@article{a95a7b7929f44486bd7621f078c438af,
title = "Locus of control and energy poverty",
abstract = "We examine the impact of locus of control (LoC) on energy poverty. Using 15 waves of longitudinal data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey and a supplementary dataset that collects information on household energy choices, we examine the direct effects of LoC on subjective and objective indicators of energy poverty. We also examine the role of savings, gambling behaviour, trust and household energy choices as potential channels through which LoC transmits to energy poverty. We find that being more internal on LoC is associated with a lower likelihood of being energy poor. Specifically, a one standard deviation increase in being more internal on LoC is associated with a 0.028 standard deviation decline in the probability of being energy poor as defined by the low-income high-cost measure of energy poverty and a 0.125 standard deviation decline in the probability that one is unable to heat their home. We find that savings, gambling behaviour, social capital and being proactive in installing energy-saving lighting and not leaving the lights on in the house throughout the day are channels through which LoC influences energy poverty.",
keywords = "Australia, Energy poverty, Locus of control, Personality",
author = "{Awaworyi Churchill}, Sefa and Russell Smyth",
note = "Funding Information: This article uses unit record data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this article, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute. The study (project number BL CHEAN 24020) was approved by the RMIT Business & Law College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN). All participants provided electronically signed consent. We thank Sonja de New and the two referees for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. We, though, are solely responsible for the views expressed and any errors. Funding Information: This article uses unit record data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this article, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute. The study (project number BL CHEAN 24020) was approved by the RMIT Business & Law College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN). All participants provided electronically signed consent. We thank Sonja de New and the two referees for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. We, though, are solely responsible for the views expressed and any errors. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 Elsevier B.V. Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2021",
month = dec,
doi = "10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105648",
language = "English",
volume = "104",
journal = "Energy Economics",
issn = "0140-9883",
publisher = "Elsevier",
}