🎧 New podcast episode featuring my paper on the pricing of climate risk in the housing market!. Grateful to @OxfordFrom and @OxfordFORE for the great conversation. #EconTwitter #Research #Podcast.

Looking forward to presenting our research at the VATT Institute for Economic Research later this week📊.

10/ Bottom line:.✔️ Road pricing works—but especially for non-BEV drivers.✔️ Combining road pricing with subsidies has limited effects on nudging behavior.✔️ Public support hinges on info, not just experience. 📄 Read the paper:

9/ 🧪 Methodology: we used a field road pricing RCT combined with a survey RCT, DiD estimation, and high-frequency GPS data—capturing shifts across modes and times, including trip location and purpose in unprecedented detail.

8/ This suggests that transparent communication is more effective than pilot exposure in building public support.

7/ 🧠 What drives public support for road pricing? Not just experience. We tested information provision on future expected benefits on congestion and pollution reduction →.✅ Significant boost in support. ❌ Experience alone with the pilot had no significant effect.

6/ 📉 Work-related trips showed little change — possibly due to rigid schedules. Most behavioral adjustments happened in non-work travel.

5/ 🧑‍🤝‍🧑🚶 In a separate treatment, we bundled road pricing with subsidies for walking & cycling. Compared to road pricing alone, this group showed: . → no significant reduction in driving externalities .→ stronger shifts to cycling but not to public transport.

4/ 💡A key insight: drivers of battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) are significantly less responsive to road pricing than non-BEV drivers. Why? May partly be explained by:.→ They face lower charges.→ Higher incomes.→ More likely to drive to work during peak hours.

3/ 🚗 The treatment led to a 5.3% reduction in driving externalities, implying a price elasticity between -0.07 and -0.15. Most of this came from:. → 4.1% fewer kilometers driven. → 2.8% fewer car trips.…mainly during off-peak hours and in urban/suburban areas.

2/ We tested time- and location-specific, distance-based road pricing in Oslo using a smartphone app that tracked about 3,000 drivers (54% of them with battery-electric vehicles) over 700,000 trips. Participants could save money by reducing externalities from driving.

1/ New paper out! .We ran one of the largest randomized controlled trials on distance-based road pricing to study how it affects travel behavior and public support. Here's what we found 👇. 📄 Ciccone, Garnache & Andreassen (CESifo WP No. 11867).

(4/4)Implications for the future:. 1. Demand-side management tools (like CPP) can reduce peak demand and the need for costly infrastructure upgrades.2. Fully electrified homes+EVs can make grids more flexible.3. Higher electrification doesn’t imply rigidity, it offers opportunity.

(3/4) Load shifting:. 3. EV households shift charging to off-peak hours&the next day🚗🔋.4. Non-EV households simply use less during peaks without compensating later. What about equity?. 5. We find similar responses to CPP across income groups, alleviating concerns about fairness

(2/4) We ran a critical peak pricing RCT in Norway—a country with fully electrified homes and a leader in EV adoption. Key results:. 1. A 10x price spike reduces peak electricity use by 15.3%, eliminating the demand peak.2. Households with EVs respond even more to CPP 🚗🔋

Will demand-side management be effective at curbing electricity demand in a future with higher levels of electrification? . Check our study just published in @JaereAere, w/ @ohernaes and @AndersGravir 🏠⚡here. Let’s dive in! (1/4).

RT @JaereAere: 🔌 Just accepted 🔌 in @JaereAere:. "Demand-Side Management in Fully Electrified Homes" by Cloé Garnache (@CGarnache), Øystein….

Is Air Pollution Regulation Too Stringent? The answer in the US seems to clearly be no.

Our new working paper on environmental taxation is out - with Pierre Merel.

Consider registering for the UEA 2020 Lectures on Urban Economics