Literature reviewIn the past two de

Literature review
In the past two decades, the role of consumers and their consumption patterns have attracted increasing attention and
discussion among researchers. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report for policymakers, Working
Group III has mentioned in its report that Changes in lifestyles and consumption patterns that emphasize resource conservation
can contribute to developing a low-carbon economy that is both equitable and sustainable. In the late 1980s, some researchers
brought the concept of lifestyle into the study of personal energy consumption. Lee Schipper et al. (1989) rightly concluded:
‘‘about 45–55% of total energy use is influenced by consumers’ activities for personal transportation, personal services, and homes.’’
They argued that significant changes in energy demand will be driven by ‘‘the mix of personal activities and their locations
besides energy prices and incomes’’. There exists relatively a large body of literature on the developed countries. Weber
and Perrels (2000) quantified the impact of lifestyle factors in the 1990s and 2010’s energy demand and related emissions
in West Germany, France and the Netherlands. Lenzen assessed the energy use and greenhouse gases attributable to consumer
activities in Australia (1998). Bin and Dowlatabadi (2005) used the consumer lifestyle approach (CLA) to study the
relationship between consumer activities and energy use and related CO2 emissions. Their results showed that 80% of energy
consumption and CO2 emissions could be attributed to consumer behaviour and related economic activities. The indirect
effects of consumer behaviour caused by energy consumption and CO2 emissions were twice those of direct actions. Here
direct action means energy use that is resulting directly from personal travel, or home energy use like lighting, appliances,
cooking, space heating and water heating. Indirect impact refers to the energy consumption and CO2 emission occurred in
the preparation of a product or service before its use. Reinders et al. (2003) analysed household energy consumption in 11
European Union countries and found that household energy consumption varied with expenditure. Lenzen et al. (2006) have
used input output analysis to evaluate sustainable household consumption from a global perspective. Their results showed
that energy needs are quite different across countries and does not support the environmental Kuznets curve. Also there are
significant differences in average energy requirements even at equal income levels.
There are few studies on the developing countries. In China, a study by Wei et al. (2007) suggests that approximately 26
per cent of total energy consumption and 30 per cent of CO2 emissions in the country every year are a consequence of residents’
lifestyles, and the economic activities that support these demands. Another study on China by Zhen-Hua Feng et al.
(2011) uses the Grey Model to compare the relationship between energy consumption, consumption expenditure and CO2
emissions for different lifestyles. The results show that direct energy consumption is diverse for urban households and simple
for rural households in China. Direct energy consumption and CO2 emissions are increasing faster for urban than for rural
households. Indirect energy consumption and CO2 emissions for urban households are much greater than the direct consumption
values. Reddy and Srinivas (2009) analysed Indian household energy consumption patterns and the factors that
influence them. It analyses actor linkages and their impact on the fuel choice mechanism. Apart from carbon footprints, closely
related energy requirements of Indian households have been calculated by Pachauri and Spreng (2002) for the years
1983–84, 1989–90 and 1993–94. Based on input–output (IO) analysis, the authors find that household energy requirements
have significantly increased over time identifying growing income, population and increasing energy intensity in the food
and agricultural sectors as the main drivers. The study also reveals income levels as the main factor determining variation
in energy requirements across households. Nicole Grunewald et al., 2012 apply IO energy analysis along with household
expenditure survey data from India for the year 2004/05 to calculate the carbon footprint of households by income groups
and analyse the respective emission drivers. The authors have also estimated the income elasticities of major consumption
subgroups to point to consumption items, which are declared as luxury goods and which exhibit a high carbon intensity. The
paper concludes by saying that other than income, fuel types used for cooking have a positive impact on carbon footprint as
well as factors like gender, age, employment and religion. The household carbon footprint of the richest quintile is almost
five times the carbon footprint of the poorest quintile.

ผลลัพธ์ (ไทย) 1:

