Consumer preferences for electric vehicles: a literature review

References

• Achtnicht, M., Bühler, G., & Hermeling, C. (2012). The impact of fuel availability on demand for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(3), 262–269. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2011.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Araghi, Y., Kroesen, M., Molin, E., & van Wee, B. (2014). Do social norms regarding carbon offsetting affect individual preferences towards this policy? Results from a stated choice experiment. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 26, 42–46. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2013.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axsen, J., & Kurani, K. S. (2011). Interpersonal influence in the early plug-in hybrid market: Observing social interactions with an exploratory multi-method approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(2), 150–159. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2010.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axsen, J., Kurani, K. S., McCarthy, R., & Yang, C. (2011). Plug-in hybrid vehicle GHG impacts in California: Integrating consumer-informed recharge profiles with an electricity-dispatch model. Energy Policy, 39(3), 1617–1629. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.12.038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axsen, J., Orlebar, C., & Skippon, S. (2013). Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study. Ecological Economics, 95, 96–107. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, M. J., Fifer, S., & Rose, J. M. (2016). Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certainty. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 89, 149–167. doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2016.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva, M., Bradley, M., Morikawa, T., Benjamin, J., Novak, T., Oppewal, H., & Rao, V. (1994). Combining revealed and stated preferences data. Marketing Letters, 5(4), 335–349. doi: 10.1007/BF00999209
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva, M., Mcfadden, D., Train, K., Walker, J., Bhat, C., Bierlaire, M., & Bunch, D. S. (2002). Hybrid choice models: Progress and challenges. Marketing Letters, 13(3), 163–175. doi: 10.1023/A:1020254301302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bockarjova, M., Knockaert, J., Rietveld, P., & Steg, L. (2014). Dynamic consumer heterogeneity in electric vehicle adoption. Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 2014 Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Boxall, P. C., & Adamowicz, W. L. (2002). Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: A latent class approach. Environmental and Resource Economics, 23, 421–446. doi: 10.1023/A:1021351721619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunce, L., Harris, M., & Burgess, M. (2014). Charge up then charge out? Drivers’ perceptions and experiences of electric vehicles in the UK. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 59, 278–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, M., King, N., Harris, M., & Lewis, E. (2013). Electric vehicle drivers’ reported interactions with the public: Driving stereotype change? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 17, 33–44. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2012.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bühler, F., Cocron, P., Neumann, I., Franke, T., & Krems, J. F. (2014). Is EV experience related to EV acceptance? Results from a German field study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 25, 34–49. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2014.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caperello, N. D., & Kurani, K. S. (2011). Households’ stories of their encounters with a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Environment and Behavior, 44(4), 493–508. doi: 10.1177/0013916511402057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chorus, C. G. (2010). A new model of random regret minimization. European Journal of Transport, Infrastructures and Logistics, 10(2), 181–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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, 61, 901–908. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chorus, C. G., & Kroesen, M. (2014). On the (im-)possibility of deriving transport policy implications from hybrid choice models. Transport Policy, 36, 217–222. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daziano, R. A. (2012). Taking account of the role of safety on vehicle choice using a new generation of discrete choice models. Safety Science, 50(1), 103–112. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.07.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daziano, R. A., & Achtnicht, M. (2013). Forecasting adoption of ultra-low-emission vehicles using Bayes estimates of a multinomial probit model and the GHK simulator. Transportation Science, 48(4), 671–683. doi: 10.1287/trsc.2013.0464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daziano, R. A., & Bolduc, D. (2013). Incorporating pro-environmental preferences towards green automobile technologies through a Bayesian hybrid choice model. Transportmetrica, 9(1), 74–106.
