From organic to fossil and in-between: new estimates of energy consumption in the Swedish manufacturing industry during 1800–1913

In this article, new estimates of energy consumption in the Swedish manufacturing industry during 1800–1913 are used for interpreting the Swedish industrialisation process from an energy economic perspective. For one we conclude that the revision of previous estimates is substantial when it comes to manufacturing. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the increase of coal consumption, the expansion of the fossil or mineral energy system, to a high degree can be explained by the increased use of steam engines in manufacturing and the transport sector. Finally, we conclude that overall energy intensity patterns is largely determined by assumptions on household firewood consumption. A narrative interpretation of the interplay between energy system transformation and the industrialisation in Sweden concludes the article.     

How Much is Too Much?

In a split sample design, we examine how the number of choice sets, design of the first choice set (context dependence), and the choice of attribute levels in the cost attribute affect the precision in the elicited preferences in otherwise completely identical choice experiment surveys. These issues are investigated for Swedish households’ marginal willingness to pay to reduce power outages. Our results indicate that neither the number of choice sets nor the design of the first choice set has a significant impact on estimated marginal willingness to pay, while the effect was significant for the additive scaling of the cost vector. At the end of the article we discuss the implications of our results on future developments and applications of choice experiments.      

Does context matter more for hypothetical than for actual contributions? Evidence from a natural field experiment

We investigated the importance of the social context for people’s voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica, using a natural field experiment. Some subjects make actual contributions while others state their hypothetical contribution. Both the degree of anonymity and information provided about the contributions of others influence subject contributions in the hypothesized direction. We found a substantial hypothetical bias with regard to the amount contributed. However, the influence of the social contexts is about the same when the subjects make actual monetary contributions as when they state their hypothetical contributions. Our results have important implications for validity testing of stated preference methods: a comparison between hypothetical and actual behavior should be done for a given social context.