The split incentive problem concerns the lack of appropriate incentives to implement energy efficiency measures. In particular, low income tenants face a phenomenon of energy poverty in which they allocate significantly more of their household income to energy expenditures than other renters. This problem is substantial, affecting 1.89% of all United States' energy use. If effectively addressed, it would create a range of savings between 4 and 11 billion dollars per year for many of the nation's poorest residents. We argue that a carefully designed program of incentives for participants (including landlords) in conjunction with a unique type of utility-managed on-bill financing mechanism has significant potential to solve many of the complications. We focus on three kinds of split incentives, five concerns inherent to addressing split incentive problems (scale, endurance, incentives, savings, political disfavor), and provide a detailed policy proposal designed to surpass those problems, with a particular focus on low-income tenants in a U.S. context.

Using detailed sociological and public health qualitative interview data, we demonstrate that energy poverty is more pervasive, and results in a greater energy burden for low-income tenants, than many policymakers would assume. This is due in part to a lack of funding, policy non-coordination, and a lack of understanding of the social and economic benefits of energy conservation, energy education, and flexible utility billing policies. Examining LIHEAP, weatherization, utility, and housing assistance policies, we suggest that a coordinated, regional approach to home energy and housing policy that integrates programs in each area will provide a more coherent policy solution.

Fracking is a controversial practice but is thriving in many areas. We combine a comprehensive data set on local bans and moratoria in the state of New York with local-level census data and spatial characteristics in a spatial econometric analysis of local fracking policies. Some factors, including location in the Utica shale, proportion of registered Democrats, and education level, increase the probability of restrictions on fracking. Extent of local land development, location in highly productive petroleum areas, and number of extant oil and gas wells are among factors that have a negative impact on the likelihood of a ban or moratorium.

No abstract

No abstract