IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v50y2015icp190-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preference and lifestyle heterogeneity among potential plug-in electric vehicle buyers

Author

Listed:
  • Axsen, Jonn
  • Bailey, Joseph
  • Castro, Marisol Andrea

Abstract

We characterize heterogeneity in preferences and motivations regarding plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs)—including plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) and electric vehicles (EVs). Using survey data collected from 1754 new vehicle buying households in Canada in 2013, we segment respondents using two approaches that prove to be complementary. Preference-based segments were constructed using latent-class analysis of discrete choice experiment data. Potential PEV buyers were split into a “PEV-enthusiast” segment (8% of the sample) with extremely high valuation of PEVs and a broader “PHEV-oriented” segment (25%) that expressed moderately positive valuation of PHEVs. Preference-based segments also varied by respondents' valuation of specific attributes such as fuel savings. Our second approach constructed lifestyle-based segments using cluster analysis on a subset of potential early PEV buyers (33% of the total sample). The six lifestyle-based clusters varied in engagement in environment- and technology-oriented lifestyles, environmental concern and openness to change. Overall preferences were fairly similar across the clusters, though apparent motivations varied substantially by cluster as indicated by their differing engagement in lifestyles and environmental concern. Taken together, both approaches suggest that PHEVs are the most likely PEV to have broad market appeal and that car buyers have high degrees of heterogeneity in both preferences and motivations.

