Modelling the adoption intention and installation choice of an automotive after-market mild-solar-hybridization kit

Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies

Volumn 56, Issue , 2015, Pages 426-445

  de Luca, Stefano ^a   di Pace, Roberta ^a   Marano, Vincenzo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SALERNO   (Italy)

Author keywords

After market hybridization kit; Choice to install; Discrete choice model; Hybrid vehicles; Intention to adopt; Random utility

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; COMMERCIAL VEHICLES; COMPETITION; ENERGY UTILIZATION; HYBRID VEHICLES; MARKETING;

AFTER-MARKET HYBRIDIZATION KIT; CHOICE TO INSTALL; DISCRETE CHOICE MODELS; INTENTION TO ADOPT; RANDOM UTILITY;

PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLES;

AUTOMOBILE; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; ELECTRIC VEHICLE; MODELING; SOLAR POWER; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

EID: 84945123824     PISSN: 0968090X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2015.04.023     Document Type: Article

References (120)

1. Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 179-211.
2. Al-Alawi, B.M., Bradley, T.H., 2013. Review of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicle market modeling studies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 21, 190-203.
3. Axsen, J., Kurani, K.S., 2010. Anticipating plug-in hybrid vehicle energy impacts in California: constructing consumer-informed recharge profiles. Transport. Res. Part D: Transport Environ. 15, 212-219.
4. Axsen, J., Kurani, K.S., 2013. Hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or electric - what do car buyers want? Energy Policy 61, 532-543.
5. Bamberg, S., Möser, G., 2007. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 27 (1), 14-25.
6. Bass, F.M., 1969. A new product growth for model consumer durables. Manage. Sci. 15 (5), 215-227.
7. Bass, F.M., 2004. Comments on a new product growth for model consumer durables: the bass model. Manage. Sci. 50, 1833-1840.
8. Batley, R., Toner, J., Knight, M., 2004. A mixed logit model of UK household demand for alternative-fuel vehicles. Int. J. Transport Econom. 31 (1), 55-77.
9. Becker, T.A., Sidhu, I., Tenderich, B., 2009. Electric vehicles in the United States: a new model with forecasts to 2030. Center for Entrepreneurship & Technology (CET) Technical Brief (2009.1).
10. Beggs, S., Cardell, S., Hausman, J., 1981. Assessing the potential demand for electric cars. J. Economet. 16, 1-19.
11. Ben Akiva, M., Morikawa, T., 1990. Estimation of switching models from revealed preferences and stated intentions. Transport. Res. Part A 24, 485-495.
12. Bolduc, D., Boucher, N., Alvarez-Daziano, R., 2008. Hybrid choice modelling of new technologies for car choice in Canada. Transport. Res. Record: J. Transport. Res. Board, 63-71.
13. Browne, D., O'Mahony, M., Caulfield, B., 2012. How should barriers to alternative fuels and vehicles be classified and potential policies to promote innovative technologies be evaluated? J. Cleaner Prod. 35, 140-151.
14. Brownstone, D., Bunch, D.S., Golob, T.F., Ren, W., 1996. A personal vehicle transactions choice model for use in forecasting demand for future alternative-fuel vehicles. Res. Transport. Econom. 4, 87-129.
15. Brownstone, D., Bunch, D.S., Train, K., 2000. Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transport. Res. Part B: Methodol. 34 (5), 315-338.
16. Bunch, D.S., Bradley, M., Golob, T.F., Kitamura, R., Occhiuzzo, G.P., 1993. Demand for clean-fuel vehicles in California: a discrete-choice stated preference pilot project. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 27 (3), 237-253.
17. Burgess, M., King, N., Harris, M., Lewis, E., 2013. Electric vehicle drivers' reported interactions with the public: driving stereotype change? Transport. Res. F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 17, 33-44.
18. Cantillo, V., Ortúzar, J.D., Williams, H.C.W., 2007. Modelling discrete choices in the presence of inertia and serial correlation. Transport. Sci. 41 (2), 195-205.
19. Cao, X., 2006. The causal relationship between the built environment and personal travel choice: evidence from Northern California. PhD Dissertation. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 2006, University of California, Davis.
