IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Public attitudes towards and demand for hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles: A review of the evidence and methodological implications

  • Yetano Roche, María
  • Mourato, Susana
  • Fischedick, Manfred
  • Pietzner, Katja
  • Viebahn, Peter

It is now widely recognized that effective communication and demand-side policies for alternative energy require sound knowledge of preferences and determinants of demand of the public and consumers. To date, public attitudes towards new transport technologies have been studied under very different conceptual frameworks. This paper gives an overview of the various conceptual frameworks and methodologies used, where four main approaches can be distinguished: general attitudinal surveys, risk perception studies, non-market economic valuation studies, and other approaches such as those based on semiotic theory. We then review the findings of the recent literature on acceptance, attitudes and preferences for hydrogen and fuel cell end-use technologies, focusing on vehicles. These studies are then contrasted with related research into alternative fuel vehicles. The paper finally discusses the main trends in research and avenues for further work in this field. We recommend, among other things, the use of approaches that build knowledge and familiarity with the technology prior to the exploration of attitudes, and the set up of studies that take a whole-systems perspective of hydrogen technologies and that look at hydrogen in the context of other competing clean technologies.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V2W-4W68F2M-2/2/72541ce38cc8e386bc76969b9d92ee70
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Policy.

Volume (Year): 38 (2010)
Issue (Month): 10 (October)
Pages: 5301-5310

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:10:p:5301-5310
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Heffner, Reid R. & Kurani, Kenneth S & Turrentine, Tom, 2007. "Symbolism and the Adoption of Fuel-Cell Vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5934t20f, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
  3. Kurani, Kenneth & Turrentine, Thomas & Sperling, Daniel, 1996. "Testing Electric Vehicle Demand in `Hybrid Households' Using a Reflexive Survey," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt0sb956wq, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  4. Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Weimer, David L., 2004. "Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 331-363, March.
  5. Kurani, Kenneth S. & Turrentine, Tom & Sperling, Daniel, 1994. "Demand for Electric Vehicles in Hybrid Households: An Exploratory Analysis," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1c29r4hr, University of California Transportation Center.
  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. O'Garra, Tanya & Mourato, Susana & Pearson, Peter, 2008. "Investigating attitudes to hydrogen refuelling facilities and the social cost to local residents," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 2074-2085, June.
  8. Golob, Thomas F. & Gould, Jane, 1998. "Projecting use of electric vehicles from household vehicle trials," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 441-454, September.
  9. Blomquist, Glenn C. & Whitehead, John C., 1998. "Resource quality information and validity of willingness to pay in contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 179-196, June.
  10. Yamamoto, Yoshihiro & Suzuki, Akihiko & Fuwa, Yasuhiro & Sato, Tomohiro, 2008. "Decision-making in electrical appliance use in the home," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 1679-1686, May.
  11. Trudy Ann Cameron, 2001. "Updating Subjective Risks in the Presence of Conflicting Information: An Application to Climate Change," University of Oregon Economics Department Working Papers 2003-8, University of Oregon Economics Department, revised 14 Jul 2001.
  12. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S & Golob, Thomas F & Ren, Weiping, 1996. "A Transactions Choice Model for Forecasting Demand for Alternative-Fuel Vehicles," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3sm7w9zk, University of California Transportation Center.
  13. O'Garra, Tanya & Mourato, Susana & Garrity, Lisa & Schmidt, Patrick & Beerenwinkel, Anne & Altmann, Matthias & Hart, David & Graesel, Cornelia & Whitehouse, Simon, 2007. "Is the public willing to pay for hydrogen buses? A comparative study of preferences in four cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 3630-3642, July.
  14. Hickson, Allister & Phillips, Al & Morales, Gene, 2007. "Public perception related to a hydrogen hybrid internal combustion engine transit bus demonstration and hydrogen fuel," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2249-2255, April.
  15. Smith, V. Kerry & Michaels, R. Gregory, 1987. "How did households interpret chernobyl? : A bayesian analysis of risk perceptions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 359-364.
  16. Chéron, Emmanuel & Zins, Michel, 1997. "Electric vehicle purchasing intentions: The concern over battery charge duration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 235-243, May.
  17. Paul Slovic & Sarah Lichtenstein & Baruch Fischhoff, 1984. "Modeling the Societal Impact of Fatal Accidents," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 464-474, April.
  18. 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.
  19. Mourato, Susana & Saynor, Bob & Hart, David, 2004. "Greening London's black cabs: a study of driver's preferences for fuel cell taxis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 685-695, March.
  20. Ahn, Jiwoon & Jeong, Gicheol & Kim, Yeonbae, 2008. "A forecast of household ownership and use of alternative fuel vehicles: A multiple discrete-continuous choice approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2091-2104, September.
  21. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Golob, Thomas F. & Ren, Weiping, 1996. "A Transaction Choice Model for Forecasting Demand for Alternative-Fuel Vehicles," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt0244r8g2, University of California Transportation Center.
  22. Tanya O’Garra & Susana Mourato, 2007. "Public Preferences for Hydrogen Buses: Comparing Interval Data, OLS and Quantile Regression Approaches," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 389-411, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:10:p:5301-5310. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.