We estimate the rebound effect for motor vehicles, by which improved fuel efficiency causes additional travel, using a pooled cross section of US states for 1966-2001. Our model accounts for endogenous changes in fuel efficiency, distinguishes between autocorrelation and lagged effects, includes a measure of the stringency of fuel-economy standards, and allows the rebound effect to vary with income, urbanization, and the fuel cost of driving. At sample averages of variables, our simultaneous-equations estimates of the short- and long-run rebound effect are 4.5% and 22.2%. But rising real income caused it to diminish substantially over the period, aided by falling fuel prices. With variables at 1997-2001 levels, our estimates are only 2.2% and 10.7%, considerably smaller than values typically assumed for policy analysis. With income and starting fuel efficiency at 1997-2001 levels and fuel prices 58 percent higher, the estimates are still only 3.1% and 15.3%, respectively.
BertrandM.DufloE.MullainathanS. (2004). “How Much Should We Trust Differences-in Differences Estimates?” Quarterly Journal of Economics199 (1): 249-275.
2.
BlairR.D.KasermanD.L.TepelR.C.(1984). “The Impact of Improved Mileage on Gasoline Consumption.” Economic Inquiry22 (2): 209-217.
3.
BunchD.S.BrownstoneD.GolobT.F. (1996). “A Dynamic Forecasting System For Vehicle Markets With Clean-Fuel Vehicles.” in HensherD.A.KingJ.OumT.H. eds., World Transport Research: Proceedings of 7th World Conference on Transport Research, (Pergamon, Oxford) Vol. 1, pp. 189-203.
4.
CARB (2004). Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Rulemaking, Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Regulations to Control Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board, August 6. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/grnhsgas/isor.pdf (accessed October2004).
5.
CerveroR.HansenM. (2002). “Induced Travel Demand and Induced Road investment.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy36 (3): 469-490.
6.
DavidsonR.MacKinnonJ.G. (1993). Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
7.
De Jong G. and H. Gunn (2001). “Recent Evidence on Car Cost and Time Elasticities of Travel Demand in Europe.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy35 (2): 137-160.
8.
FairRay C. (1984). Specification, Estimation, and Analysis of Macroeconometric Models. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.
9.
GoldbergP.K. (1995). “Product Differentiation and Oligopoly in International Markets: The Case of the U.S. Automobile Industry.” Econometrica63 (4), July, pp.: 891-951.
10.
GoldbergP.K. (1998). “The Effects of the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Standards.” Journal of Industrial Economics46 (4): 1-33.
11.
GoodwinP.B. (1996). “Empirical Evidence on Induced Traffic: A Review and Synthesis.” Transportation23 (1): 35-54.
12.
GoodwinP.DargayJ.HanlyM. (2004). “Elasticities of Road Traffic and Fuel Consumption with Respect to Price and Income: A Review.” Transport Reviews24 (3): 275-292.
13.
GrahamD.J.GlaisterS. (2002). “The Demand for Automobile Fuel: A Survey of Elasticities.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy36 (1): 1-26.
14.
GreeneD.L. (1992). “Vehicle Use and Fuel Economy: How Big is the Rebound Effect?” Energy Journal13 (1): 117-143.
15.
GreeneD.L.KahnJ.R.GibsonR.C. (1999). “Fuel Economy Rebound Effect for US Households.” Energy Journal20 (3): 1-31.
16.
GreeningL.A.GreeneD.L.DifiglioC., (2000). “Energy Efficiency and Consumption - The Rebound Effect - A Survey.” Energy Policy28: 389-401.
17.
HarringtonW. (2003). Implications of CAFE for Conventional Air Pollutants and Congestion. Paper presented to the American Economic Association and the Association of Environmental and Resources Economists, San Diego, Jan. 2003 Haughton J. and S. Sarkar (1996). “Gasoline Tax as a Corrective tax: Estimates for the United States.” 1970-1991, Energy Journal17 (2): 103-126.
18.
HensherD.A. (1986). “Dimensions of Automobile Demand: An Overview of an Australian Research Project.” Environment and Planning A18: 1339-1374.
19.
HensherD.A.SmithN.C.MilthorpeF.W.BarnardP.,(1992). Dimensions of Automobile Demand: A Longitutinal Study of Household Automobile Ownership and Use. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
20.
JonesC.T. (1993). “Another Look at U.S. Passenger Vehicle Use and the ‘Rebound’ Effect from Improved Fuel Efficiency.” Energy Journal14 (4): 99-110.
21.
LaveC.A. (1996). “What Really Is the Growth of Vehicle Usage?” Transportation Research Record1520: 117-121.
22.
ManneringF.L. (1986). “A Note on Endogenous Variables in Household Vehicle Utilization Equations.” Transportation Research B20 (1): 1-6.
23.
National Research Council (2002). Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press,.
24.
ParryI.W.H.SmallK. A.. (2005). “Does Britain or the United States Have the Right Gasoline Tax?” American Economic Review95 (4): 1276-1289.
25.
PickrellD.SchimekP..(1999). “Growth in Motor Vehicle Ownership and Use: Evidence from the Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey.” Journal of Transportation and Statistics2 (1): 1-17.
26.
PortneyP.R.ParryI.W.H.GruenspechtH.K.HarringtonW. (2003). “The Economics of Fuel Economy Standards.” Journal of Economic Perspectives17: 203-217.
SchimekP. (1996). “Gasoline and Travel Demand Models Using Time Series and Cross-Section Data from the United States.” Transportation Research Record1558: 83-89.
29.
SmallK.A.Van DenderK.(2005). A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions on Vehicle Miles Traveled, Final Report for the California Air Resources Board, ARB Contract Number 02-336
30.
SmallK.A.Van DenderK.(2006). Fuel Efficiency and Motor Vehicle Travel: The Declining Rebound Effect, UCI Department of Economics Working Paper 05-06-03
31.
TrainK.. (1986). Qualitative Choice Analysis: Theory, Econometrics, and an Application to Automobile Demand. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
32.
USDOE (1979). State Energy Fuel Prices by Major Economic Sector from 1960 through 1977: Preliminary Report and Documentation. Washington, D.C.: US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.
33.
USDOE (1996). Policies and Measures for Reducing Energy Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Lessons from Recent Literature. Report No. DOE/PO-0047, Washington, D.C.: US Department of Energy, Office of Policy and International Affairs.
34.
USDOE (2003). 2003 California Gasoline Price Study: Preliminary Findings. Washington D.C.: US Department of Energy, Office of Oil and Gas.
35.
WestS.E. (2004). “Distributional Effects of Alternative Vehicle Pollution Control Policies.” Journal of Public Economics88 (3-4): 735-757.
36.
WooldridgeJ.M. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
