@article{58473,
  abstract     = {{Using a large unique longitudinal survey data set from Germany covering more than 5,000 households, we analyze stated intentions and actual implementations of both flood-proofing and heat stress reduction measures to assess the intention behavior gap (IBG) in climate change adaptation. Our results do not only reveal a substantial IBG for most stated intentions, but also show their limits in serving as a good predictor for realized actions later. Moreover, the IBG itself can hardly be explained by observable household data characteristics. While we do find some similarities in explanatory variables affecting both intentions and implementations, these variables provide only little insights into the actual levels of implemented actions. In line with regret theory, the IBG in our data can be partly explained by anticipated regret caused by a feeling of having invested in vain in cases where adaptation measures are installed, but extreme weather events do not occur for the time being. Our results are informative for adaptation-related communication campaigns and public policy interventions, especially in the aftermath of natural disasters.}},
  author       = {{Osberghaus, Daniel and Botzen, Wouter and Kesternich, Martin}},
  journal      = {{Ecological Economics }},
  keywords     = {{Intention-behavior gap, Adaptation, Climate Change, Flooding, Heat}},
  title        = {{{The intention-behavior gap in climate change adaptation: Evidence from longitudinal survey data}}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}

@article{57139,
  author       = {{Chlond, Bettina and Goeschl , Timo  and Kesternich, Martin}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Environmental Economics and Management }},
  title        = {{{More money or better procedures? Evidence from an Energy Efficiency Assistance Program }}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}

@techreport{62697,
  abstract     = {{Urged by the European Energy Crisis and the threatening consequences of severe
natural gas shortages, energy providers launched gas-saving initiatives incor-
porating financial incentives to reduce residential natural gas consumption. In
collaboration with one of Germany’s largest energy providers, we conducted
a natural field experiment (N = 2,598) to evaluate the effectiveness of a
behaviorally-guided co-design of such a gas-saving initiative by implementing
two established behavioral instruments – reminders of gas saving intentions and
descriptive norm feedback. Our findings show limited effectiveness of the behav-
ioral instruments during the high-price period. The feedback risks a “boomerang
effect” among households with above-average initial savings, who reduce their
conservation efforts in response. The reminder does not significantly enhance sav-
ings in our main specifications, yet, realizes 1 percentage point savings in alternate
models refining for outliers. Potential mechanisms include a significant intention-
action gap and misperceived effectiveness of energy-saving actions, which are not
alleviated by the reminder.}},
  author       = {{Tinnefeld, Vicky and Kesternich, Martin and Werthschulte, Madeline}},
  keywords     = {{Residential energy savings, energy crisis, behavioral interventions, survey data, field experiment}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Discussion Paper No. 25-60}},
  title        = {{{Do Energy-Saving Nudges Deliver During High-Price Periods? Field Experimental Evidence From the European Energy Crisis}}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}

@article{47099,
  author       = {{Bartels, Lara and Kesternich, Martin and Löschel, Andreas}},
  issn         = {{1556-5068}},
  journal      = {{Land Economics }},
  keywords     = {{General Earth and Planetary Sciences, General Environmental Science}},
  title        = {{{The Demand for Voluntary Carbon Dioxide Removal – Experimental Evidence from an Afforestation Project in Germany}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.3979837}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}

@techreport{56494,
  abstract     = {{Many industrialized countries have recognized the need to mitigate energy cost increases faced by low-income households by fostering the adoption of energy-efficient technologies. How to meet this need is an open question, but “behavioral insights” are likely components of future policy designs. Applying well-established behavioral insights to low-income house- holds raises questions of transportability as they are typically underrepresented in the existing evidence base. We illustrate this problem by conducting a randomized field experiment on scalable, low-cost design elements to improve program take-up in one of the world’s largest en- ergy efficiency assistance programs. Observing investment decisions of over 1,800 low-income households in Germany’s “Refrigerator Replacement Program”, we find that the transportabil- ity problem is real and consequential: First, the most effective policy design would not have been chosen based on existing behavioral insights. Second, design elements favored by these insights either prove ineffective or even backfire, violating ‘do no harm’ principles of policy advice. Systematic testing remains crucial for addressing the transportability problem, partic- ularly for policies targeting vulnerable groups.
}},
  author       = {{Kesternich, Martin and Chlond , Bettina and Goeschl, Timo  and Werthschulte, Madeline}},
  keywords     = {{Transportability, low-income households, field experiment, randomized controlled trial, governmental welfare programs, energy efficiency, technology adoption}},
  publisher    = {{ AWI Discussion Paper Series No. 755}},
  title        = {{{Transporting behavioral insights to low-income households: A field experiment on energy efficiency investments}}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}