20. Caperello, N.D., Kurani, K.S., 2012. Households' stories of their encounters with a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Environ. Behav. 44 (4), 493-508.
21. Carley, S., Krause, R.M., Lane, B.W., Graham, J.D., 2013. Intent to purchase a plug-in electric vehicle: a survey of early impressions in large US cites. Transp. Res. D: Transp. Environ. 18, 39-45.
22. Cascetta, E., 2009. Transportation Systems Analysis: Models and Applications. Springer Verlag, US.
23. Cascetta, E., Cartenì, A., 2014. The hedonic value of railways terminals. A quantitative analysis of the impact of stations quality on travellers behaviour. Transport. Res. Part A 61, 41-52.
24. Centrone, F., Goia, A., Salinelli, E., 2007. Demographic processes in a model of innovation diffusion with dynamic market. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 74, 247-266.
25. Chéron, E., Zins, M., 1997. Electric vehicle purchasing intentions: the concern over battery charge duration. Transport. Res. Part A 31, 235-243.
26. Chorus, C.G., Koetse, M.J., Hoen, A., 2013. Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: comparing a utility maximization and a regret minimization model Energy Policy, 2013. Energy Policy 61, 901-908.
27. Cui, X., Liu, C., Kim, H.K., Kao, S.C., Tuttle, M.A., Bhaduri, B.L., 2011. A multi agent-based framework for simulating household PHEV distribution and electric distribution network impact. In: Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, Washington DC.
28. Dagsvik, J.K., Wennemo, T., Wetterwald, D.G., Aaberge, R., 2002. Potential demand for alternative fuel vehicles. Transport. Res. Part B: Methodol. 36 (4), 361- 384.
29. Denholm, P., Sioshansi, R., 2009. The value of compressed air energy storage with wind in transmission-constrained electric power systems. Energy Policy 37 (8), 3149-3158.
30. Diamond, D., 2009. The impact of government incentives for hybrid-electric vehicles: evidence from US states. Energy Policy 37, 972-983.
31. Dittmar, H., 1992. The social psychology of material possessions: to have is to be. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead.
32. Duvall, M., Knipping E., 2007. Environmental Assessment of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles.
33. Egbue, O., Long, S., 2012. Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: an analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy 48, 717-729.
34. Ehsani, M., Gao, Y., Emadi, A., 2010. Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric and Fuel Cell Vehicles, second ed. CRC Press, New York.
35. Eppstein, M.J., Grover, D.K., Marshall, J.S., Rizzo, D.M., 2011. An agent-based model to study market penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Energy Policy 39, 3789-3802.
36. Feng, W., Figliozzi, M., 2013. An economic and technological analysis of the key factors affecting the competitiveness of electric commercial vehicles: a case study from the USA market. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 26, 135-145.
37. Fontaine, P.J., 2008. Shortening the path to energy independence: a policy agenda to commercialize battery-electric vehicles. The Electricity J. 21, 22-42.
38. Garcia, R., 2007. Modeling vehicle choice behavior using agent-based approach. In: Proceedings of the second workshop on agent-based models of market dynamics and consumer behaviour. European Social Simulation Association and University of Groningen, Groningen.
39. Gardner, B., Abraham, C., 2007. What drives car use? a grounded theory analysis of commuters' reasons for driving. Transp. Res. Part F 10, 187-200.
40. Giddens, A., 1991. Modernity and Self-identity. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
41. Glerum, A., Stankovikj, L., Thémans, M., Bierlaire, M., 2013. Forecasting the demand for electric vehicles: accounting for attitudes and perceptions. Transport. Sci.
42. Golob, T.F., Bunch, D.S., Brownstone, D., 1997. A vehicle use forecasting model based on revealed and stated vehicle type choice and utilisation data. J. Transport Econom. Policy, 69-92.
43. Graham-Rowe, E., Gardner, B., Abraham, C., Skippon, S., Dittmar, H., Hutchins, R., Stannard, J., 2012. Mainstream consumers driving plug-in battery-electric and plug-in hybrid electric cars: a qualitative analysis of responses and evaluations. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 46 (1), 140-153.
44. Greene, D.L., 2010. Measuring energy security: can the united states achieve oil independence? Energy Policy 38 (4), 1614-1621.
