As energy markets become more decentralised, energy trading platforms are emerging as useful tools to facilitate the coordination of energy consumption and generation, encouraging a more efficient use of renewable energy by residential producers and consumers. By exploring three different European countries, we study the effectiveness of both monetary and non-monetary incentives in fostering energy trade via trading platforms. We use an incentivized survey experiment to evaluate the drivers of consumers’ and prosumers’ willingness to participate in an energy trading platform. We find that the monetary incentive is not necessarily the main reason why people would choose to trade their energy, but other dimensions, such as environmental concerns and independence from the national grid, play an important role.
Balta-OzkanN.WatsonT.MoccaE. (2015). “Spatially uneven development and low carbon transitions: Insights from urban and regional planning.”Energy Policy85: 500-510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.05.013.
BrunekreeftG.BuchmannM.MeyerR. (2016). “The rise of third parties and the fall of incumbents driven by large- scale integration of renewable energies: the case of Germany.”The Energy Journal37(Bollino-Madlener Special Issue). https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.37.SI2.gbru.
7.
ChettyR. (2015). “Behavioral economics and public policy: A pragmatic perspective.”American Economic Review105(5): 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151108.
DellerD.GiuliettiM.LoomesG.PriceC.W.MonicheA.JeonJ.Y. (2021). “Switching energy suppliers: It’s not all about the money.”The Energy Journal42(3). https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.42.3.ddel.
10.
DharshingS. (2017). “Household dynamics of technology adoption: A spatial econometric analysis of residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems in Germany.”Energy Research & Social Science23: 113-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.10.012.
11.
EckerF.SpadaH.HahnelU.J. (2018). “Independence without control: Autarky outperforms autonomy benefits in the adoption of private energy storage systems.”Energy Policy122: 214-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.028.
12.
EvansS.C.RobertsM.C.KeeleyJ.W.BlossomJ.B.AmaroC.M.GarciaA.M.StoughC.O.CanterK.S.RoblesR.ReedG.M. (2015). “Vignette methodologies for studying clinicians decision-making: validity, utility, and application in ICD-11 field studies.”International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology15(2): 160-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.12.001.
13.
FalkA.BeckerA.DohmenT.EnkeB.HuffmanD.SundeU. (2018). “Global evidence on economic preferences.”The Quarterly Journal of Economics133(4): 1645-1692. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjy013.
14.
FellM.J.SchneidersA.ShipworthD. (2019). “Consumer Demand for Blockchain-Enabled Peer-to-Peer Electricity Trading in the United Kingdom: An Online Survey Experiment.”Energies12(20): 3913. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12203913.
FischerB.GutscheG.WetzelH. (2021). “Who wants to get involved? Determining citizen willingness to participate in German renewable energy cooperatives.”Energy Research & Social Science76: 102013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102013.
17.
FloresM.PriceC.W. (2018). “The role of attitudes and marketing in consumer behaviours in the British retail electricity market.”The Energy Journal39(4). https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.39.4.mflo.
18.
FrederiksE.R.StennerK.HobmanE.V. (2015). “Household energy use: Applying behavioural economics to understand consumer decision-making and behaviour.”Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews41: 1385-1394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.026.
19.
GeorgarakisE.BauwensT.PronkA.-M.AlSkaifT. (2021). “Keep it green, simple and socially fair: a choice experiment on prosumers’ preferences for peer-to-peer electricity trading in the Netherlands.”Energy Policy 159: 112615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112615.
20.
GlachantJ.-M.RossettoN. (2021). “New Transactions in Electricity: Peer-to-Peer and Peer-to-X.”Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy10(2). https://doi.org/10.5547/2160-5890.10.2.jgla.
21.
GobelM.S.Benet-MartinezV.MesquitaB.UskulA.K. (2018). “Europe’s culture (s): Negotiating cultural meanings, values, and identities in the European context.”Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology49(6): 858-867. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022118779144.
22.
GreensteinS.PrinceJ. (2006). “The Diffusion of the Internet and the Geography of the Digital Divide in the United States.”National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w12182.
23.
HackbarthA.LobbeS. (2020). “Attitudes, preferences, and intentions of German households concerning participation in peer-to-peer electricity trading.”Energy Policy138: 111238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111238.
24.
HahnelU.J.HerberzM.Pena-BelloA.ParraD.BroschT. (2020). “Becoming prosumer: Revealing trading preferences and decision-making strategies in peer-to-peer energy communities.”Energy Policy137: 111098. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.enpol.2019.111098.
25.