Suggested Citation

  • Axsen, Jonn & Bailey, Joseph & Castro, Marisol Andrea, 2015. "Preference and lifestyle heterogeneity among potential plug-in electric vehicle buyers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 190-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:50:y:2015:i:c:p:190-201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2015.05.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988315001553
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.05.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hidrue, Michael K. & Parsons, George R. & Kempton, Willett & Gardner, Meryl P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 686-705, September.
    2. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2013. "Hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or electric—What do car buyers want?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 532-543.
    3. Bunch, David S. & Bradley, Mark & Golob, Thomas F. & Kitamura, Ryuichi & Occhiuzzo, Gareth P., 1993. "Demand for clean-fuel vehicles in California: A discrete-choice stated preference pilot project," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 237-253, May.
    4. Hanley, Nick & Shogren, Jason & White, Ben, 2013. "Introduction to Environmental Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199568734.
    5. Axsen, Jonn & TyreeHageman, Jennifer & Lentz, Andy, 2012. "Lifestyle practices and pro-environmental technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 64-74.
    6. Kurani, Kenneth S & Turrentine, Tom & Sperling, Daniel, 1994. "Demand for electric vehicles in hybrid households: an exploratory analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 244-256, October.
    7. Yoo, James & Ready, Richard C., 2014. "Preference heterogeneity for renewable energy technology," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 101-114.
    8. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, January.
    9. Couper, Mick P. & Kapteyn, Arie & Schonlau, Matthias & Winter, Joachim, 2007. "Noncoverage and nonresponse in an Internet survey," Munich Reprints in Economics 20093, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    10. Elizabeth Shove, 2010. "Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(6), pages 1273-1285, June.
    11. Bin, Shui & Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 2005. "Corrigendum to "Consumer lifestyles approach to US energy use and the related CO2 emissions": [Energy Policy 33 (2005) 197-208]," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1362-1363, July.
    12. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt1c29r4hr is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Sanquist, Thomas F. & Orr, Heather & Shui, Bin & Bittner, Alvah C., 2012. "Lifestyle factors in U.S. residential electricity consumption," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 354-364.
    14. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 315-338, June.
    15. Junyi Shen, 2009. "Latent class model or mixed logit model? A comparison by transport mode choice data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(22), pages 2915-2924.
    16. Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mura, Marina & Contu, Davide, 2012. "Combining choice experiments with psychometric scales to assess the social acceptability of wind energy projects: A latent class approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 334-347.
    17. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2004. "What type of vehicle do people drive? The role of attitude and lifestyle in influencing vehicle type choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 201-222, March.
    18. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    19. Bin, Shui & Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 2005. "Consumer lifestyle approach to US energy use and the related CO2 emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 197-208, January.
    20. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    21. Hurtubia, Ricardo & Nguyen, My Hang & Glerum, Aurélie & Bierlaire, Michel, 2014. "Integrating psychometric indicators in latent class choice models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 135-146.
    22. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt15g9v24c is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Ben-Akiva, Moshe & McFadden, Daniel & Train, Kenneth & Börsch-Supan, Axel, 2002. "Hybrid Choice Models: Progress and Challenges," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 02-29, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    24. Kim, Jinhee & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry, 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, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 71-85.
    25. Tanaka, Makoto & Ida, Takanori & Murakami, Kayo & Friedman, Lee, 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, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 194-209.
    26. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2004. "What type of vehicle do people drive? The role of attitude and lifestyle in influencing vehicle type choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 201-222, March.
    27. Joan Walker & Jieping Li, 2007. "Latent lifestyle preferences and household location decisions," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 77-101, April.
    28. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt3h69n0cs is not listed on IDEAS
    29. Ziegler, Andreas, 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, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1372-1385.
    30. Maria Kamargianni & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Amalia Polydoropoulou, 2014. "Incorporating social interaction into hybrid choice models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1263-1285, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice study for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 89-111.
    2. Wolinetz, Michael & Axsen, Jonn, 2017. "How policy can build the plug-in electric vehicle market: Insights from the REspondent-based Preference And Constraints (REPAC) model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 238-250.
    3. Axsen, Jonn & TyreeHageman, Jennifer & Lentz, Andy, 2012. "Lifestyle practices and pro-environmental technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 64-74.
    4. Bailey, Joseph & Axsen, Jonn, 2015. "Anticipating PEV buyers’ acceptance of utility controlled charging," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 29-46.
    5. Abotalebi, Elnaz & Scott, Darren M. & Ferguson, Mark R., 2019. "Why is electric vehicle uptake low in Atlantic Canada? A comparison to leading adoption provinces," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 289-298.
    6. Danielis, Romeo & Scorrano, Mariangela & Giansoldati, Marco & Rotaris, Lucia, 2019. "A meta-analysis of the importance of the driving range in consumers’ preference studies for battery electric vehicles," Working Papers 19_2, SIET Società Italiana di Economia dei Trasporti e della Logistica.
    7. Parsons, George R. & Hidrue, Michael K. & Kempton, Willett & Gardner, Meryl P., 2014. "Willingness to pay for vehicle-to-grid (V2G) electric vehicles and their contract terms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 313-324.
    8. Jia, Wenjian & Chen, T. Donna, 2023. "Investigating heterogeneous preferences for plug-in electric vehicles: Policy implications from different choice models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Elnaz Abotalebi & Mark R. Ferguson & Moataz Mohamed & Darren M. Scott, 2020. "Design of a survey to assess prospects for consumer electric mobility in Canada: a retrospective appraisal," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1223-1250, June.
    10. Higgins, Christopher D. & Mohamed, Moataz & Ferguson, Mark R., 2017. "Size matters: How vehicle body type affects consumer preferences for electric vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 182-201.
    11. Milan Scasny & Milan Scasny & Iva Zverinova & Mikolaj Czajkowski, 2015. "Individual preference for the alternative fuel vehicles and their attributes in Poland," EcoMod2015 8575, EcoMod.
    12. Jeremy van Dijk & Mehdi Farsi & Sylvain Weber, 2020. "Travel mode choices in a greening market: the impact of electric vehicles and prior investments," IRENE Working Papers 20-04, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    13. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    14. Kim, Sung Hoo & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2023. "Finite mixture (or latent class) modeling in transportation: Trends, usage, potential, and future directions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 134-173.
    15. Giansoldati, Marco & Danielis, Romeo & Rotaris, Lucia & Scorrano, Mariangela, 2018. "The role of driving range in consumers' purchasing decision for electric cars in Italy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PA), pages 267-274.
    16. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    17. Bergantino, Angela S. & Bierlaire, Michel & Catalano, Mario & Migliore, Marco & Amoroso, Salvatore, 2013. "Taste heterogeneity and latent preferences in the choice behaviour of freight transport operators," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 77-91.
    18. Ardeshiri, Ali & Rashidi, Taha Hossein, 2020. "Willingness to pay for fast charging station for electric vehicles with limited market penetration making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    19. Helveston, John Paul & Liu, Yimin & Feit, Elea McDonnell & Fuchs, Erica & Klampfl, Erica & Michalek, Jeremy J., 2015. "Will subsidies drive electric vehicle adoption? Measuring consumer preferences in the U.S. and China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 96-112.
    20. Tanaka, Makoto & Ida, Takanori & Murakami, Kayo & Friedman, Lee, 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, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 194-209.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • R40 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:50:y:2015:i:c:p:190-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.