45. Hackbarth, A., Madlener, R., 2013. Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: a discrete choice analysis. Transp. Res. Part D: Transport Environ. 25, 5-17.
46. Heffner, R.R., Turrentine, T.S., Kurani, K.S., 2006. A Primer on Automobile Semiotics. University of California, Davis, Institute of Transport Studies.
47. Hensher, D.A., 1994. Stated preference analysis of travel choices: the state of practice. Transportation 21 (2), 107-133.
48. Higgins, A., Paevere, P., Gardner, J., Quezada, G., 2012. Combining choice modelling and multi-criteria analysis for technology diffusion: an application to the uptake of electric vehicles. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79, 1399-1412.
49. Hoen, A., Koetse, M.J., 2014. A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 61, 199-215.
50. Hsu, C.I., Li, H.C., Lu, S.M., 2013. A dynamic marketing model for hybrid electric vehicles: a case study of Taiwan. Transport. Res. Part D: Transport Environ. 20, 21-29.
51. Jensen, M., 1999. Passion and heart in transport. A sociological analysis of transport behaviour. Transp. Policy 6, 19-33.
52. Jensen, A.F., Cherchi, E., Mabit, S.L., 2013. On the stability of preferences and attitudes before and after experiencing an electric vehicle. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 25, 24-32.
53. Jeon, S.Y., 2010. Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Technology and Its Market Feasibility. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
54. Karplus, V.J., Paltsev, S., Reilly, J.M., 2010. Prospects for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the United States and Japan: a general equilibrium analysis. Transp. Res. Part A 44, 620-641.
55. King, D., Inderwildi, O., Carey, C., Santos, G., Yan, X., Behrendt, H., Teytelboym, A., 2010. Future of Mobility Roadmap: Ways to Reduce Emissions While Keeping Mobile. Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. University of Oxford, England.
56. Kintner-Meyer, M., Schneider, K., Pratt, R., 2007. Impacts assessment of plug-in hybrid vehicles on electric utilities and regional US power grids, Part 1: Technical analysis. Pacific Northwest Natl. Lab. (a), 1-20.
57. Kollmuss, A., Agyeman, J., 2002. Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ. Educ. Res. 8 (3).
58. Krupa, J.S., Rizzo, D.M., Eppstein, M.J., Brad Lanute, D., Gaalema, D.E., Lakkaraju, K., Warrender, C.E., 2014. Analysis of a consumer survey on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 64, 14-31.
59. Kurani, K.S., Turrentine, T.S., Heffner, R.R., 2007. Narrative self-identity and societal goals: automotive fuel economy and global warming policy. In: Daniel, S., James, S.C. (Eds.), Driving Climate Change. Academic Press, Burlington, pp. 217-238.
60. Lamberson, P.J., 2009. The Diffusion of Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Center for the Study of Complex Systems, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
61. Lane, B., Potter, S., 2007. The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the UK: exploring the consumer attitude-action gap. J. Cleaner Prod. 15 (11-12), 1085-1092.
62. Lee, D.H., Park, S.Y., Kim, J.W., Lee, S.K., 2013. Analysis on the feedback effect for the diffusion of innovative technologies focusing on the green car. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.
63. Lieven, T., Mühlmeier, S., Henkel, S., Waller, J.F., 2011. Who will buy electric cars? an empirical study in Germany. Transport. Res. Part D 16, 236-243.
64. Liu, J., Khattak, A., Wang, X., 2015. The role of alternative fuel vehicles: using behavioral and sensor data to model hierarchies in travel. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol.
65. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., 2000. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
66. Mann, E., Abraham, C., 2006. The role of affect in UK commuters' travel mode choices: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Br. J. Psychol. 97, 155-176.
67. Marano, V., Medina, H., Sorrentino, M., Rizzo, G., 2013. A model to assess the benefits of an after-market hybridization kit based on realistic driving habits and charging infrastructure. SAE Int. J. Alternative Powertrains 2, 3.
68. McManus, W., Senter Jr., R., 2010. Market models for predicting PHEV adoption and diffusion. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor, MI.
69. Miller, G.F., 2009. Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior. Viking, New York, NY.
70. Moons, I., De Pelsmacker, P., 2012. Emotions as determinants of electric car usage intention. J. Mark. Manage. 28 (3-4), 195-237.
71. Muraleedharakurup, G., McGordon, A., Poxon, J., Jennings, P., 2010. Building a Better Business Case: The Use of Non-linear Growth Models for Predicting the Market for Hybrid Vehicles in the UK, Monaco.
72. Musti, S., Kockelman, K.M., 2011. Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas. Transport. Res. Part A 45, 707-720.
73. Noppers, E.H., Keizer, K., Bolderdijk, J.W., Steg, L., 2014. The adoption of sustainable innovations: driven by symbolic and environmental motives. Global Environ. Change 25, 52-62.
74. Oliver, J.D., Rosen, D.E., 2010. Applying the environmental propensity framework: a segmented approach to hybrid electric vehicle marketing strategies. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 18 (4), 377-393.
75. Onwezen, M.C., Antonides, G., Bartels, J., 2013. The norm activation model: an exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in proenvironmental behaviour. J. Econ. Psychol. 39, 141-153.
76. Ahn, J., Gicheol, J., Kim, Y., 2008. A forecast of household ownership and use of alternative fuel vehicles: a multiple discrete-continuous choice approach. Energy Econom. 30, 2091-2104.
77. Ozaki, R., Sevastyanova, K., 2011. Going hybrid: an analysis of consumer purchase motivations. Energy Policy 39 (5), 2217-2227.
78. Pearre, N.S., Kempton, W., Guensler, R.L., Elango, V.V., 2011. Electric vehicles: how much range is required for a day's driving? Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 19 (6), 1171-1184.
79. Peters, A., Dütschke, E., 2014. How do consumers perceive electric vehicles? A comparison of german consumer groups. J. Environ. Policy Plan. (September), 1-19
80. Potoglou, D., Kanaroglou, P.S., 2007. Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transport. Res. Part D: Transport Environ. 12 (4), 264-274.
81. Prochaska, J.O., DiClemente, C.C., 1983. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 51 (3), 390-395 (Accessed 2009 Mar 18).
82. Prochaska, J.O., DiClemente, C.C., 1994. The Transtheoretical Approach: Crossing Traditional Boundaries of Therapy. Krieger Pub.
83. Qian, L., Soopramanien, D., 2011. Heterogeneous consumer preferences for alternative fuel cars in China. Transport. Res. Part D: Transport Environ. 16 (8), 607-613.
84. Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J., Bodin, J., 2015. Advances in consumer electric vehicle adoption research: a review and research agenda. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 34, 122-136.
85. Rizzo, G., Marano, V., Pisanti, C., D'Agostino, M., Naddeo, M., Sorrentino, M., Arsie, I., 2014. A prototype mild-solar-hybridization kit: design and challenges. Energy Procedia 45, 1017-1026.
86. Roehrich, G., 2004. Consumer innovativeness: concepts and measurements. J. Business Res. 57, 671-677.
87. Rogers, E.M., 2003. Diffusion of Innovations, fifth ed. Free Press, New York.
88. Samaras, C., Meisterling, K., 2008. Life Cycle Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Plug.
89. Santini, D.J., Vyas, A.D., 2005. Suggestions for a new vehicle choice model simulating advanced vehicles introduction decisions (Avid): Structure and Coefficients. Center for Transportation Analysis, Argonne National Laboratory. ANL/ESD/05-1.
90. Schuitema, G., Anable, J., Skippon, S., Kinnear, N., 2013. The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 48, 39-49.
91. Shafiei, E., Thorkelsson, H., Ásgeirsson, E.I., Davidsdottir, B., Raberto, M., Stefansson, H., 2012. An agent-based modeling approach to predict the evolution of market share of electric vehicles: a case study from Iceland. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79 (9), 1638-1653.
92. Sharma, R., Manzie, C., Bessede, M., Brear, M.J., Crawford, R.H., 2012. Conventional, hybrid and electric vehicles for Australian driving conditions - Part 1: Technical and financial analysis. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 25, 238-249.
93. Shih, E., Schau, H.J., 2011. To justify or not to justify: the role of anticipated regret on consumers' decisions to upgrade technological innovations. J. Retail. 87 (2), 242-251.
94. Sikes, K., Gross, T., Lin, Z., Sullivan, J., Cleary, T., Ward, J., 2010. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle market introduction study: final report (No. ORNL/TM-2009/ 019). Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL).
