Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/306525 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Series/Report no.: 
AWI Discussion Paper Series No. 755
Publisher: 
University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Heidelberg
Abstract: 
Many industrialized countries have recognized the need to mitigate energy cost increases faced by low-income households by fostering the adoption of energy-efficient technologies. How to meet this need is an open question, but "behavioral insights" are likely components of future policy designs. Applying well-established behavioral insights to low-income households raises questions of transportability as they are typically underrepresented in the existing evidence base. We illustrate this problem by conducting a randomized field experiment on scalable, low-cost design elements to improve program take-up in one of the world's largest energy efficiency assistance programs. Observing investment decisions of over 1,800 low-income households in Germany's "Refrigerator Replacement Program", we find that the transportability problem is real and consequential: First, the most effective policy design would not have been chosen based on existing behavioral insights. Second, design elements favored by these insights either prove ineffective or even backfire, violating "do no harm" principles of policy advice. Systematic testing remains crucial for addressing the transportability problem, particularly for policies targeting vulnerable groups.
Subjects: 
Transportability
low-income households
field experiment
randomized controlled trial
governmental welfare programs
energy efficiency
technology adoption
JEL: 
C93
D91
Q49
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.