   Google Scholar
• De Haan, P., Peters, A., & Scholz, R. W. (2007). Reducing energy consumption in road transport through hybrid vehicles: Investigation of rebound effects, and possible effects of tax rebates. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(11–12), 1076–1084. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.05.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitropoulos, A., Rietveld, P., & Van Ommeren, J. N. (2013). Consumer valuation of changes in driving range: A meta-analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 55, 27–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dittmar, H. (1992). The social psychology of material possessions: To have is To Be. New York, NY: St Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doran, R., & Larsen, S. (2016). The relative importance of social and personal norms in explaining intentions to choose eco-friendly travel options. International Journal of Tourism Research, 18, 159–166. doi: 10.1002/jtr.2042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egbue, O., & Long, S. (2012). Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy, 48(2012), 717–729. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farber, S., Neutens, T., Miller, H. J., & Li, X. (2013). The social interaction potential of metropolitan regions: A time-geographic measurement approach using joint accessibility. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(3), 483–504. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2012.689238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franke, T., & Krems, J. F. (2013). What drives range preferences in electric vehicle users? Transport Policy, 30, 56–62. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.07.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franke, T., Neumann, I., Bühler, F., Cocron, P., & Krems, J. F. (2012). Experiencing range in an electric vehicle: Understanding psychological barriers. Applied Psychology, 61(3), 368–391. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00474.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher, K. S., & Muehlegger, E. (2011). Giving Green to get Green? Incentives and consumer adoption of hybrid vehicle technology. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 61(1), 1–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jeem.2010.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glerum, A., Stankovikj, L., & Bierlaire, M. (2014). Forecasting the demand for electric vehicles: Accounting for attitudes and perceptions. Transportation Science, 48(4), 483–499. doi: 10.1287/trsc.2013.0487
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(1), 140–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackbarth, A., & Madlener, R. (2013). Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: A discrete choice analysis. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 25, 5–17. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, L., Wang, M., Chen, W., & Conzelmann, G. (2014). Incorporating social impact on new product adoption in choice modeling: A case study in green vehicles. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 32, 421–434. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2014.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helveston, J. P., Liu, Y., Feit, E. M., Fuchs, E., Klampfl, E., & Michalek, J. J. (2015). Will subsidies drive electric vehicle adoption? Measuring consumer preferences in the U.S. and China. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 73, 96–112. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2014.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess, S., Fowler, M., & Adler, T. (2012). A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: Evidence from a cross-nested logit study. Transportation, 39(3), 593–625. doi: 10.1007/s11116-011-9366-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess, S., & Rose, J. (2009). Some lessons in stated choice survey design. In European Transport Conference, 2009 Proceedings.
   Google Scholar
• Hidrue, M. K., Parsons, G. R., Kempton, W., & Gardner, M. P. (2011). Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resource and Energy Economics, 33(3), 686–705. doi: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2011.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoen, A., & Koetse, M. J. (2014). A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 61, 199–215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holtsmark, B., & Skonhoft, A. (2014). The Norwegian support and subsidy policy of electric cars. Should it be adopted by other countries? Environmental Science & Policy, 42, 160–168. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horne, M., Jaccard, M., & Tiedemann, K. (2005). Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions. Energy Economics, 27(1), 59–77. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2004.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C.-I., Li, H.-C., & Lu, S.-M. (2013). A dynamic marketing model for hybrid electric vehicles: A case study of Taiwan. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 20, 21–29. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2013.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huijts, N. M. A., Molin, E. J. E., & Steg, L. (2012). Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: A review-based comprehensive framework. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(1), 525–531. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.08.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. F., Cherchi, E., & Mabit, S. L. (2013). On the stability of preferences and attitudes before and after experiencing an electric vehicle. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 25, 24–32. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, M. E. (2007). Do greens drive hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer choice. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 54(2), 129–145. doi: 10.1016/j.jeem.2007.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, J., Rasouli, S., & Timmermans, H. (2014). Expanding scope of hybrid choice models allowing for mixture of social influences and latent attitudes: Application to intended purchase of electric cars. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 69, 71–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klöckner, C. A. (2014). The dynamics of purchasing an electric vehicle – a prospective longitudinal study of the decision-making process. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 24, 103–116. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, B., & Potter, S. (2007). The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the UK: Exploring the consumer attitude–action gap. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(11–12), 1085–1092. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.05.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J. Y., & Kwan, M.-P. (2011). Visualisation of socio-spatial isolation based on human activity patterns and social networks in space-time. Tijdschrift Voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 102(4), 468–485. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2010.00649.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, H., Tu, H., & Hensher, D. (2016). Integrating the mean–variance and scheduling approaches to allow for schedule delay and trip time variability under uncertainty. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 89, 151–163. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2016.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, M. K., Mak, H.-Y., & Rong, Y. (2015). Toward mass adoption of electric vehicles: Impact of the range and resale anxieties. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 17(1), 101–119. doi: 10.1287/msom.2014.0504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mabit, S. L., & Fosgerau, M. (2011). Demand for alternative-fuel vehicles when registration taxes are high. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(3), 225–231. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2010.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maness, M., & Cirillo, C. (2011). Measuring and modeling future vehicle preferences: A preliminary stated preference survey in Maryland. European Transport Conference 2011: Seminars.
