Politická ekonomie
Politická ekonomie
Prague Economic Papers
University of Economics, Prague

Prague Economic Papers - Articles first published online

Household Ecological Preferences and Renewable Energy Spending

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.pep.713

[full text (PDF)]

Maciej Malaczewski

Published online: 12. 3. 2019

In this paper, we propose a model that demonstrates the influence of household ecological preferences on their acceptance of spending on renewable energy. The model discusses the production of energy from both non-renewable and renewable sources, the quality of the natural environment, pollution emissions, and utility maximization. If households choose to reduce pollutant emissions, they should reduce their levels of consumption. The main aspect that distinguishes the proposed model is the assumption of complementarity between physical capital and energy. This complementarity exists due to the fact that non-renewable natural resources are the main energy source throughout the world. The presented model is solved and analysed in detail. Our analysis of the model leads to the conclusion that maximizing the utility share of the total production spent on renewable energy generation depends on the relation of both preference parameters, not on each individual preference parameter. Since the presented model helps to explain several economic mechanisms, it may become incorporated into a larger model.

Keywords: complementarity between natural resources and capital, ecological preferences, energy, natural resource use, pollution

JEL Classification: O44, Q32, Q43


Acemoglu, D. (2009). Introduction to Modern Economic Growth. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA:

Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691132921.

Amigues, J. P., Grimaud, A., Moreaux, M. (2004). Optimal Endogenous Sustainability with

an Exhaustible Resource through Dedicated R&D. Les Cahiers du LERNA, 4, 154 .

Apostolakis, B. E. (1990). Energy-capital Substitutability/Complementarity: The Dichotomy.

Energy Economics, 12(1), 48–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(90)90007-3

Arnberg, S., Bjorner, T. B. (2007). Substitution between Energy, Capital and Labour within

Industrial Companies: A micro Panel Data Analysis. Resource and Energy Economics, 29(2),

122–136, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2006.01.001

Barro, R. J., Sala-i-Martin, X. (2003). Economic Growth. 2nd. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA:

MIT Press. ISBN 9780262025539.

Burke, P. J. (2010). Income, Resources, and Electricity Mix. Energy Economics, 32(3), 616–626,


Costantini, V., Martini, C. (2010). The Causality between Energy Consumption and Economic

Growth: A Multi-sectoral Analysis Using Non-stationary Cointegrated Panel Data. Energy

Economics, 32(3), 591–603, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.09.013

Costantini, V., Paglialunga, E. (2014). Elasticity of Substitution in Capital-energy Relationships:

How Central is a Sector-based Panel Estimation Approach? Sustainability Environmental

Economics and Dynamics Studies. Working Paper No. 1314.

Costanza, R., Daly, H. E. (1992). Natural Capital and Sustainable Development. Conservation

Biology, 6(1), 37–46, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610037.x

da Silva, A. S. (2008). Growth with Exhaustible Resource and Endogenous Extraction Rate.

Economic Modelling, 25(6), 1165–1174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2008.03.001

Dasgupta, P., Heal, G. (1974). The Optimal Depletion of Exhaustible Resources. The Review

of Economic Studies, 41(5), 3–28, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296369

Di Vita, G. (2006). Natural Resources Dynamics: Exhaustible and Renewable Resources, and the

Rate of Technical Substitution. Resources Policy, 31(3), 172–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.


Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1979). Energy Analysis and Economic Valuation. Southern Economic

Journal, 45(4),1023–1058, https://doi.org/10.2307/1056953

Greiner, A. (2005). Fiscal Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model with Public

Capital and Pollution. The Japanese Economic Review, 56(1), 67–84, https://doi.


Prague Economic Papers, 2019, https://doi.org.10.18267/j.pep.713 13 ONLINE FIRST

Grimaud, A., Roug e, L. (2003). Non-renewable Resources and Growth with Vertical Innovations:

Optimum, Equilibrium and Economic Policies. Journal of Environmental Economics and

Management, 45(2), 433–453, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0095-0696(02)00049-9

Grimaud, A., Roug e, L. (2005). Polluting Non-renewable Resources, Innovation and Growth:

Welfare and Environmental Policy. Resource and Energy Economics, 27(2), 109–129,


Grimaud, A., Roug e, L. (2008). Environment, Directed Technical Change and Economic

Policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 41(4), 439–463, https://doi.org/10.1007/


Grimaud, A., Roug e, L. (2014). Carbon Sequestration, Economic Policies and Growth. Resource

and Energy Economics, 36(2), 307–331, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2013.12.004

Koetse, M. J., De Groot, H. L., Florax, R. J. (2008). Capital-energy Substitution and Shifts in Factor

Demand: A Meta-analysis. Energy Economics, 30(5), 2236–2251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.