HallB.H. (2004). “Innovation and diffusion.”National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w10212.
26.
HansenA.R.JacobsenM.H.Gram-HanssenK. (2022). “Characterizing the Danish energy prosumer: Who buys solar PV systems and why do they buy them?” Ecological Economics193: 107333. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.ecolecon.2021.107333.
27.
International Renewable Energy Agency (2020). “Peer-to-Peer Electricity Trading: Innovation Landscape Brief.”Technical report International Renewable Energy Agency.
JamesH.S.Jr. (2002). “The trust paradox: a survey of economic inquiries into the nature of trust and trustworthiness.”Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization47(3): 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(01)00214-1.
30.
JunlakarnS.KokchangP.AudomvongsereeK. (2022). “Drivers and Challenges of Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading Development in Thailand.”Energies15(3): 1229. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15031229.
31.
KaenzigJ.HeinzleS.L.WüstenhagenR. (2013). “Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany.”Energy Policy53: 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.061.
KoiralaB.P.AraghiY.KroesenM.GhorbaniA.HakvoortR.A.HerderP.M. (2018). “Trust, awareness, and independence: Insights from a socio-psychological factor analysis of citizen knowledge and participation in community energy systems.”Energy research & social science38: 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.01.009.
34.
LazaricN.Le GuelF.BelinJ.OltraV.LavaudS.DouaiA. (2019). “Determinants of sustainable consumption in France: the importance of social influence and environmental values.”Journal of Evolutionary Economics : 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-019-00654-7.
35.
LehtonenM.de CarloL. (2019). “Community energy and the virtues of mistrust and distrust: Lessons from Brighton and Hove energy cooperatives.”Ecological Economics164: 106367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106367.
36.
LiH.XiaoF.YinL. (2021). “Application of Blockchain Technology in Energy Trading: a Review.”Frontiers in Energy Research9: 130. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2021.671133.
37.
McKennaE.PlessJ.DarbyS.J. (2018). “Solar photovoltaic self-consumption in the UK residential sector: New estimates from a smart grid demonstration project.”Energy Policy118: 482-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.006.
38.
Mir-ArtiguesP.Del RíoP. (2021). “Prosumers’ Behavior under a Regulation That Encourages Strict Self-Sufficiency. The Case of Spanish Photovoltaic Micro-Generation.”Energies14(4): 1114. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14041114.
39.
OzbafliA.JenkinsG.P. (2016). “Estimating the willingness to pay for reliable electricity supply: A choice experiment study.”Energy Economics56: 443-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2016.03.025.
40.
PalmA. (2017). “Peer effects in residential solar photovoltaics adoption-A mixed methods study of Swedish users.”Energy Research & Social Science26: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.01.008.
PlewniaF.GuentherE. (2021). “The transition value of business models for a sustainable energy system: the case of virtual peer-to-peer energy communities.”Organization & Environment34(3): 479-503. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026620932630.
44.
PollittM.G.ShaorshadzeI. (2013). “The role of behavioural economics in energy and climate policy.” In Handbook on energy and climate change, Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857933690.00035.
45.
ReuterE.LoockM. (2017). “Empowering local electricity markets: A survey study from Switzerland, Norway, Spain and Germany.”
46.
RogersE.M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.
47.
SchleichJ.GassmannX.MeissnerT.FaureC. (2019). “A large-scale test of the effects of time discounting, risk aversion, loss aversion, and present bias on household adoption of energy-efficient technologies.”Energy Economics80: 377-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.12.018.
48.
Smart Energy Europe (2020). “The smartEn Map Prosumers 2020.” Technical report Smart Energy Europe.
TankardM.E.PaluckE.L. (2016). “Norm perception as a vehicle for social change.”Social Issues and Policy Review10(1): 181-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12022.
51.
TusharW.SahaT.K.YuenC.MorstynT.McCullochM.D.PoorH.V.WoodK.L. (2019). “A motivational game- theoretic approach for peer-to-peer energy trading in the smart grid.”Applied Energy243: 10-20. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.apenergy.2019.03.111.
52.
UK Energy Research Centre (2019). “Paying for energy transitions: public perspectives and acceptability.” Technical report UK Energy Research Centre.
53.
ValkilaN.SaariA. (2013). “Attitude-behaviour gap in energy issues: Case study of three different Finnish residential areas.”Energy for Sustainable Development17(1): 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2012.10.001.
ZhouY.WuJ.LongC.MingW. (2020). “State-of-the-art analysis and perspectives for peer-to-peer energy trading.”Engineering6(7): 739-753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2020.06.002.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