95. Sirgy, J.M., 1986. Self-Congruity. Praeger, New York, USA.
96. Skippon, S.M., Garwood, M., 2011. Responses to battery electric vehicles: UK consumer attitudes and attributions of symbolic meaning following direct experience to reduce psychological distance. Transport. Res. Part D 16, 525-531.
97. Sovacool, B., Hirsh, R., 2009. Beyond batteries: an examination of the benefits and barriers to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and a vehicle-to-grid (V2G) transition. Energy Policy 37, 1095-1103.
98. Steg, L., 2005. Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transport. Res. Part A 39, 147-162.
99. Steg, L., Vlek, C., 2009. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 29 (3), 309-317.
100. Steg, L., Vlek, C., Slotegraaf, G., 2001. Instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives for using a motor car. Transport. Res. Part F 4, 151-169.
101. Stern, P.C., 2000. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior 56 (3), 407-424.
102. Struben, J., Sterman, J.D., 2008. Transition challenges for alternative fuel vehicle and transportation systems. Environ. Plan. B - Plan. Des. 35 (6), 1070-1097.
103. Sullivan, J. L., Salmeen, I.T., Simon, C.P., 2009. PHEV Marketplace Penetration: An Agent Based Simulation.
104. Tamor, M.A., Milačić , M., 2015. Electric vehicles in multi-vehicle households. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 56, 52-60.
105. Tamor, M.A., Gearhart, C., Soto, C., 2013. A statistical approach to estimating acceptance of electric vehicles and electrification of personal transportation. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 26, 125-134.
106. Tamor, M.A., Moraal, P.E., Reprogle, B., Milačić , M., 2015. Rapid estimation of electric vehicle acceptance using a general description of driving patterns. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 51, 136-148.
107. Train, K., 1980. The potential market for non-gasoline-powered automobiles. Transport. Res. 14A, 405-414.
108. Train, K., 1986. Qualitative Choice Analysis. Econometrics and Application Automobile Demand. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
109. Train, K., 2010. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation Publisher. Cambridge University Press.
110. Trappey, C.V., Wu, H.Y., 2008. An evaluation of the time-varying extended logistic, simple logistic, and Gompertz models for forecasting short product lifecycles. Adv. Eng. Inform. 22 (4), 421-430.
111. Ulrich, K.T., 2005. Estimating the technology frontier for personal electric vehicles. Transport. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 13 (5-6), 448-462.
112. van Bree, B., Verbong, G.P.J., Kramer, G.J., 2010. A multi-level perspective on the introduction of hydrogen and battery-electric vehicles. Technol. Forecasting Social Change 77 (4), 529-540.
113. Van Rijnsoever, F.J., Hagen, P., Willems, M., 2013. Preferences for alternative fuel vehicles by Dutch local governments. Transport. Res. Part D 20, 15-20.
114. Voss, K.E., Spangenberg, E.R., Grohmann, B., 2003. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. J. Mark. Res. 40, 310-320.
115. Watson, L., Spence, M.T., 2007. Causes and consequences of emotions on consumer behaviour: a review and integrative cognitive appraisal theory. Eur. J. Mark. 41 (5/6), 487-511.
116. Weinstein, N.D., Rothman, A., Sutton, S., 1998. Stage theories of health behavior. Health Psychol. 17, 290-299.
117. Won, J.R., Yoon, Y.B., Lee, K.J., 2009. Prediction of electricity demand due to PHEVs (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) distribution in Korea by using diffusion model. In: Proceedings of the Transmission & Distribution Conference & Exposition: Asia and Pacific. p. 1-4.
118. Zhang, Y., Yu, Y., Zou, B., 2011. Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: the case of EV. Energy Policy 39 (11), 7015- 7024.
119. Bierlaire, M., 2003. BIOGEME: A free package for the estimation of discrete choice models. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Swiss Transportation Research Conference, Ascona, Switzerland.
120. Sioshansi, R., Denholm, P., 2009. Emissions impacts and benefits of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and vehicle to grid services. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 1199-1204.