Society, Behaviour, and Climate Change Mitigation 2000
DOI: 10.1007/0-306-48160-x_1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Incorporating Behavioural, Social, and Organizational Phenomena in the Assessment of Climate Change Mitigation Options

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 109 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The savings reflect the cost of saved energy within the overall energy Table 3. Job creation effects related to energy efficiency investments have been described (Geller et al, 1992;Laitner et al, 1998;Jeftha, 2003), and specifically for South Africa (Laitner et al, 2001;Spalding-Fecher et al, 2003;Howells, 2004). We adopt and adapt a demand input-output analysis, as per Howells (2004), and determine economy-wide expenditure changes on labour due to the changes in purchasing per unit of energy saved for an energy efficiency measure, and per unit of capacity invested in for a new power station.…”
Section: Results: Sustainable Development Benefits and Ghg Co-benefitsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The savings reflect the cost of saved energy within the overall energy Table 3. Job creation effects related to energy efficiency investments have been described (Geller et al, 1992;Laitner et al, 1998;Jeftha, 2003), and specifically for South Africa (Laitner et al, 2001;Spalding-Fecher et al, 2003;Howells, 2004). We adopt and adapt a demand input-output analysis, as per Howells (2004), and determine economy-wide expenditure changes on labour due to the changes in purchasing per unit of energy saved for an energy efficiency measure, and per unit of capacity invested in for a new power station.…”
Section: Results: Sustainable Development Benefits and Ghg Co-benefitsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Behavior is not adequately dealt with in current climate policy analyses, since they mostly assume that agents behave rationally in the sense of perfectly maximizing utility or profits (Laitner et al 2000;Gowdy 2008;Brekke and Johansson-Stenman 2008). However, people may act as citizens or as consumers, which are more characterized by habits, imitation, social pressure (in terms of both status and conformity), cooperation, and altruism, whereas firms may be better described as showing routinelike behavior (van den Bergh et al 2000).…”
Section: Perspective 8: Behavior Learning and Substitutionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…With their necessary levels of aggregation, IAMs do not represent individual interacting decision 14 makers, but rather 'representative agents' that describe aggregate behavior at the mean (Conlisk, 15 1996, Laitner et al, 2000. Representative agents act 'as if' they were perfectly rational.…”
Section: Why Behavioral Realism In Iams Is Importantmentioning
confidence: 99%