Cited by 672Energy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthEnergy Efficiency and Management

The Rebound Effect and Energy Efficiency Policy

Gillingham, Kenneth, Rapson, David, Wagner, Gernot·2016·Review of Environmental Economics and Policy

Abstract

What do we know about the size of the rebound effect, the well-known phenomenon that improving energy efficiency may save less energy than expected due to a rebound of energy use? Is there any validity to the claims that energy efficiency improvements can actually lead to an increase in energy use (known as backfire)? This article clarifies what the rebound effect is and provides a guide for economists and policymakers interested in its existence and magnitude. We discuss how some studies in the literature consider a rebound effect that results from a costless exogenous increase in energy efficiency, whereas others examine the effects of a specific energy efficiency policy—a distinction that leads to very different welfare and policy implications. We present the most reliable evidence available about the size of the energy efficiency rebound effect and discuss situations where such estimation is extraordinarily difficult. With this in mind, we present a new way of thinking about the macroeconomic rebound effect. We conclude that overall, the existing research provides little support for the so-called backfire hypothesis. However, our understanding of the macroeconomic rebound effect remains limited, particularly as it relates to induced innovation and productivity growth. (JEL: H23, Q38, Q41)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/reep/rev017

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gillingham, K., Rapson, D., & Wagner, G.
Affiliations
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Environmental Defense Fund (US)
Corresponding author
  • Gillingham, Kenneth
  • Rapson, David
  • Wagner, Gernot
Venue
Review of Environmental Economics and Policy
Published
2016-01-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
68-88
ISSN
  • 1750-6816 (ISSN-L)
  • 1750-6824
OpenAlex
W3123626357
Cited by
672
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 78 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Review of Environmental Economics and Policy (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Energy, Environment, Economic Growth
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy Efficiency and Management
Keywords
rebound effect, energy efficiency, energy efficiency policy, induced innovation, productivity growth, welfare effects, energy consumption

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review