@techreport{57603,
  author       = {{Chlond, Bettina and Goeschl, Timo  and Kesternich, Martin and Werthschulte, Madeline}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Policy Brief 24-21}},
  title        = {{{Zielgruppengerichtete Ausgestaltung von Förderprogrammen führt zum Erfolg: Was uns das Beispiel „Energieeffizienz für alle“ lehrt}}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}

@article{47093,
  abstract     = {{We experimentally test a theoretically promising amendment to the ratchet-up mechanism of the Paris Agreement. The ratchet-up mechanism prescribes that parties’ commitments to the global response to climate change cannot decrease over time, and our results show that its effect is detrimental. We design a public goods game to study whether cooperation is promoted by an amendment to the mechanism that stipulates that all agents must contribute at least a collectively chosen minimum based on the principle of the lowest common denominator. We find that binding collective minimum contributions improve the effectiveness of the ratchet-up mechanism. Non-binding minimum contributions, by contrast, do not encourage cooperation. Our data indicate that the difference is attributable to conditional cooperative dynamics. If other participants contribute less than the collective minimum contribution, even initially cooperative participants start to negatively reciprocate this form of non-compliance by contributing less.}},
  author       = {{Alt, Marius and Kesternich, Martin and Gallier, Carlo and Sturm, Bodo}},
  issn         = {{1556-5068}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Environmental Economics and Management}},
  keywords     = {{global public goods, climate change, institutions, ratchet-up mechanism, minimum contributions, laboratory experiment}},
  title        = {{{Collective Minimum Contributions to Counteract the Ratchet Effect in the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.4288327}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}

@article{47102,
  author       = {{Gallier, Carlo and Goeschl, Timo and Kesternich, Martin and Lohse, Johannes and Reif, Christiane and Römer, Daniel}},
  issn         = {{1556-5068}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization}},
  pages        = {{457--468}},
  title        = {{{Inter-Charity Competition under Spatial Differentiation: Sorting, Crowding, and Spillovers}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.3466679}},
  volume       = {{216}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}

@techreport{47078,
  abstract     = {{<jats:p>Informationen sind für eine erfolgreiche Klimapolitik in doppelter Hinsicht wichtig: Sie werden benötigt, wenn Potenziale zur Vermeidung von Emissionen identifiziert und klimapolitische Instrumente ausgewählt werden. Und sie sind zentral, damit Bürger/innen selbst Entscheidungen im Sinne des Klimaschutzes treffen können.</jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Frick, Marc and Foese, Dario and Von Graevenitz, Kathrine and Kesternich, Martin and Wagner, Ulrich}},
  issn         = {{1430-8800}},
  keywords     = {{General Medicine}},
  pages        = {{44--50}},
  publisher    = {{Ökologisches Wirtschaften 38(1)}},
  title        = {{{Die Doppelwirkung von Information für klimafreundliches Handeln}}},
  doi          = {{10.14512/oew380144}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}