   Google Scholar
• Mau, P., Eyzaguirre, J., Jaccard, M., Collins-Dodd, C., & Tiedemann, K. (2008). The “neighbor effect”: Simulating dynamics in consumer preferences for new vehicle technologies. Ecological Economics, 68(1–2), 504–516. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice-behaviour. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–142). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• McFadden, D., & Train, K. (2000). Mixed MNL models of discrete response. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 15(5), 447–470. doi: 10.1002/1099-1255(200009/10)15:5<447::AID-JAE570>3.0.CO;2-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mock, P., & Yang, Z. (2014). Driving electrification. The International Council on Clean Transportation: Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Molin, E., Van Stralen, W., & Van Wee, B. (2012). Car drivers preferences for electric cars. 91th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Musti, S., & Kockelman, K. M. (2011). Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: Anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 45(8), 707–720.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neutens, T., Schwanen, T., Witlox, F., & Maeyer, P. D. (2008). My space or your space? Towards a measure of joint accessibility. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32(5), 331–342. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2008.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petschnig, M., Heidenreich, S., & Spieth, P. (2014). Innovative alternatives take action – investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 61, 68–83. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2013.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potoglou, D., & Kanaroglou, P. S. (2007). Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 12(4), 264–274. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2007.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qian, L., & Soopramanien, D. (2011). Heterogeneous consumer preferences for alternative fuel cars in China. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(8), 607–613. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2011.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasouli, S., & Timmermans, H. (2013). Influence of social networks on latent choice of electric cars: A mixed logit specification using experimental design data. Networks and Spatial Economics, 13, 1–32. doi: 10.1007/s11067-012-9171-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J., & Bodin, J. (2015). Advances in consumer electric vehicle adoption research: A review and research agenda. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 34, 122–136. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2014.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shin, J., Hong, J., Jeong, G., & Lee, J. (2012). Impact of electric vehicles on existing car usage: A mixed multiple discrete–continuous extreme value model approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(2), 138–144. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2011.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sierzchula, W., Bakker, S., Maat, K., & Van Wee, B. (2014). The influence of financial incentives and other socio-economic factors on electric vehicle adoption. Energy Policy, 68, 183–194. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.01.043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steg, L. (2005). Car use: Lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(2–3), 147–162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tamor, M. A., Moraal, P. E., Reprogle, B., & Milačić, M. (2015). Rapid estimation of electric vehicle acceptance using a general description of driving patterns. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 51, 136–148. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2014.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanaka, M., Ida, T., Murakami, K., & Friedman, L. (2014). Consumers’ willingness to pay for alternative fuel vehicles: A comparative discrete choice analysis between the US and Japan. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 70, 194–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Train, K. (2003). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Valeri, E., & Danielis, R. (2015). Simulating the market penetration of cars with alternative fuel powertrain technologies in Italy. Transport Policy, 37, 44–56. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodjack, J., Garas, D., Lentz, A., Turrentine, T., Tal, G., & Nicholas, M. (2012). Consumer perceptions and use of driving distance of electric vehicles. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2287, 1–8. doi: 10.3141/2287-01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, J., Chen, X., & Block-Schachter, D. (2014). Superficial fairness in Beijing’s car license lottery policy. Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Ziegler, A. (2012). Individual characteristics and stated preferences for alternative energy sources and propulsion technologies in vehicles: A discrete choice analysis for Germany. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(8), 1372–1385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar