Best-practice and average practice: technique choice and energy demand in a vintage model

  • Lennart Hjalmarsson
  • Finn R. Försund
Part of the International Studies in Economic Modelling book series (ISIM)


Comparisons between best-practice use of energy and average practice have become quite popular in debates and scenarios about future need for energy, and sometimes fairly strong conclusions are drawn about long-run energy demand on the basis of such comparisons (see for example Goldemberg et al., 1988 and Johansson et al., 1989). Since in most sectors of an economy there is a substantial difference between the average and lowest energy input coefficients (i.e. the amount of energy used per unit output) an instantaneous adoption of best-practice energy-using technology in all sectors would decrease the use of energy radically.


Energy Demand Relative Price Reference Case Technical Progress Capacity Expansion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bogren, E. (1984) Energiproduktivitetens variationer inom industribranscher. Project report from the Energy Research Board, Efn/AES, 1984:2.Google Scholar
  2. Eaton, B. C. and Ware, R. (1987) A Theory of Market Structure with Sequential Entry. RAND Journal of Economics, 18, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Forsund, F. R. and Hjalmarsson, L. (1987) Analysis of Industrial Structure. A Production Function Approach. Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  4. Gilbert, R. J. and Harris, R. G. (1984) Competition with Lumpy Investment. RAND Journal of Economics, 15, 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gilbert, R. J. and Lieberman, M. (1987) Investment and Coordination in Oligopolistic Industries. RAND Journal of Economics, 18, 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goldemberg, J., Johansson, T. B., Reddy A. K. N. et al. (1988) Energy for a Sustainable World. Wiley Eastern, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  7. Heckscher, E. F. (1918) Svenska produktionsproblem. Bonniers, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  8. Hjalmarsson, L. (1974) The Size Distribution of Establishments and Firms Derived from an Optimal Process of Capacity Expansion. European Economic Review, 5, 123–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hjalmarsson, L. (1976) Capacity Expansion and its Implications for the Size Distribution of Firms: Reply. European Economic Review, 7, 287–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hjalmarsson, L. and Eriksson, S-G. (1985) ‘Choice of Technology and Energy Demand in a Vintage Framework.’ Unpublished.Google Scholar
  11. Johansen, L. (1972) Production Functions. Amsterdam, North Holland.Google Scholar
  12. Johansson, T. B, Bodlund, B. and Williams, R. H. (eds) (1989) Electricity — Efficient End-Use and New Generation Technologies, and their Planning Implications. Lund University Press, Lund.Google Scholar
  13. Manne, A., (1961) Capacity Expansion and Probabilistic Growth. Econometrica, 29, 632–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Peck, S. C. (1974) Alternative Investment Models for Firms in the Electric Utilities Industry, Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 5, 420–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lennart Hjalmarsson
  • Finn R. Försund

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations