Advertisement

Transportation

, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 1721–1753 | Cite as

Incentivizing alternative fuel vehicles: the influence of transport policies, attitudes and perceptions

  • Jose J. Soto
  • Victor Cantillo
  • Julian Arellana
Article
  • 333 Downloads

Abstract

This paper aims to evaluate the influence of policies, attitudes and perceptions when incentivizing alternative fuel vehicles. The impact of possible policies such as gasoline taxes increases, purchase price subsidies, tax exemptions, and increases in fuel recharging station availability for alternative fuelled vehicles is evaluated using hybrid choice models. The models also allow assessing the sensitivity of latent variables (i.e., attitudes and perceptions) in the car purchase behaviour. The models are estimated using data from a stated choice survey collected in five Colombian cities. The latent variables are obtained from the rating of statements related to the transport system, environmental concern, vehicle preferences, and technology. The modelling approach includes regression between latent variables. Results show that environmental concern and the support for green transport policies have a positive influence on the intention to purchase alternative fuel vehicles. Meanwhile, people who reveal to be car-dependent prefer to buy standard fuelled vehicles. The analysis among cities shows similar trends in individual behaviour, although there are differences in attribute sensitivities. The policy scenario analysis revealed high sensitivity to capital cost and the need for extensive investments in refuelling stations for alternative fuel vehicles to become attractive. Nevertheless, all policies should not only be directed at infrastructure and vehicles but also be focused on user awareness and acceptance of the alternative fuel vehicles. The analysis suggests that in an environmentally conscious market, people prefer alternative fuels. However, if the transport policies support private transport, the market shares of alternative fuel vehicles will decrease.

Keywords

Alternative fuel vehicles Hybrid choice model Discrete choice Latent variables 

References

  1. Achtnicht, M., Bühler, G., Hermeling, C.: The impact of fuel availability on demand for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 17(3), 262–269 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beggs, S., Cardell, S., Hausman, J.: Assessing the potential demand for electric cars. J. Econom. 17, 1–19 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Akiva, M., McFadden, D., Train, K., Walker, J., Bhat, C., Bierlaire, M., Bolduc, D., Boersch-Supan, A., Brownstone, D., Bunch, D.S., Daly, A.: Hybrid choice models: progress and challenges. Mark. Lett. 13(3), 163–175 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bittencourt, M.V.L., Cardoso, L.C.B., Irwin, E.G.: Biofuels policies and fuel demand elasticities in Brazil: an IV approach. In: Anais do XLIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 43rd Brazilian Economics Meeting] (No. 181). ANPEC-Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pósgraduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics] (2016)Google Scholar
  5. Bjerkan, K.Y., Nørbech, T.E., Nordtømme, M.E.: Incentives for promoting battery electric vehicle (BEV) adoption in Norway. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 43, 169–180 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolduc, D., Boucher, N., Alvarez-Daziano, R.: Hybrid choice modeling of new technologies for car choice in Canada. Transp. Res. Rec. 2082, 63–71 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brownstone, D., Bunch, D.S., Train, K.: Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 34, 315–338 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cantillo, V., Ortúzar, J., Williams, H.: Modeling discrete choices in the presence of inertia and serial correlation. Transp. Sci. 41(2), 195–205 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caulfield, B., Farrell, S., McMahon, B.: Examining individuals preferences for hybrid electric and alternatively fuelled vehicles. Transp. Policy 17, 381–387 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cherchi, E.: A stated choice experiment to measure the effect of informational and normative conformity in the preference for electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 100, 88–104 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chorus, C.G., Kroesen, M.: On the (im-) possibility of deriving transport policy implications from hybrid choice models. Transp. Policy 36, 217–222 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collantes, G.: Do green tech policies need to pass the consumer test? The case of ethanol fuel. Energy Econ. 32, 1235–1244 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daly, A., Hess, S., Patruni, B., Potoglou, D., Rohr, C.: Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on travel behaviour. Transportation 39, 267–297 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dagsvik, J.K., Wennemo, T., Wetterwald, D.G., Aaberge, R.: Potential demand for alternative fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. B 36, 361–384 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Daziano, R.A.: Taking account of the role of safety on vehicle choice using a new generation of discrete choice models. Saf. Sci. 50(1), 103–112 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Daziano, R.A., Chiew, E.: Electric vehicles rising from the dead: data needs for forecasting consumer response toward sustainable energy sources in personal transportation. Energy Policy 51, 876–894 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daziano, R.A., Bolduc, D.: Incorporating pro-environmental preferences toward green automobile technologies through a Bayesian Hybrid Choice Model. Transp. A Transp. Sci. 9(1), 74–106 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. DG MOVE: State of the art on alternative fuel transport systems in the European Union, p. 128 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. Doornik, J.A.: Object-Oriented Matrix Programming Using Ox, 3rd edn. London: Timberlake Consultants Press and Oxford (2007). www.doornik.com
  20. Engerer, H., Horn, M.: Natural gas vehicles: an option for Europe. Energy Policy 38(2), 1017–1029 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ewing, G.O., Sarigollu, E.: Car fuel-type choice under travel demand management and economic incentives. Transp. Res. D 3(6), 429–444 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fujii, S., Gärling, T.: Application of attitude theory for improved predictive accuracy of stated preference methods in travel demand analysis. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 37(4), 389–402 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Galván, J., Cantillo, V., Arellana, J.: Factors influencing demand for buses powered by alternative energy sources. J. Public Transp. 19(2), 23–37 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Glerum, A., Stankovikj, L., Thémans, M., Bierlaire, M.: Forecasting the demand for electric vehicles: accounting for attitudes and perceptions. Transp. Sci. 48(4), 483–499 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gnann, T., Plötz, P.: A review of combined models for market diffusion of alternative fuel vehicles and their refueling infrastructure. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47, 783–793 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hackbarth, A., Madlener, R.: Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: a discrete choice analysis. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 25, 5–17 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hackbarth, A., Madlener, R.: Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: a stated choice study for Germany. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 85, 89–111 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hensher, D., Louviere, J., Swait, J.: Combining sources of preference data. J. Econom. 89(1–2), 197–221 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hess, S., Train, K., Polak, J.: On the use of a modified latin hypercube sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a mixed logit model for vehicle choice. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 40, 147–163 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hess, S., Fowler, M., Adler, T., Bahreinian, A.: A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: evidence from a cross-nested logit study. Transportation 39(3), 593–625 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hidrue, M.K., Parsons, G.R., Kempton, W., Gardner, M.P.: Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resour. Energy Econ. 33, 686–705 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hoen, A., Koetse, M.J.: A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 61, 199–215 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Horne, M., Jaccard, M., Tiedemann, K.: Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions. Energy Econ. 27, 59–77 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. International Energy Agency: Co2 emissions from fuel combustion highlights. IEA Publications, p. 136 (2014)Google Scholar
