turanВестник университета «Туран»Bulletin of "Turan" University1562-29592959-1236Университет «Туран»10.46914/1562-2959-2026-1-2-631-643turan-5621Research ArticleТРИБУНА МОЛОДОГО ИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЯPLATFORM OF YOUNG RESEARCHERЭкономическая модель поведенческой адаптации домохозяйств в условиях внедрения временных тарифов на электроэнергиюEconomic model of household behavioral adaptation under the introduction of time-of-use electricity tariffshttps://orcid.org/0009-0009-5474-4148КалиевН. Е.KaliyevN. Е.

докторант 

г. Алматы

PhD student 

Almaty

nurzhan.kaliyev@outlook.comhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3221-7824ДауренбековаА. Н.DaurenbekovaA. N.

д.э.н., профессор 

г. Алматы

 

d.e.s., professor 

Almaty

a.daurenbekova@turan-edu.kzhttps://orcid.org/0009-0004-0962-4044ГриневичЮ. А.GrinevichY. A.

к.э.н., доцент

г. Нижний Новгород

c.e.s., associate professor

Nizhny Novgorod

julia-grinevich@mail.ruУниверситет «Туран»КазахстанTuran UniversityKazakhstanННГУ им. ЛобачевскогоРоссияState UNN named after LobachevskyRussian Federation20261607202602631643Copyright © Калиев Н.Е., Дауренбекова А.Н., Гриневич Ю.А., 20262026Калиев Н.Е., Дауренбекова А.Н., Гриневич Ю.А.Kaliyev N.Е., Daurenbekova A.N., Grinevich Y.A.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://vestnik.turan-edu.kz/jour/article/view/5621

Современные энергетические системы сталкиваются с необходимостью обеспечения баланса между эффективностью тарифной политики и социальной справедливостью. Настоящее исследование направлено на выявление экономических и поведенческих факторов адаптации домохозяйств к временным тарифам на электроэнергию на примере г. Алматы. Цель исследования – эмпирически определить ключевые детерминанты готовности потребителей переходить на тарифы, дифференцированные по времени суток. Теоретической основой послужили принципы поведенческой экономики, а анализ выполнен с использованием метода структурных уравнений (PLS-SEM). Опрос 388 респондентов показал, что основное влияние на готовность перехода оказывают технологическая готовность, восприятие справедливости тарифной системы и институциональное доверие. Фактор избегания риска препятствует адаптации, отражая осторожность потребителей при изменении тарифов. Экологическая переменная не показала статистической значимости и была исключена. Результаты подчеркивают важность укрепления технологической готовности, справедливости и доверия при разработке эффективной тарифной политики в Казахстане и способствуют развитию поведенческих подходов в энергетической экономике.

Modern energy systems face the challenge of balancing tariff efficiency with social fairness. This study aims to identify the economic and behavioral factors influencing household adaptation to time-of-use (TOU) electricity tariffs in Almaty, Kazakhstan. The main objective is to empirically determine the key determinants of consumers’ willingness to adopt time-differentiated tariffs. The research is grounded in behavioral economics principles, and data analysis was conducted using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) approach. A survey of 388 respondents revealed that technological readiness, perceived fairness, and institutional trust are the primary drivers of behavioral intention to adopt TOU tariffs. Risk aversion negatively affects adaptation, reflecting consumer caution toward tariff changes. The environmental concern variable was statistically insignificant and excluded from the final model. The findings emphasize the importance of strengthening technological readiness, fairness, and trust to ensure the success of tariff reforms and contribute to advancing behavioral approaches in energy economics.

