy-saving technological change. Q. J. Econ. 3:August941–75
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71. 
    Wei M, Smith SJ, Sohn MD. 2017. Experience curve development and cost reduction disaggregation for fuel cell markets in Japan and the US. Appl. Energy 191:346–57
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72. 
    Mundaca L, Sonnenschein J, Steg L, Höhne N, Ürge-Vorsatz D. 2019. The global expansion of climate mitigation policy interventions, the Talanoa Dialogue and the role of behavioural insights. Environ. Res. Commun. 1:6061001
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 73. 
    Gillingham K, Newell RG, Palmer K. 2009. Energy efficiency economics and policy. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 1:597–620
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 74. 
    Gellings CW, Wikler G, Ghosh D. 2006. Assessment of U.S. electric end-use efficiency potential. Electr. J 19:955–69
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. 
    Ito K. 2015. Asymmetric incentives in subsidies: evidence from a large-scale electricity rebate program. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 7:3209–237
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 76. 
    Labandeira X, Labeaga JM, Linares P, López-Otero X. 2020. The impacts of energy efficiency policies: meta-analysis. Energy Policy 147:111790
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 77. 
    Krishnamurti T, Schwartz D, Davis A, Fischhoff B, Bruine de Bruin W et al. 2012. Preparing for smart grid technologies: a behavioral decision research approach to understanding consumer expectations about smart meters. Energy Policy 41:790–97
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78. 
    Bittle R, Valesano R, Thaler G. 1979. The effects of daily feedback on residential electricity usage as a function of usage level and type of feedback information. J. Environ. Syst. 9:275–87
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79. 
    Hutton RB, Mauser GA, Filiatrault P, Ahtola OT. 1986. Effects of cost-related feedback on consumer knowledge and consumption behavior: a field experimental approach. J. Consum. Res. 13:3327–36
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80. 
    Bager S, Mundaca L. 2017. Making ‘Smart Meters’ smarter? Insights from a behavioural economics pilot field experiment in Copenhagen, Denmark. Energy Res. Soc. Sci 28:April68–76
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81. 
    Lesic V, Glasgo B, Krishnamurti T, Bruine de Bruin W, Davis M, Azevedo IL 2019. Comparing consumer perceptions of appliances’ electricity use to appliances’ actual direct-metered consumption. Environ. Res. Commun. 1:11111002
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 82. 
    Nadel S, Goldstein D. 1996. Appliance and equipment efficiency standards: history, impacts, current status, and future directions. Proceedings of the ACEEE Summer Study of Energy Efficiency in Buildings1–20 Washington, DC: Am. Counc. Energy-Efficient Econ https://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/publications/researchreports/A963.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83. 
    Buchanan K, Russo R, Anderson B 2015. The question of energy reduction: the problem(s) with feedback. Energy Policy 77:89–96
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 84. 
    Allcott H. 2011. Social norms and energy conservation. J. Public Econ. 95:9–101082–95
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 85. 
    Andor MA, Fels KM. 2018. Behavioral economics and energy conservation—a systematic review of non-price interventions and their causal effects. Ecol. Econ. 148: July 2017.178–210
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. 
    Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. 2018. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms: reprise. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 13:2249–54
    [Google Scholar]
  87. 87. 
    Tiefenbeck V, Staake T, Roth K, Sachs O 2013. For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign. Energy Policy 57:160–71
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 88. 
    Abrahamse W, Steg L, Vlek C, Rothengatter T. 2005. A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. J. Environ. Psychol. 25:3273–91
    [Google Scholar]
  89. 89. 
    Allcott H, Mullainathan S. 2010. Behavior and energy policy. Policy Forum 327:March1204–6
    [Google Scholar]
  90. 90. 
    Harding M, Hsiaw A. 2014. Goal setting and energy conservation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 107:209–27
    [Google Scholar]
  91. 91. 
    Katzev RD, Johnson TR. 1984. Comparing the effects of monetary incentives and foot-in-the-door strategies in promoting residential electricity conservation. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 14:112–27
    [Google Scholar]
  92. 92. 
    McClelland L, Cook SW. 1980. Promoting energy conservation in master-metered apartments through group financial incentives. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 10:120–31
    [Google Scholar]
  93. 93. 
    Winett RA, Kagel JH, Battalio RC, Winkler RC. 1978. Effects of monetary rebates, feedback, and information on residential electricity conservation. J. Appl. Psychol. 63:173–80
    [Google Scholar]
  94. 94. 
