Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study

Ecological Economics

Volumn 95, Issue , 2013, Pages 96-107

  Axsen, Jonn ^a   Orlebar, Caroline ^b   Skippon, Stephen ^b  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL B V   (United States)

Author keywords

Consumer behavior; Consumer learning; Electric vehicles; Preferences; Sustainable consumption

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; ELECTRIC VEHICLE; ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY; SOCIAL IMPACT; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; WORKPLACE;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84883734732     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.009     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Axsen J., Kurani K.S. Reflexive Layers of Influence (RLI): A Model of Social Influence, Vehicle Purchase Behavior, and Pro-Societal Values 2010, University of California, Davis.
2. Axsen J., Kurani K.S. Interpersonal influence in the early plug-in hybrid market: observing social interactions with an exploratory multi-method approach. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 2011, 16:150-159.
3. Axsen J., Kurani K.S. Interpersonal influence within car buyers' social networks: applying five perspectives to plug-in hybrid vehicle drivers. Environ. Plan. A 2012, 44:1057-1065.
4. Axsen J., Kurani K.S. Social influence, consumer behavior, and low-carbon energy transitions. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2012, 37.
5. Axsen J., Kurani K.S. Connecting plug-in vehicles with green electricity through consumer demand. Environ. Res. Lett. 2013, 8:1-8.
6. Axsen J., Kurani K.S. Developing sustainability-oriented values: insights from households in a trial of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Glob. Environ. Change 2013, 23:70-80.
7. Axsen J., Mountain D.C., Jaccard M. Combining stated and revealed choice research to simulate the neighbor effect: the case of hybrid-electric vehicles. Resour. Energy Econ. 2009, 31:221-238.
8. Axsen J., TyreeHageman J., Lentz A. Lifestyle practices and pro-environmental technology. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 82:64-74.
9. Bettman J., Luce M., Payne J. Constructive consumer choice processes. J. Consum. Res. 1998, 25:187-217.
10. Borgatti S.P., Mehra A., Brass D.J., Labianca G. Network analysis in the social sciences. Science 2009, 323:892-895.
11. Brownstone D., Bunch D.S., Train K. Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. B 2000, 34:315-338.
12. Bruun H., Hukkinen A. Crossing boundaries: an integrative framework for studying technological change. Soc. Stud. Sci. 2003, 33:95-116.
13. Bunch D.S., Bradley M., Golob T.F., Kitamura R., Occhiuzzo G.P. Demand for clean-fuel vehicles in California: a discrete-choice stated preference pilot project. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 1993, 27:237-253.
14. Calfee J. Estimating the demand for electric automobiles using fully disaggregated probabilistic choice analysis. Transp. Res. B 1985, 19B:287-301.
15. Caperello N., Kurani K.S. Households' stories of their encounters with a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Environ. Behav. 2012, 44:493-508.
16. Carrasco J.A., Hogan B., Wellman B., Miller E.J. Collecting social network data to study social activity-travel behavior: an egocentric approach. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des. 2008, 35:961-980.
17. Ewing G., Sarigollu E. Assessing consumer preferences for clean-fuel vehicles: a discrete choice experiment. J. Public Policy Mark. 2000, 19:106-118.
18. Galis V., Gyberg P. Energy behaviour as a collectif. Energy Effic. 2011, 4:303-319.
19. Giddens A. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age 1991, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
20. Goetzke F., Rave T. Bicycle use in Germany: explaining differences between municipalities with social network effects. Urban Stud. 2011, 48:427-437.
21. Heffner R.R., Kurani K.S., Turrentine T.S. Symbolism in California's early market for hybrid electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 2007, 12:396-413.
22. Hidrue M.K., Parsons G.R., Kempton W., Gardner M.P. Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resour. Energy Econ. 2011, 33:686-705.
23. Hirschman E.C. Symbolism and technology as sources for the generation of innovations. Adv. Consum. Res. 1981, 9:537.
24. Hitchings R. Researching air-conditioning addiction and ways of puncturing practice: professional office workers and the decision to go outside. Environ. Plan. A 2011, 43:2838-2856.
25. Hogan B., Carrasco J.A., Wellman B. Visualizing personal networks: working with participant-aided sociograms. Field Methods 2007, 19:116-144.
26. Jackson T. Motivating Sustainable Consumption: A Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural Change 2005, Sustainable Development Research Network, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK.
27. Jolivet E., Heiskanen E. Blowing against the wind - an exploratory application of actor network theory to the analysis of local controversies and participation processes in wind energy. Energy Policy 2010, 38:6746-6754.
28. Kahn M.E., Vaughn R. Green market geography: the spatial clustering of hybrid vehicles and LEED registered buildings. B.E. J. Econ. Anal. Policy 2009, 9:1-22.
29. Kline R., Pinch T. Users as agents of technological change: the social construction of the automobile in the rural United States. Technol. Cult. 1996, 37:763-795.
30. Kurani K.S., Turrentine T., Sperling D. Demand for electric vehicles in hybrid households: an exploratory analysis. Transp. Policy 1994, 1:244-256.
31. Liberman M., Trope Y., Stephan E. Psychological distance. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles 2007, Guildford Press, New York, NY. A.W. Kruglanksi, E.T. Higgins (Eds.).
32. Lovell H. The role of individuals in policy change: the case of UK low-energy housing. Environ. Plan. C 2009, 27:491-511.
33. Marwell G., Oliver P.E., Prahl R. Social networks and collective action: a theory of the critical mass 3. Am. J. Sociol. 1988, 94:502-534.
34. Mau P., Eyzaguirre J., Jaccard M., Collins-Dodd C., Tiedemann K. The 'neighbor effect': simulating dynamics in consumer preferences for new vehicle technologies. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 68:504-516.
35. Maxwell J. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach 2005, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
36. McCracken G. The Long Interview 1988, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.
37. Noonan D., Hsieh L., Matisoff D. Spatial effects in energy-efficient residential HVAC technology adoption. Environ. Behav. 2013, 45:476-503.
38. Norton B., Costanza R., Bishop R. The evolution of preferences: why 'sovereign' preferences may not lead to sustainable policies and what to do about it. Ecol. Econ. 1998, 24:193-211.
39. Oliver P., Marwell G., Teixeira R. A theory of the critical mass 1. Interdependence, group heterogeneity, and the production of collective action. Am. J. Sociol. 1985, 91:522-556.
40. Paez A., Scott D., Volz E. A discrete-choice approach to modeling social influence on individual decision making. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des. 2008, 35:1055-1069.
41. Peattie K. Green consumption: behavior and norms. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2010, 35:195-228.
42. Pinch T.J., Bijker W.E. The social construction of facts and artifacts - or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Soc. Stud. Sci. 1984, 14:399-441.
43. Potoglou D., Kanaroglou P.S. Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transport. Res. Part D - Transport. Environ. 2007, 12:264-274.
44. Rogers E. Diffusion of Innovations 2003, Free Press, New York. 5th ed.
45. Shove E. Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change. Environ. Plan. A 2010, 42:1273-1285.
46. Shove E., Warde A. Inconspicuous consumption: the sociology of consumption, lifestyles and the environment. Sociological Theory and the Environment: Classical Foundations, Contemporary Insights 2002, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, Maryland. R. Dunlap, F. Buttel, P. Dickens, A. Gijswijt (Eds.).
47. Skippon S., Garwood M. Responses to battery electric vehicles: UK consumer attitudes and attributions of symbolic meaning following direct experience to reduce psychological distance. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 2011, 16:525-531.
48. Spaargaren G. Sustainable consumption: a theoretical and environmental policy perspective. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2003, 16:687-701.
49. Spaargaren G., Van Vliet B. Lifestyles, consumption and the environment: the ecological modernization of domestic consumption. Environ. Polit. 2000, 9:50-76.
50. Steg L. Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 2005, 39:147-162.
51. Stets J., Biga C. Bringing identity theory into environmental sociology. Sociol. Theory 2003, 21:398-423.
52. Train K. The potential market for non-gasoline-powered automobiles. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 1980, 14A:405-414.
53. Turner V. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure 1969, Aldine Publishing, Chicago, IL.
54. Valente T. Network models and methods for studying the diffusion of innovations. Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis 2005, 98-116. Cambridge University Press, New York, New York. P. Carrington, J. Scott, S. Wasserman (Eds.).
55. van Rijnsoever F., Farla J., Dijst M.J. Consumer car preferences and information search channels. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 2009, 14:334-342.
56. Wilson C., Dowlatabadi H. Models of decision making and residential energy use. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2007, 32:169-203.
57. Wood W., Hayes T. Social influence on consumer decisions: motives, modes, and consequences. J. Consum. Psychol. 2012, 22:324-328.