@techreport{47094,
  author       = {{Bartels, Lara and Kesternich, Martin}},
  issn         = {{1556-5068}},
  keywords     = {{General Earth and Planetary Sciences, General Environmental Science}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Discussion Paper 22-040}},
  title        = {{{Motivate the Crowd or Crowd-Them Out? The Impact of Local Government Spending on the Voluntary Provision of a Green Public Good}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.4251592}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@techreport{47096,
  author       = {{Chlond, Bettina and Goeschl, Timo and Kesternich, Martin}},
  issn         = {{1556-5068}},
  keywords     = {{General Earth and Planetary Sciences, General Environmental Science}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Discussion Paper  22-020}},
  title        = {{{More Money or Better Procedures? Evidence From an Energy Efficiency Assistance Program}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.4151557}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@techreport{47092,
  author       = {{Kesternich, Martin and Osberghaus, Daniel and Botzen, Willem Jan Wouter}},
  issn         = {{1556-5068}},
  keywords     = {{General Earth and Planetary Sciences, General Environmental Science}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Discussion Paper 22-055}},
  title        = {{{The Intention-Behavior Gap in Climate Change Adaptation}}},
  doi          = {{10.2139/ssrn.4288341}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@techreport{47080,
  author       = {{Kesternich, Martin and von Graevenitz, Kathrine}},
  publisher    = {{ifo Schnelldienst 11/2022, 21-24}},
  title        = {{{Gas- statt Preisbremse: Wie die Umsetzung von Unterstützungsprogrammen zum Gassparen für Haushalte und Unternehmen gelingen kann}}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@techreport{47097,
  author       = {{Chlond, Bettina and Goeschl, Timo  and Kesternich, Martin}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Policy Brief 22-01}},
  title        = {{{Wie lässt sich die Energieeffizienz in einkommensschwachen Haushalten steigern?}}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@techreport{47095,
  author       = {{Kesternich, Martin and Will, Ulrike and Manger-Nestler, Cornelia}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Policy Brief 22-04}},
  title        = {{{Pariser Klimaschutzabkommen – Berichtsstandards und Begleitanalysen nationaler Klimaschutzbeiträge stärken}}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}

@techreport{47098,
  author       = {{Alt, Marius and Gallier, Carlo and Sturm, Bodo and Kesternich, Martin}},
  publisher    = {{ZEW Policy Brief 21-09}},
  title        = {{{Ausblick auf die COP26 in Glasgow, Eine schrittweise Erhöhung der Klimaschutzbeiträge reicht nicht – ein Klimaklub sollte mitgedacht werden}}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@techreport{47100,
  author       = {{Frick, Marc and Conzelmann, Annabell and von Graevenitz, Kathrine and Kesternich, Martin and Wagner, Ulrich and Rausch, Sebastian}},
  title        = {{{Transparente Klimabilanzen - Information für klimafreundliches Handeln}}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{45587,
  author       = {{Habla, Wolfgang and Huwe, Vera and Kesternich, Martin}},
  issn         = {{1361-9209}},
  journal      = {{Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment}},
  keywords     = {{General Environmental Science, Transportation, Civil and Structural Engineering}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier BV}},
  title        = {{{Electric and conventional vehicle usage in private and car sharing fleets in Germany}}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.trd.2021.102729}},
  volume       = {{93}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}

@article{45586,
  abstract     = {{<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>We have collected data from a world-wide survey among COP delegates to empirically investigate preferences for certain burden sharing rules among key groups in a setting that reflects the possibility of observing concessions from negotiating partners. In our survey, the participants had the opportunity to select and combine up to eight (pre-defined) burden sharing rules and to assign relative weights to the selected rules in their preferred bundle. We examine whether such a mechanism helps to overcome the currently strictly (self-interested) strategic claims on equity in the negotiation process. We observe that delegates from different groups of countries show a general willingness for concessions. However, the degree to which different burden sharing rules are taken into consideration partly differs between countries. As a key insight we report that the individual assessment of the polluter-pays rule based on current emissions does not only stress the persistence of the traditional Annex-B/Non-Annex-B division but also suggests tendencies for a more fragmented grouping with different positions between, for example, delegates from developing countries (i.e. G77 members) and emerging countries (i.e. BASIC). At the same time, we observe tendencies for a more harmonized view among key groups towards the ability-to-pay rule in a setting of weighted burden sharing rules.</jats:p>}},
  author       = {{Kesternich, Martin and Löschel, Andreas and Ziegler, Andreas}},
  issn         = {{1432-847X}},
  journal      = {{Environmental Economics and Policy Studies}},
  keywords     = {{Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Economics and Econometrics}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{309--331}},
  publisher    = {{Springer Science and Business Media LLC}},
  title        = {{{Negotiating weights for burden sharing rules in international climate negotiations: an empirical analysis}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s10018-020-00289-0}},
  volume       = {{23}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}

@techreport{47083,
  author       = {{Habla, Wolfgang and Huwe, Vera and Kesternich, Martin}},
  issn         = {{0043-6275}},
  keywords     = {{Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)}},
  pages        = {{330--334}},
  publisher    = {{Wirtschaftsdienst 99(5), 330-334}},
  title        = {{{Tempolimits und Grenzwerte: für eine evidenzbasierte verkehrspolitische Debatte}}},
  doi          = {{10.1007/s10273-019-2452-6}},
  volume       = {{99(5)}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}