Comparing the model traditions of energy economics and energy technology: the case of Norwegian energy-efficiency policies

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Highlights the importance of model choice in energy policy analysis and the complementary nature of bottom-up and top-down approaches.

🏢実務担当者:Offers guidance on selecting appropriate modeling tools for energy-efficiency policy evaluation, relevant for corporate energy management teams.

🏛政策担当者:Emphasizes the need to use multiple models to capture a broad set of policy impacts, especially for residential energy efficiency.

When considering the introduction of energy and climate policies, numerical model analyses are useful tools. Bottom-up energy-system models and top-down general equilibrium models originate from different research communities: energy technologists and energy economists, respectively. We align a version of each type, introduce similar energy policies and compare the outcomes. The case is an energy-saving target for the Norwegian residential sector. We identify some important differences in the scope, data, and assumptions in the two model types that lead to noticeably diverging results. Some general conclusions can be drawn from our case study. The perspective and purpose of the study are crucial when choosing model(s). If the outcome for the consumers is in focus, bottom-up energy-system models give more accurate results about technology choices. They also include one type of response to energy policy that is not present in traditional top-down models: change in the use of non-purchased energy, for instance self-collected wood or ambient energy for heat pumps. On the other hand, top-down models feature a wider range of substitution possibilities in demand, by allowing for changes in demand for energy as well as for other goods, not only in the household sector but in all sectors of the economy. It follows that top-down models are more appropriate when the focus is on economy-wide repercussions that can potentially counteract the impacts on the residential sector. As the two model types have complementary contributions to energy policy planning, they should, ideally, be used together to capture a broad set of policy impacts. We claim that numerical models are well fit for assessing policy designs and particularly useful for analyses of future impacts. We argue that model comparison is often preferred to technically challenging and costly model linking procedures. We conclude that the technologists’ bottom-up and economists’ top-down approaches complement each other. What to choose will depend on the purposes and foci of the analysis. Apparently small deviations in modelling may have a large impact on results.

• openalex https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Comparing_the_model_traditions_of_energy_economics_and_energy_technology_the_case_of_Norwegian_energy-efficiency_policies/32915670first seen 2026-07-28 04:57:04 · last seen 2026-07-28 04:57:19