Janie M. Chermak

As renewable electricity generation continues to increase in the United States (US), considerable effort goes into matching heterogeneous supply to demand at a subhour time-step. As a result, some electric providers offer incentive-based programs for residential consumers that aim to reduce electric demand during high-demand periods. There is little research into determinants of consumer response to incentive-based programs beyond typical sociodemographic characteristics. To add to this body of literature, this paper presents the findings of a dichotomous choice contingent valuation (CV) survey targeting US ratepayers’ participation in a direct-load-control scheme utilizing a smart thermostat designed to reallocate consumer electricity demand on summer days when grid stress is high. Our results show approximately 50% of respondents are willing to participate at a median willingness-to-accept (WTA) figure of USD 9.50 (95% CI: 3.74, 15.25) per month that lasts for one summer (June through August)—or slightly less than USD 30 per annum. Participation is significantly affected by a respondent’s attitudes and preferences surrounding various environmental and institutional perspectives, but not by sociodemographic characteristics. These findings suggest utilities designing direct-load-control programs may improve participation by designing incentives specific to customers’ attitudes and preferences.

State-mandated renewable portfolio standards affect substantial portions of the total U.S. electricity supply. Renewable portfolio standards are environmentally motivated policies, yet they have the potential to greatly impact economy. There is not an agreement in the literature on the impact of renewable portfolio standards policies on regional economies, especially on job creation. By integrating various methodologies including econometrics, geographic information system, and input–output analysis into a unique system dynamics model, this paper estimates the economic and environmental impacts of various renewable portfolio standards scenarios in the state of New Mexico, located in Southwestern U.S. The state is endowed with traditional fossil fuel resources and substantial renewable energy potential. In this work we estimated and compared the economic and environmental tradeoffs at the county level under three renewable portfolio standards: New Mexico’s original standard of 20% renewables, the recently adopted 100% renewables standard, and a reduced renewable standard of 10%. The final one would be a return to a more traditional generation profile. We found that while the 20% standard has the highest market-based economic impact on the state as a whole, it is not significantly different from other scenarios. However, when environmental impacts are included, the 100% standard yields the highest value. In addition, while the state level economic impacts across the three scenarios are not significantly different, the county-level impacts are substantial. This is especially important for a state like New Mexico, which has a high reliance on energy for economic development. A higher renewable portfolio standard appears to be an economic tool to stimulate targeted areas’ economic growth. These results have policy implications.

We compare individual consumer response between ex ante market data collected by a water utility and ex post experimentally generated data. The experimentally generated data are matched to each participant's water bill history, which predates the experiment. This differentiates our research from prior efforts, which analyze market and experimental data with similar chronologies. For roughly 70% of the participants there is no statistical difference between water demand elasticities estimated using laboratory data and those estimated from market data. Our results provide initial support for the use of experimental procedures to generate missing data regarding hypothetical consumer response. (JEL C9, D12, Q25)

This study examines detailed data for faculty at a typical public research university in the United States between 1995 and 2004 to explore whether gender wage differentials can be explained by productivity differences. The level of detail – including the number of courses taught, enrollment, grant dollars, and number and impact of publications – largely eliminates the problem of unmeasured productivity, and the restriction to one firm eliminates unmeasured work conditions that confound investigations of wider labor markets. The authors find that direct productivity measures reduce the gender wage penalty to about 3 percent, only 1 percentage point lower than estimates from national studies of many institutions and with fewer productivity controls. The wage structure for women faculty differs markedly from the wage structure for men. Interpreted against the institutional features of wage setting for this population, the paper concludes that penalties for women arise at the department level.

This paper presents a general model of optimal water management for a transboundary aquifer under three different management approaches: cooperative, noncooperative, and myopic. Comparing the results from the approaches, we find the cooperative solution, where a single management plan is executed for all parts of the aquifer, results in the highest level of net social welfare, followed by the noncooperative and then the myopic. The trade‐offs we find for the higher levels of welfare are lower use levels in the earlier periods. We present a short discussion of factors that can increase the inefficiencies of the models and suggest directions for future research.