Lin, C. Y. C., Meng, H., Ngai, T. Y., Oscherov, V., Zhu, Y. H. (2009). Hotelling Revisited: Oil Prices

and Endogenous Technological Progress. Natural Resources Research, 18(1), 29–38,


Longo, A., Markandya, A., Petrucci, M. (2008). The Internalization of Externalities in

the Production of Electricity: Willingness to Pay for the Attributes of a Policy

for Renewable Energy. Ecological Economics, 67(1), 140–152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.


Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary

Economics, 22(1), 3–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7

Maeda, A., Nagaya, M. (2012). The Optimal Timing of the Transition to New Environmental

Technology for Economic Growth. Modern Economy, 3(3), 263–274, https://doi.


Mosiño, A. (2012). Producing Energy in a Stochastic Environment: Switching from

Non-Renewable to Renewable Resources. Resource and Energy Economics, 34(4), 413–430,


Neustroev, D. (2013). The Uzawa-Lucas Growth Model with Natural Resources. University Library

of Munich, Germany. Working Paper No. 52937.

Pautrel, X. (2008). Reconsidering the Impact of the Environment on Long-run Growth when

Pollution Influences Health and Agents have a Finite-lifetime. Environmental and Resource

Economics, 40(1), 37–52, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9139-y

Pautrel, X. (2009). Pollution and Life Expectancy: How Environmental Policy can

Promote Growth. Ecological Economics, 68(4), 1040–1051, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.


Pittel, K., Bretschger, L. (2010). The Implications of Heterogeneous Resource Intensities

on Technical Change and Growth. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne

d’Ă©conomique, 43(4), 1173–1197, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5982.2010.01610.x

Scarpa, R., Willis, K. (2010). Willingness-to-pay for Renewable Energy: Primary and Discretionary

Choice of British Households’ for Micro-generation Technologies. Energy Economics, 32(1),

129–136, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.06.004

Scholz, C. M., Ziemes, G. (1999). Exhaustible Resources, Monopolistic Competition, and

Endogenous Growth. Environmental and Resource Economics, 13(2), 169–185.

Prague Economic Papers, 2019, https://doi.org.10.18267/j.pep.713 14 ONLINE FIRST

Schou, P. (2002). When Environmental Policy is Superfluous: Growth and Polluting

Resources. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 104(4), 605–620, https://doi.


Smulders, S., De Nooij, M. (2003). The Impact of Energy Conservation on Technology and

Economic Growth. Resource and Energy Economics, 25(1), 59–79, https://doi.org/10.1016/


Solow, R. M. (1974). Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources. The Review

of Economic Studies, 41(5), 29–45, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296370

Stern, D. I., Cleveland, C. J. (2004). Energy and Economic Growth. Encyclopedia of Energy, 2,


Stern, D. I. (2011). The Role of Energy in Economic Growth. Annals of the New York Academy

of Sciences, 1219(1), 26–51, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05921.x

Stigka, E. K., Paravantis, J. A., Mihalakakou, G. K. (2014). Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy

Sources: A Review of Contingent Valuation Applications. Renewable and Sustainable

Energy Reviews, 32, 100–106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.026

Stiglitz, J. (1974). Growth with Exhaustible Natural Resources: Efficient and Optimal Growth

Paths. Review of Economic Studies, 41(5), 123–137, https://doi.org/10.2307/2296377

Stuermer, M., Schwerhoff, G. (2013). Technological Change in Resource Extraction and

Endogenous Growth. Bonn Econ. Discussion Papers No. 12, https://doi.org/10.2139/


Tahvonen, O., Salo, S. (2001). Economic Growth and Transitions between Renewable and

Nonrenewable Energy Resources. European Economic Review, 45(8), 1379–1398, https://


Van Zon, A., Yetkiner, I. H. (2003). An Endogenous Growth Model with Embodied Energy-Saving

Technical Change. Resource and Energy Economics, 25(1), 81–103, https://doi.org/10.1016/


Wiser, R. H. (2007). Using Contingent Valuation to Explore Willingness to pay for Renewable

Energy: A Comparison of Collective and Voluntary Payment Vehicles. Ecological

Economics, 62(3–4), 419–432, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.003

Xepapadeas, A. (2005). Economic Growth and the Environment. Handbook of Environmental

Economics, 3, 1219–1271, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0099(05)03023-8

Zografakis, N., Sifaki, E., Pagalou, M., Nikitaki, G., Psarakis, V., Tsagarakis, K. P. (2010). Assessment

of Public Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Renewable Energy Sources in Crete.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(3), 1088–1095, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.