  35. International Energy Agency: Global EV Outlook 2016: beyond one million electric cars, p. 51 (2016)Google Scholar
  36. Janssen, A., Lienin, S.F., Gassmann, F., Wokaun, A.: Model aided policy development for the market penetration of natural gas vehicles in Switzerland. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 40, 316–333 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jansson, J.: Car (ing) for our environment?: Consumer eco-innovation adoption and curtailment behaviors: the case of the alternative fuel vehicle (2009)Google Scholar
  38. Jensen, A.F., Cherchi, E., Mabit, S.L.: On the stability of preferences and attitudes before and after experiencing an electric vehicle. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 25, 24–32 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jensen, A.F., Cherchi, E., Ortúzar, J.: A long panel survey to elicit variation in preferences and attitudes in the choice of electric vehicles. Transportation 41(5), 973–993 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jensen, A.F., Cherchi, E., Mabit, S.L., Ortúzar, J.: Predicting the potential market for electric vehicles. Transp. Sci. 51(2), 427–440 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kim, J., Rasouli, S., Timmermans, H.: A hybrid choice model with a nonlinear utility function and bounded distribution for latent variables: application to purchase intention decisions of electric cars. Transp. A Transp. Sci. 12(10), 909–932 (2016)Google Scholar
  42. Kollmuss, A., Agyeman, J.: Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ. Educ. Res. 8(3), 239–260 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Langbroek, J.H., Franklin, J.P., Susilo, Y.O.: The effect of policy incentives on electric vehicle adoption. Energy Policy 94, 94–103 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D.: Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. University Press, Cambridge (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mabit, S.L., Fosgerau, M.: Demand for alternative-fuel vehicles when registration taxes are high. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 16, 225–231 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mabit, S.L., Cherchi, E., Jensen, A.F., Jordal-Jørgensen, J.: The effect of attitudes on reference-dependent preferences: estimation and validation for the case of alternative-fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 82, 17–28 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Maldonado-Hinarejos, R., Sivakumar, A., Polak, J.W.: Exploring the role of individual attitudes and perceptions in predicting the demand for cycling: a hybrid choice modelling approach. Transportation 41(6), 1287–1304 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9551-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Melaina, M., Muratori, M., McLaren, J., Schwabe, P.: Investing in Alternative Fuel Infrastructure: Insights for California from Stakeholder Interviews (No. 17-05279) (2017)Google Scholar
  49. Melton, N., Axsen, J., Sperling, D.: Moving beyond alternative fuel hype to decarbonize transportation. Nat. Energy 1(3), 16013 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mersky, A.C., Sprei, F., Samaras, C., Qian, Z.S.: Effectiveness of incentives on electric vehicle adoption in Norway. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 46, 56–68 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Myklebust, B.: EVs in bus lanes—controversial incentive. In: Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS27), 2013 World. IEEE, pp. 1–7 (2013)Google Scholar
  52. Ortúzar, J., Willumsen, L.G.: Modelling transport, vol. 4. Wiley, Chichester (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Potoglou, D., Kanaroglou, P.S.: Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 12, 264–274 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Romm, J.: The car and fuel of the future. Energy Policy 34, 2609–2614 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Saldarriaga-Isaza, C.A., Vergara, C.: Who switches to hybrids? A study of a fuel conversion program in Colombia. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 43(5), 572–579 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sobh, A.S.: Transportation Economics and Energy. Doctoral dissertation, Utah State University (2015)Google Scholar
  57. Soto, J.J., Cantillo, V., Arellana, J.: Hybrid choice model for alternative fuelled vehicles. Interciencia 39(9), 666–672 (2014)Google Scholar
  58. Tanaka, M., Ida, T., Murakami, K., Friedman, L.: Consumers’ willingness to pay for alternative fuel vehicles: a comparative discrete choice analysis between the US and Japan. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 70, 194–209 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Valeri, E., Cherchi, E.: Does habitual behavior affect the choice of alternative fuel vehicles? Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 10(9), 825–835 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Vij, A., Walker, J.: How, when and why integrated choice and latent variable models are latently useful. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 90, 192–217 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. von Rosenstiel, D.P., Heuermann, D., Hüsig, S.: Why has the introduction of natural gas vehicles failed in Germany?—Lessons on the role of market failure in markets for alternative fuel vehicles. Energy Policy 78, 91–101 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walker, J.: Extended Discrete Choice Models: Integrated Framework, Flexible Error Structures, and Latent Variables. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2001)Google Scholar
  63. Wang, H., Fang, H., Yu, X., Wang, K.: Development of natural gas vehicles in China: an assessment of enabling factors and barriers. Energy Policy 85, 80–93 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Yánez, F., Raveau, S., Rojas, M., Ortuzar, J.: Modelling and forecasting with latent variables in discrete choice panel models. In European Transport Conference (2009)Google Scholar
  65. Yeh, S.: An empirical analysis on the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles: the case of natural gas. Energy Policy 35, 5865–5875 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jose J. Soto
    • 1
    • 2
  • Victor Cantillo
    • 1
  • Julian Arellana
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversidad del NorteBarranquillaColombia
  2. 2.Faculty of EngineeringUniversidad Tecnologica de BolívarCartagenaColombia

Personalised recommendations