การทบทวนวรรณกรรมในสองทศวรรษ บทบาทของผู้บริโภคและรูปแบบการใช้ของพวกเขาได้ดึงดูดความสนใจเพิ่มขึ้น และการสนทนาระหว่างนักวิจัย รายงาน IPCC (ว่าด้วยการเปลี่ยนแปลงสภาพภูมิอากาศ) สำหรับผู้กำหนดนโยบาย การทำงานกลุ่ม III มีกล่าวถึงในรายงานการเปลี่ยนแปลงในวิถีชีวิตและรูปแบบการบริโภคที่เน้นการอนุรักษ์ทรัพยากรสามารถมีส่วนร่วมในการพัฒนาเศรษฐกิจคาร์บอนต่ำที่เป็นธรรม และยั่งยืน ในปลายทศวรรษ 1980 นักวิจัยบางนำแนวคิดของการใช้ชีวิตในการศึกษาการใช้พลังงานส่วนบุคคล Lee Schipper et al. (1989) สรุปเรื่อง:''ประมาณ 45 – 55% ของพลังงานทั้งหมดที่ใช้ได้รับอิทธิพลจากกิจกรรมของผู้บริโภคสำหรับรถส่วนบุคคล ส่วนบุคคล และบริการบ้าน ''พวกเขาโต้เถียงที่ จะขับเคลื่อนการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่สำคัญในความต้องการพลังงานโดย '' ผสมผสานกิจกรรมส่วนบุคคลและตำแหน่งนอกจากราคาพลังงานและรายได้ '' ค่อนข้างมีร่างกายขนาดใหญ่ของวรรณกรรมในประเทศพัฒนาแล้ว เวเบอร์และ Perrels (2000) quantified ผลกระทบของสาเหตุในความต้องการพลังงานในปี 1990 และบริษัทฯ ที่เกี่ยวข้องกับการปล่อยในสหพันธ์สาธารณรัฐเยอรมนี ฝรั่งเศส และเนเธอร์แลนด์ Lenzen ประเมินการพลังงานใช้และเรือนกระจกก๊าซรวมถึงผู้บริโภคกิจกรรมในออสเตรเลีย (1998) ช่องและ Dowlatabadi (2005) ใช้วิธีชีวิตแบบผู้บริโภค (CLA) ศึกษาการความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างกิจกรรมการบริโภค และการใช้พลังงาน และปล่อย CO2 ที่เกี่ยวข้อง ผลลัพธ์พบว่า 80% ของพลังงานconsumption and CO2 emissions could be attributed to consumer behaviour and related economic activities. The indirecteffects of consumer behaviour caused by energy consumption and CO2 emissions were twice those of direct actions. Heredirect action means energy use that is resulting directly from personal travel, or home energy use like lighting, appliances,cooking, space heating and water heating. Indirect impact refers to the energy consumption and CO2 emission occurred inthe preparation of a product or service before its use. Reinders et al. (2003) analysed household energy consumption in 11European Union countries and found that household energy consumption varied with expenditure. Lenzen et al. (2006) haveused input output analysis to evaluate sustainable household consumption from a global perspective. Their results showedthat energy needs are quite different across countries and does not support the environmental Kuznets curve. Also there aresignificant differences in average energy requirements even at equal income levels.There are few studies on the developing countries. In China, a study by Wei et al. (2007) suggests that approximately 26per cent of total energy consumption and 30 per cent of CO2 emissions in the country every year are a consequence of residents’lifestyles, and the economic activities that support these demands. Another study on China by Zhen-Hua Feng et al.(2011) uses the Grey Model to compare the relationship between energy consumption, consumption expenditure and CO2emissions for different lifestyles. The results show that direct energy consumption is diverse for urban households and simplefor rural households in China. Direct energy consumption and CO2 emissions are increasing faster for urban than for ruralhouseholds. Indirect energy consumption and CO2 emissions for urban households are much greater than the direct consumptionvalues. Reddy and Srinivas (2009) analysed Indian household energy consumption patterns and the factors thatinfluence them. It analyses actor linkages and their impact on the fuel choice mechanism. Apart from carbon footprints, closelyrelated energy requirements of Indian households have been calculated by Pachauri and Spreng (2002) for the years1983–84, 1989–90 and 1993–94. Based on input–output (IO) analysis, the authors find that household energy requirementshave significantly increased over time identifying growing income, population and increasing energy intensity in the foodand agricultural sectors as the main drivers. The study also reveals income levels as the main factor determining variationin energy requirements across households. Nicole Grunewald et al., 2012 apply IO energy analysis along with householdexpenditure survey data from India for the year 2004/05 to calculate the carbon footprint of households by income groupsand analyse the respective emission drivers. The authors have also estimated the income elasticities of major consumptionsubgroups to point to consumption items, which are declared as luxury goods and which exhibit a high carbon intensity. Thepaper concludes by saying that other than income, fuel types used for cooking have a positive impact on carbon footprint aswell as factors like gender, age, employment and religion. The household carbon footprint of the richest quintile is almostfive times the carbon footprint of the poorest quintile.