    Slavin RE, Wodarski JS, Blackburn BL. 1981. A group contingency for electricity conservation in master-metered apartments. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 14:3357–63
    [Google Scholar]
  95. 95. 
    Dolan P, Metcalfe RD. 2015. Neighbors, knowledge, and nuggets: two natural field experiments on the role of incentives on energy conservation Work. Pap. Becker Friedman Inst. Econ., Univ Chicago: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2589269
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  96. 96. 
    Nadel S. 1992. Utility demand-side management experience and potential—a critical review. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 17:507–35
    [Google Scholar]
  97. 97. 
    Delmas MA, Fischlein M, Asensio OI. 2013. Information strategies and energy conservation behavior: a meta-analysis of experimental studies from 1975 to 2012. Energy Policy 61:729–39
    [Google Scholar]
  98. 98. 
    Boza-Kiss B, Moles-Grueso S, Urge-Vorsatz D. 2013. Evaluating policy instruments to foster energy efficiency for the sustainable transformation of buildings. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 5:2163–76
    [Google Scholar]
  99. 99. 
    Cornelis E. 2019. History and prospect of voluntary agreements on industrial energy efficiency in Europe. Energy Policy 132:May567–82
    [Google Scholar]
  100. 100. 
    Ekins P, Etheridge B. 2006. The environmental and economic impacts of the UK climate change agreements. Energy Policy 34:152071–86
    [Google Scholar]
  101. 101. 
    UK Environment Agency 2015. CRC energy efficiency scheme: allowancesRep., UK Environment Agency, Bristol, UK https://www.gov.uk/crc-energy-efficiency-scheme-allowances
    [Google Scholar]
  102. 102. 
    Bento A, Gillingham K, Jacobsen MR, Knittel CR, Leard B et al. 2018. Flawed analysis of U.S. auto fuel economy standard. Science 362:64191119–21
    [Google Scholar]
  103. 103. 
    Billingsley MA, Hoffman IM, Stuart E, Schiller SR, Goldman CA, LaCommare K. 2014. The program administrator cost of saved energy for utility customer-funded energy efficiency programs Rep., US Dep. Energy, Washington, DC: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1129528/
    [Google Scholar]
  104. 104. 
    Madlener R, Hauertmann M. 2012. Rebound effects in German residential heating: Do ownership and income matter?. FCN Work. Pap. 2/2011. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1887030
    [Crossref]
  105. 105. 
    Aydin E, Kok N, Brounen D. 2017. Energy efficiency and household behavior: the rebound effect in the residential sector. RAND J. Econ. 48:3749–82
    [Google Scholar]
  106. 106. 
    McCoy D, Kotsch RA. 2021. Quantifying the distributional impact of energy efficiency measures. Energy J 42:6 https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.42.6.dmcc
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  107. 107. 
    Ryan L, Campbell N. 2012. Spreading the net: the multiple benefits of energy efficiency improvements Rep., Int. Energy Agency, Paris: https://www.ourenergypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Spreading_the_Net.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 108. 
    IPCC (Intergov. Panel Clim. Change) 2018. Mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5°C in the context of sustainable development. Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5°C V Masson-Delmotte, P Zhai, H-O Pörtner, D Roberts, J Skea et al. Geneva: World Meteorol. Organ 32 https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/chapter-2/
    [Google Scholar]
  109. 109. 
    de la Rue du Can S, Pudleiner D, Pielli K. 2018. Energy efficiency as a means to expand energy access: a Uganda roadmap. Energy Policy 120:January354–64
    [Google Scholar]
  110. 110. 
    Thomas BA, Azevedo IL. 2013. Estimating direct and indirect rebound effects for US households with input-output analysis. Part 1: Theoretical framework. Ecol. Econ. 86:199–210
    [Google Scholar]
  111. 111. 
    Thomas BA, Azevedo IL. 2014. Should policy-makers allocate funding to vehicle electrification or end-use energy efficiency as a strategy for climate change mitigation and energy reductions? Rethinking electric utilities efficiency programs. Energy Policy 67:28–36
    [Google Scholar]
  112. 112. 
    Khazzoom JD. 1980. Economic implications of mandated efficiency standard for household appliances. Energy J 1:421–40
    [Google Scholar]
  113. 113. 
    Jevons WS. 1865. The Coal Question: An Inquiry Concerning the Progress of the Nation, and the Probable Exhaustion of Our Coal-mines New York: Macmillan
    [Google Scholar]
  114. 114. 
    Brookes L. 1979. A low energy strategy for the UK by G. Leach et al: a review and reply. Atom 269:3–8
    [Google Scholar]
  115. 115. 
    Grubb M. 1990. Energy efficiency and economic fallacies. Energy Policy 18:4483–85
    [Google Scholar]
  116. 116. 
    Saunders H. 1992. The Khazzoom-Brookes postulate and neoclassical growth. Energy J 13:4131–38
    [Google Scholar]
  117. 117. 
    Pearson P, Fouquet R. 1996. Energy efficiency, economic efficiency and future carbon dioxide emissions from the developing world. Energy J 17:41–26
    [Google Scholar]
  118. 118. 
    Roy J. 2000. The rebound effect: some empirical evidence from India. Energy Policy 28:6–7433–38
    [Google Scholar]
  119. 119. 
    Lowe R. 2003. A theoretical analysis of price elasticity of energy demand in multi-stage energy conversion systems. Energy Policy 31:1699–704
    [Google Scholar]
  120. 120. 
    Schipper L 2000. Energy Policy 28:6–7)
    [Google Scholar]
  121. 121. 
    Gillingham K, Rapson D, Wagner G. 2016. The rebound effect and energy efficiency policy. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 10:168–88
    [Google Scholar]
  122. 122. 
    Saunders H. 2008. Fuel conserving (and using) production functions. Energy Econ 30:52184–235
    [Google Scholar]
  123. 123. 
    Saunders H. 2013. Recent evidence for large rebound: elucidating the drivers and their implications for climate change models. Energy J 31:123–48
    [Google Scholar]
  124. 124. 
    Sorrell S. 2007. The rebound effect: an assessment of the evidence for economy-wide energy savings from improved energy efficiency Rep., UK Energy Research Centre London:
    [Google Scholar]
  125. 125. 
    Sorrell S. 2014. Energy substitution, technical change and rebound effects. Energies 7:52850–73
    [Google Scholar]
  126. 126. 
    Stern DI. 2020. How large is the economy-wide rebound effect?. Energy Policy 147:August111870
    [Google Scholar]
  127. 127. 
    Santarius T, Walnum HJ, Aall C 2016. Rethinking Climate and Energy Policies: New Perspectives on the Rebound Phenomenon Cham, Switz: Springer Int. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  128. 128. 
    Schmitz H, Madlener R. 2020. Direct and indirect energy rebound effects in German households: a linearized almost ideal demand system approach. Energy J 41:589–118
    [Google Scholar]
  129. 129. 
    Chakravarty D, Dasgupta S, Roy J. 2013. Rebound effect: how much to worry?. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 5:2216–28
    [Google Scholar]
  130. 130. 
    Chakravarty D, Roy J 2016. The Global South: new estimates and insights from urban India. Rethinking Climate and Energy Policies: New Perspectives on the Rebound Phenomenon T Santarius, HJ Walnum, C Aall 55–72 Cham, Switz: Springer Int. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  131. 131. 
    Druckman A, Chitnis M, Sorrell S, Jackson T 2011. Missing carbon reductions? Exploring rebound and backfire effects in UK households. Energy Policy 39:63572
    [Google Scholar]
  132. 132. 
    Wei T. 2010. A general equilibrium view of global rebound effects. Energy Econ 32:3661–72
    [Google Scholar]
  133. 133. 
    Wei T, Liu Y. 2017. Estimation of global rebound effect caused by energy efficiency improvement. Energy Econ 66:27–34
    [Google Scholar]
  134. 134. 
    Stern D, Kander A 2012. The role of energy in the Industrial Revolution and modern economic growth. Energy 33:3125–52
    [Google Scholar]
  135. 135. 
    Liu Y, Wei T, Park D 2019. Macroeconomic impacts of energy productivity: a general equilibrium perspective. Energy Effic 12:71857–72
    [Google Scholar]
  136. 136. 
    Stern DI. 2017. How accurate are energy intensity projections?. Clim. Change 143:3–4537–45
    [Google Scholar]
  137. 137. 
    Brockway PE, Sorrell S, Semieniuk G, Heun MK, Court V. 2021. Energy efficiency and economy-wide rebound effects: a review of the evidence and its implications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 141:110781
    [Google Scholar]
  138. 138. 
    Wei T, Zhou J, Zhang H. 2019. Rebound effect of energy intensity reduction on energy consumption. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 144:February233–39
    [Google Scholar]
  139. 139. 
    Lamb WF, Wiedmann T, Pongratz J, Andrew R, Crippa M et al. 2021. A review of trends and drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018. Environ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abee4e
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  140. 140. 
    UNEP (UN Environ. Prog.) 2016. The emissions gap report 2016 Rep., UNEP Nairobi: https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2016
    [Google Scholar]
  141. 141. 
    Maamoun N. 2019. The Kyoto Protocol: empirical evidence of a hidden success. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 95:227–56
    [Google Scholar]
  142. 142. 
    Saunders H. 2013. Is what we think of as ‘rebound’ really just income effects in disguise?. Energy Policy 57:308–17
    [Google Scholar]
  143. 143. 
    Smil V. 2003. Energy at the Crossroads: Global Perspectives and Uncertainties Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
  144. 144. 
    Lichtenberg FR. 1986. Energy prices and induced innovation. Res. Policy 15:267–75
    [Google Scholar]
  145. 145. 
    Popp D. 2019. Environmental policy and innovation: a decade of research NBER Work. Pap. 2563
    [Google Scholar]
  146. 146. 
    Grubb M, Drummond P, Poncia A, McDowall W, Popp D et al. 2021. Induced innovation in energy technologies and systems: a review of evidence and potential implications for CO2 mitigation. Environ. Res. Lett. 16:043007
    [Google Scholar]
  147. 147. 
    Costantini V, Crespi F, Palma A. 2017. Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: a patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies. Res. Policy 46:4799–819
    [Google Scholar]
  148. 148. 
    Noailly J. 2012. Improving the energy efficiency of buildings: the impact of environmental policy on technological innovation. Energy Econ 34:3795–806
    [Google Scholar]
  149. 149. 
    Kruse J, Wetzel H. 2016. Energy prices, technological knowledge, and innovation in green energy technologies: a dynamic panel analysis of European patent data. CESifo Econ. Stud. 62:3397–425
    [Google Scholar]
  150. 150. 
    Weiss M, Junginger M, Patel MK, Blok K. 2010. A review of experience curve analyses for energy demand technologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77:3411–28
    [Google Scholar]
  151. 151. 
    Rubin ES, Azevedo IML, Jaramillo P, Yeh S. 2015. A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies. Energy Policy 86:198–218
    [Google Scholar]
  152. 152. 
    Ambec S, Cohen MA, Elgie S, Lanoie P. 2013. The Porter hypothesis at 20: Can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness?. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 7:12–22
    [Google Scholar]
  153. 153. 
    Cohen MA, Tubb A. 2018. The impact of environmental regulation on firm and country competitiveness: a meta-analysis of the Porter hypothesis. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 5:2371–99
    [Google Scholar]
  154. 154. 
    Borghesi S, Cainelli G, Mazzanti M. 2015. Linking emission trading to environmental innovation: evidence from the Italian manufacturing industry. Res. Policy 44:3669–83
    [Google Scholar]
  155. 155. 
    Rogge KS, Schneider M, Hoffmann VH. 2011. The innovation impact of the EU emission trading system—findings of company case studies in the German power sector. Ecol. Econ. 70:3513–23
    [Google Scholar]
  156. 156. 
    Gulbrandsen LH, Stenqvist C. 2013. The limited effect of EU emissions trading on corporate climate strategies: comparison of a Swedish and a Norwegian pulp and paper company. Energy Policy 56:516–25
    [Google Scholar]
  157. 157. 
    Steinbuks J, Neuhoff K. 2014. Assessing energy price induced improvements in efficiency of capital in OECD manufacturing industries. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 68:2340–56
    [Google Scholar]
  158. 158. 
    Moshiri S, Duah N. 2016. Changes in energy intensity in Canada. Energy J 37:4315–42
    [Google Scholar]
  159. 159. 
    Sue Wing I 2008. Explaining the declining energy intensity of the U.S. economy. Resour. Energy Econ 30:121–49
    [Google Scholar]
  160. 160. 
    Carraro C, De Cian E. 2012. Factor-augmenting technical change: an empirical assessment. Environ. Model. Assess. 18:113–26
    [Google Scholar]
  161. 161. 
    Adeyemi OI, Hunt LC. 2014. Accounting for asymmetric price responses and underlying energy demand trends in OECD industrial energy demand. Energy Econ 45:435–44
    [Google Scholar]
  162. 162. 
    Hausman J. 1979. Individual discount rates and the purchase and utilization of energy-using durables. Bell J. Econ. 10:133–54
    [Google Scholar]
  163. 163. 
    Allcott H, Wozny N. 2014. Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox. Rev. Econ. Stat. 96:5779–95
    [Google Scholar]
  164. 164. 
    Safarzynska K. 2012. Modeling the rebound effect in two manufacturing industries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 79:61135–54
    [Google Scholar]
  165. 165. 
    Hicks AL, Theis TL. 2014. An agent based approach to the potential for rebound resulting from evolution of residential lighting technologies. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19:2370–76
    [Google Scholar]
  166. 166. 
    Athey S, Imbens GW. 2017. The state of applied econometrics: causality and policy evaluation. J. Econ. Perspect. 31:23–32
    [Google Scholar]
  167. 167. 
    Boomhower J, Davis LW. 2014. A credible approach for measuring inframarginal participation in energy efficiency programs. J. Public Econ. 113:67–79
    [Google Scholar]
  168. 168. 
    Alberini A, Towe C. 2015. Information v. energy efficiency incentives: evidence from residential electricity consumption in Maryland. Energy Econ 52:S30–40
    [Google Scholar]
  169. 169. 
    Allcott H. 2015. Site selection bias in program evaluation. Q. J. Econ. 130:31117–65
    [Google Scholar]
  170. 170. 
    Allcott H, Knittel C, Taubinsky D. 2015. Tagging and targeting of energy efficiency subsidies. Am. Econ. Rev. 105:5187–91
    [Google Scholar]
  171. 171. 
    Burlig F, Knittel C, Rapson D, Reguant M, Wolfram C. 2017. Machine learning from schools about energy efficiency NBER Work. Pap. 23908
    [Google Scholar]
  172. 172. 
    Knittel CR, Stolper S. 2019. Using machine learning to target treatment: the case of household energy use NBER Work. Pap. 26531
    [Google Scholar]
  173. 173. 
    Souza M. 2019. Predictive counterfactuals for treatment effect heterogeneity in event studies with staggered adoption Work. Pap. Univ. Carlos III Madrid Spain: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3484635
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  174. 174. 
    Filippini M, Hunt LC. 2011. Energy demand and energy efficiency in the OECD countries: a stochastic demand frontier approach. Energy J 32:2 https://doi.org/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol32-No2-3
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  175. 175. 
    Adom PK, Amakye K, Abrokwa KK, Quaidoo C. 2018. Estimate of transient and persistent energy efficiency in Africa: a stochastic frontier approach. Energy Convers. Manag. 166:556–68
    [Google Scholar]
  176. 176. 
    Bruns SB, Moneta A, Stern DI. 2019. Estimating the economy-wide rebound effect using empirically identified structural vector autoregressions. LME Work. Pap. Ser.2284-0400
    [Google Scholar]
  177. 177. 
    Wang R, Saunders H, Moreno-Cruz J, Caldeira K. 2019. Induced energy-saving efficiency improvements amplify effectiveness of climate change mitigation. Joule 3:92103–19
    [Google Scholar]
  178. 178. 
    Allan G, Hanley N, McGregor P, Swales K, Turner K. 2007. The impact of increased efficiency in the industrial use of energy: a computable general equilibrium analysis for the United Kingdom. Energy Econ 29:4779–98
    [Google Scholar]
  179. 179. 
    Turner K. 2009. Negative rebound and disinvestment effects in response to an improvement in energy efficiency in the UK economy. Energy Econ 31:5648–66
    [Google Scholar]
  180. 180. 
    Lemoine D. 2018. General equilibrium rebound from energy efficiency innovation NBER Work. Pap. 25172
    [Google Scholar]
  181. 181. 
    Fullerton D, Ta CL. 2019. Costs of energy efficiency mandates can reverse the sign of rebound NBER Work. Pap. 25696
    [Google Scholar]
  182. 182. 
    Rausch S, Schwerin H. 2018. Does higher energy efficiency lower economy-wide energy use?. CER-ETH Econ. Work. Pap. Ser. 18/299
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-084937
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-084937
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error