Abstract
Consumer satisfaction with utility services has received increased attention from firms, consumer associations, regulators and governments since the 1990s. Evidence is mounting that consumers in specific socio-economic groups express lower satisfaction levels than their peers, at least, in some utility markets. Seeing this as part of their remit to protect consumer welfare, governments and international organizations are exploring possible demand-side policy responses with the intention of ameliorating lower satisfaction levels of these groups of consumers. However, more information on the precise relationships between satisfaction and consumers’ socio-economic background is required if policy is to be proportional and effective. This paper provides new empirical knowledge on this topic by contrasting consumers’ stated and revealed preferences for five utility services (electricity, gas, fixed and cellular telephony and Internet) across twelve European countries. We find strong evidence that consumers’ socio-economic characteristics matter: consumers with lower levels of education, the elderly and those not employed exhibit particular expenditure patterns on, and lower satisfaction levels with, some utility services. However, this relationship is uneven and depends on the socio-economic category and service in question. We conclude by highlighting five findings which may be of use to policy-makers when considering whether demand-side regulatory policies are required
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
References
American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI). (2013). Retrieved December 1, 2013 from http://www.theacsi.org/products-and-services/energy-ulilities/energy-benchmark.
Anderson, E. W., & Fornell, C. (2000). Foundations of the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Total Quality Management, 11(7), 869–882.
Andreasen, A. R., & Manning, J. (1990). The dissatisfaction and complaining behavior of vulnerable consumers. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, 3, 12–20.
Australian Government (2007). Behavioural Economics and Public Policy: Roundtable Proceedings. Australian Government, Productivity Commission: Melbourne. Retrieved June 12, 2012 from http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/79250/behavioural-economics.pdf.
Briglauer, W., Schwarz, A., & Zulehner, C. (2011). Is fixed-mobile substitution strong enough to de-regulate fixed voice telephony? Evidence from the Austrian markets. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 39, 50–67.
Camerer, C., Issacharoff, S., Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2003). Regulation for conservatives: Behavioral economics and the case for “Asymmetric Paternalism”. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 151, 1211–1254.
Cardona, M., Schwarz, A., Yurtoglu, B. B., & Zulehner, C. (2009). Demand estimation and market definition for broadband Internet services. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 35, 70–95.
Clifton, J., Comín, F., & Díaz-Fuentes, D. (2010). The political economy of telecoms and electricity internationalization in the single market. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(7), 988–1006.
Clifton, J., & Díaz-Fuentes, D. (2010). Evaluating EU policies on public services: A citizens’ perspective. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 81(2), 281–311.
Consumer Focus (2010). What’s the deal? Energy suppliers’ social tariffs and rebates. Retrieved September 4, 2013 from http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/files/2010/10/Whats-the-deal-2010.pdf.
Cooper, J. C., & Kovacic, W. E. (2012). Behavioral economics: Implications for regulatory behavior. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 41(1), 41–58.
Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2010). Are risk aversion and impatience related to cognitive ability? The American Economic Review, 100(3), 1238–1260.
EC (1997). Eurobarometer 47.0: L’Europe des Consommateurs. Brussels: EC
EC (2000). Eurobarometer 53.0: Les Européens et les services d’intérêt généraux. Brussels: EC
EC (2002). Eurobarometer 58.0: Consumers’ opinions on Services of General Interest in the EU 15. Brussels: EC
EC (2003). CCEB Eurobarometer: Consumers’ opinions on services of general interest in the New Member States. Brussels: EC.
EC (2005). Eurobarometer 62.1: Consumers opinions on Services of General Interest. Brussels: EC.
EC (2007). Eurobarometer 65.3: Consumers opinions on Services of General Interest. Brussels: EC.
EC (2008). How Can Behavioral Economics Improve Policies Affecting Consumers? Details and Presentations from the international conference organized by DG Health and Consumer Protection: Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/dyna/conference/economics_en.htm. Accessed 15 June 2012
EC (2010a). The Monitoring of Consumer Markets in the European Union. Retrieved September 10, 2013 from http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/strategy/docs/EC_Market_Monitoring_2010_en.pdf.
EC (2010b). Behavioral Economics, So What: Should Policy Makers Care? Material from the International Conference organized by DG Health and Consumers, Brussels, November 22. Retrieved June 22, 2012 from http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/conferences/behavioural_economics2/links_en.htm.
EC (2012). On knowledge-enhancing aspects of consumer empowerment 2012–2014. Brussels: EC
EC (2013) Eurobarometers. Retrieved December 1, 2013 from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm.
ECCG (European Consumer Consultative Group) (2013). Opinion on consumers and vulnerability. Retrieved September 16, 2013 from http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/empowerment/docs/eccg_opinion_consumers_vulnerability_022013_en.pdf.
EP (European Parliament) (2012). On a strategy for strengthening the rights of vulnerable consumers. (2011/2272(INI)). Brussels: European Parliament
EUROSTAT (2011). Household Budget Survey. Luxembourg: EUROSTAT
Federal Trade Commission (2007). Behavioral Economics and Consumer Policy, New Jersey, September 14. Retrieved June 22, 2012 from http://www.ftc.gov/be/consumerbehavior/index.shtml.
Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction barometer: The Swedish experience. Journal of Marketing, 56(1), 6–21.
Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., Cha, J., & Bryant, B. E. (1996). The American Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, purpose, and findings. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 7–18.
Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research. Journal of Economic Literature, Xl, 402–435.
