Ordnungspolitische Grundlagen
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 186-192
81 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 186-192
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 266-273
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 169-177
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 220-265
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 203-219
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 16-29
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 7-10
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 106-112
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 11-15
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 53-77
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 78-105
In: Nachhaltigkeit, Ordnungspolitik und freiwillige Selbstverpflichtung, S. 141-168
In: ZEW Economic Studies 44
As the residential buildings sector accounts for around 30 percent of the final energy demand in Germany, this sector is increasingly becoming the focus of public attention with regard to climate change. In this book, decisions on energy consumption by private households are examined. The analyses are based on several empirical methods. The results show that the road to more sustainable energy consumption in residential buildings is not hampered by a lack of will on behalf of the consumers. However one should be realistic that there are many instances where improving thermal institution involves additional economic costs for individual households.
In: ZEW Economic Studies; Sustainable Energy Consumption in Residential Buildings, S. 1-37
In: Borup , M , Klitkou , A , Andersen , M M , Hain , D S , Lindgaard Christensen , J & Rennings , K 2013 , Indicators of energy innovation systems and their dynamics. A review of current practice and research in the field : Radar report . EIS .
The purpose of this 'radar report' is to give an overview of the state of the art concerning indicators of energy innovation systems and their dynamics. As part of this, it is the aim to discuss current challenges and efforts made by researchers and other professionals working in the field. Through this, the radar report shall contribute to the discussion of how the field might develop in the future; both for the sake of understanding the dynamics of energy innovation systems in general and, more specifically, for the sake of understanding the role energy innovation systems play for moving towards more climate-friendly and sustainable energy systems. The analysis behind the radar report builds on a search and review of research literature, databases, statistics schemes, etc., on indicators of energy innovation systems as such and on relevant connected issues. In addition, it builds on assessment and insights from experienced researchers in the field. It is the intention with the report to communicate knowledge from researchers to other interested parties; not only to other researchers, but also to stakeholders more broadly, e.g. interest organisations, policy makers, sta-tisticians, etc. However, a one-way communication picture is not entirely correct. Not only do researchers in many cases build on nationally or internationally recognized indicator schemes and databases established by governmental bodies, statistics agencies or international organizations like the OECD (Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development) and the IEA (International Energy Agency). Researchers are also in a number of cases involved in establishment and development of official indicator schemes for example by acting as advisors or carrying out background studies. The interaction between research and practitioners is complex, and it makes little sense to address scientific research activities only, without taking into consideration the broader picture of indicator schemes. What we researchers most obviously can contribute with compared to other professional bodies in the field, is an explicit theoretical analysis perspective, in this case based on innovation system theory. Through this we can hopefully point out issues and raise questions that would otherwise not have been addressed.
BASE