временные тарифыдомохозяйстваповеденческая экономикатехнологическая готовностьсправедливостьинституциональное довериеизбегание рискаtime-of-use tariffshouseholdsbehavioral economicstechnological readinessperceived fairnessinstitutional trustrisk aversionReferencesАО «KEGOC». Годовой отчет 2024: Энергия развития. – Астана: АО «KEGOC». – 2024. – 204 с. URL: www.kegoc.kz/upload/iblock/138/6rui15jyo4eeu7pt0wv08rr5vpi0x80e.pdf (дата обращения: 20.11.2025)AO «KEGOC». Godovoj otchet 2024: Jenergija razvitija. – Astana: AO «KEGOC». 2024. 204 р. URL: www.kegoc.kz/upload/iblock/138/6rui15jyo4eeu7pt0wv08rr5vpi0x80e.pdf (data obrashhenija: 20.11.2025) (In Russian)Borenstein S., Bushnell J. Do Two Electricity Pricing Wrongs Make a Right? Cost Recovery, Externalities, and Efficiency // Journal of Industrial Economics. 2019. Vol. 67. No. 1. P. 1–31.Borenstein S., Bushnell J. (2019) Do Two Electricity Pricing Wrongs Make a Right? Cost Recovery, Externalities, and Efficiency // Journal of Industrial Economics. Vol. 67. No. 1. P. 1–31. (In English)Faruqui A., Palmer J. Dynamic Pricing of Electricity and Its Discontents. USA: SSRN, 2011. 17 p.Faruqui A., Palmer J. (2011) Dynamic Pricing of Electricity and Its Discontents. USA: SSRN. 17 p. (In English)Allcott H., Mullainathan S. Behavioral Science and Energy Policy // Science. 2010. Vol. 327. No. 5970. P. 1204–1205.Allcott H., Mullainathan S. (2010) Behavioral Science and Energy Policy // Science. Vol. 327. No. 5970. P. 1204–1205. (In English)Faruqui A., Sergici S., Akaba L. Dynamic Pricing of Electricity for Residential Customers: The Evidence from Michigan. USA: SSRN, 2012. 31 p.Faruqui A., Sergici S., Akaba L. (2012) Dynamic Pricing of Electricity for Residential Customers: The Evidence from Michigan. USA: SSRN. 31 p. (In English)Faruqui A., Sergici S. Household Response to Dynamic Pricing of Electricity: A Survey of the Experimental Evidence. USA: SSRN, 2009. 42 p.Faruqui A., Sergici S. (2009) Household Response to Dynamic Pricing of Electricity: A Survey of the Experimental Evidence. USA: SSRN. 42 p. (In English)Nicolson M., Huebner G., Shipworth D. Are Consumers Willing to Switch to Smart Time-of-Use Electricity Tariffs? The Importance of Loss-Aversion and Electric Vehicle Ownership // Energy Research & Social Science. 2017. Vol. 23. P. 82–96.Nicolson M., Huebner G., Shipworth D. (2017) Are Consumers Willing to Switch to Smart Time-of-Use Electricity Tariffs? The Importance of Loss-Aversion and Electric Vehicle Ownership // Energy Research & Social Science. Vol. 23. P. 82–96. (In English)Sundt S., Rehdanz K., Meyerhoff J. Consumers’ Willingness to Accept Time-of-Use Tariffs for Shifting Electricity Demand // Energies. 2020. Vol. 13. No. 8. Art. 1989.Sundt S., Rehdanz K., Meyerhoff J. (2020) Consumers’ Willingness to Accept Time-of-Use Tariffs for Shifting Electricity Demand // Energies. Vol. 13. No. 8. Art. 1989. (In English)Barberis N. Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment // Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2013. Vol. 27. No. 1. P. 173–196.Barberis N. (2013) Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment // Journal of Economic Perspectives. Vol. 27. No. 1. P. 173–196. (In English)Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk // Econometrica. 1979. Vol. 47. No. 2. P. 263–291.Kahneman D., Tversky A. (1979) Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk // Econometrica. Vol. 47. No. 2. P. 263–291. (In English)Samuelson W., Zeckhauser R. Status Quo Bias in Decision Making // Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 1988. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 7–59.Samuelson W., Zeckhauser R. (1988) Status Quo Bias in Decision Making // Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 7–59. (In English)Sundt S. Fairness Perceptions and the Acceptance of Time-of-Use Tariffs // Energy Research & Social Science. 2021. Vol. 74. Art. 101976.Sundt S. (2021) Fairness Perceptions and the Acceptance of Time-of-Use Tariffs // Energy Research & Social Science. Vol. 74. Art. 101976. (In English)Stern P.C., Dietz T., Abel T., Guagnano G.A., Kalof L. A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism // Human Ecology Review. 1999. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 81–97.Stern P.C., Dietz T., Abel T., Guagnano G.A., Kalof L. (1999) A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism // Human Ecology Review. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 81–97. (In English)Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., Davis F.D. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View // MIS Quarterly. 2003. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 425–478.Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., Davis F.D. (2003) User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View // MIS Quarterly. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 425–478. (In English)Möller B., Eltrop L., Leuthold F. Institutional Trust and the Acceptance of Renewable Energy // Energy Policy. 2018. Vol. 122. P. 429–441.Möller B., Eltrop L., Leuthold F. (2018) Institutional Trust and the Acceptance of Renewable Energy // Energy Policy. Vol. 122. P. 429–441. (In English)Dohmen T., Falk A., Huffman D., Sunde U., Schupp J., Wagner G.G. Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, and Behavioral Consequences // Journal of the European Economic Association. 2011. Vol. 9. No. 3. P. 522–550.Dohmen T., Falk A., Huffman D., Sunde U., Schupp J., Wagner G.G. (2011) Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, and Behavioral Consequences // Journal of the European Economic Association. Vol. 9. No. 3. P. 522–550. (In English)Ajzen I. The Theory of Planned Behavior // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991. Vol. 50. No. 2. P. 179–211.Ajzen I. (1991) The Theory of Planned Behavior // Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Vol. 50. No. 2. P. 179–211. (In English)

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.