George, M., Graham, C., & Lennard, L. (2011). Too many hurdles: Information and advice barriers in the energy market. Leicester: Centre for Consumers and Essential Services.
Giulietti, M., & Waddams Price, C. (2005). Consumer choice and competition policy: A study of UK energy markets. The Economic Journal, 115, 949–968.
Glass, V., & Stevanova, S. K. (2010). An empirical study of broadband diffusion in rural America. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 38, 70–85.
Haynes, G. A. (2009). Testing the boundaries of the choice overload phenomenon: The effect of number of options and time pressure on decision difficulty and satisfaction. Psychology & Marketing, 26(3), 204–212.
Hjorth, K., & Fosgerau, M. (2011). Loss aversion and individual characteristics. Environmental and Resource Economics, 49, 573–596.
Institute for Government. (2010). Mindspace. Institute for Government, Cabinet Office: Influencing behaviour through public policy. London.
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995–1006.
Johnson, M. D., Gustafsson, A., Andreassen, T. W., Lervik, L., & Cha, J. (2001). The evolution and future of national customer satisfaction index models. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22, 217–245.
Kahneman, D., Knestsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion and status Quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193–206.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kahneman, D., & Thaler, R. H. (2006). Anomalies. Utility maximization and experienced utility. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 221–234.
Lunn, P., & Lyons, S. (2010). Behavioural economics and ‘Vulnerable Consumers’: A summary of evidence, communications consumer panel. Retrieved December 1, 2013 from http://www.communications consumerpanel.org.uk/Behavioural%20Economics%20and%20Vulnerable%20Consumers%20final% 20report%20correct%20date.pdf.
Macher, J. T., Mayo, J. W., Ukhaneva, O., & Woroch, G. A. (2012). Demand in a Portfolio-choice environment: The evolution of telecommunications. Georgetown McDonough School of Business Research Paper No. 2012–19. Retrieved March 10, 2014 from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2133424.
McColl-Kennedy, J., & Schneider, U. (2000). Measuring customer satisfaction: Why, what and how. Total Quality Management, 11(7), 883–896.
Mullainathan, S., & Thaler, R. (2000). Behavioural economics. Working Paper Series, 00–27. Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Muzzini, E. (2005). Consumer participation in Infrastructure regulation - Evidence from the East Asia and Pacific Region. World Bank Working Paper, \(\text{ n }^{o}\) 66. Washington DC: World Bank
NCSI-UK (2013). National Customer Satisfaction Index-UK. Retrieved December 1, 2013 from http://www.ncsiuk.com/index.php.
OECD. (2001). Innovation and Productivity in Services. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2008). Enhancing Competition in Telecommunications: Protecting and Empowering Consumers. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2010). Consumer Policy Toolkit. Paris: OECD
OFGEM (2012). Proposals for a new Consumer Vulnerability Strategy, OFGEM: London. Retrieved February 20, 2013 from http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Sustainability/SocAction/Documents1/Proposals%20for%20a%20new%20Consumer%20Vulnerability%20Strategy.pdf.
OFT (Office of Fair Trading) (1998). Vulnerable Consumer Groups: quantification and analysis. Research paper. Retrieved September 9, 2013 from http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/consumer_protection/oft219.pdf.
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (1998). Governance without Government? Rethinking Public Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2), 223–243.
Samuelson, P. A. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. Economica, 5(17), 61–71.
Stearn, J., (2012). Tackling Consumer Vulnerability, Consumer Focus. Retrieved September 4, 2013 from http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/files/2012/12/Tackling-consumer-vulnerability.pdf.
Szymanski, D. M., & Henard, D. H. (2001). Customer satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 29(1), 16–35.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. The American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179.
Vigoda-Gadot, E., Shoham, A., & Vashdi, D. R. (2010). Bridging bureaucracy and democracy in Europe: A comparative study of perceived managerial excellence, satisfaction with public services and trust in governance. European Union Politics, 11(2), 289–308.
Whitehead, J. C., Pattanayak, S. K., Van Houvten, G. L., & Gelso, B. R. (2008). Combining revealed and stated preference data to estimate the nonmarket value of ecological services: an assessment of the state of the service. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(5), 872–908.
Wilson, C. M., & Waddams Price, C. (2010). Do consumers switch to the best supplier? Oxford Economic Papers, 62, 647–668.
Wunder, C., Wiencierz, A., Schwarze, J., & Küchenhoff, H. (2013). Well-being over the lifespan: Semiparametric evidence from British and German longitudinal data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 154–167.
Yatchew, Y., & Griliches, Z. (1985). Specification error in profit models. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 67(1), 134–139.
Acknowledgments
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Program under grant agreement No. 266887 (Project COCOPS), Socio-economic Sciences & Humanities. We would like to thank Michael Crew and the three anonymous reviewers for their insights and comments on earlier versions of this paper. We acknowledge support from the EC and EUROSTAT, particularly Peter Paul Borg, Emanuele Ciriolo, Adriaan Dierx, Gerard Hanney, Maria Lissowska, David Mair and Luca Protti.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Clifton, J., Díaz-Fuentes, D. & Fernández-Gutiérrez, M. The impact of socio-economic background on satisfaction: evidence for policy-makers. J Regul Econ 46, 183–206 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-014-9251-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-014-9251-1
Keywords
- Utility services
- Regulation
- Consumer satisfaction
- Socio-economic analysis
- Consumers
- Stated and revealed preferences