Effects of monetary and nonmonetary interventions on energy conservation: A meta-analysis of experimental studies

Governments around the world have reached a consensus on mitigating climate change through energy conservation and emission reduction. The literature has provided evidence that both monetary and nonmonetary interventions are effective in promoting public energy conservation. However, it remains unclear whether monetary or nonmonetary intervention is more efficient in reducing energy consumption. With evidence from 112 field trials and 13,998 study subjects between 1976 and 2021, this study systematically evaluated and compared the energy-saving effects of monetary and nonmonetary interventions using a random-effects meta-analysis approach. The results show that nonmonetary interventions are more effective than monetary interventions, which means that the use of low-cost, efficient nonmonetary interventions is a promising strategy for promoting energy conservation. The optimal intervention modes were identified through subgroup analysis. Interventions lasting 1–6 months with a weekly frequency and the combination of antecedent interventions and consequence interventions were shown to be most effective. This is the first quantitative review study to focus on comparing the energy-conservation effects of monetary and nonmonetary interventions, and to identify the most effective intervention methods. The findings provide valuable insights for guiding the management of public energy consumption.