Identification and prioritization of factors affecting the adoption of electric vehicles using analytic network process

Eshtiaghi, Kh.; Aliyannezhadi, M.; Najafian, A.H.

doi:10.22034/IJHCUM.2021.03.09

Document Type : ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

Authors

Department of Business Management and Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22034/IJHCUM.2021.03.09

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Given the spread of environmental pollution, the development of strategies and changes in lifestyle to reduce urban environmental pollution is of great importance. One of the existing solutions is to develop and promote the use of electric vehicles. An electric vehicle is a car that uses a battery pack to store the electrical energy that powers the motor. EV batteries are charged by plugging the vehicle in to an electric power source. These days, electric vehicles are considered as one of the most modern innovations in the car business. However, the use of these vehicles has not been particularly widespread in third world countries, and this may be due to several reasons. Despite the high level of air pollution in Iran, People and the government still do not accept electric vehicles as an important way to reduce air pollution, and electric vehicles are rarely seen on the streets. The main factors that can affect the reception of electric vehicles by the Iranian people are economic, technical, access, laws, marketing, and personal.
METHODS: The factors extracted from literature and identified factors were prioritized using the analytic network process technique. After data gathering with help of questionnaire which its relaiablity and validity was confirmed through inconsistency index and content validity ratio consecutively, the data analysis was performed using SuperDecision software.
FINDING: The results showed that Economic with 23%, Technical with 17.8%, Accessibility with 16.4%, laws with 15.3%, marketing with 15.1% and personal with 12.2% had the most significant effect in acceptance of the Iranian people of electric vehicles.
CONCLUSION:The results showed that economic factors had the most significant effect in comparison with other criteria. depreciation time, producer company, fuel subsidy, availability of repair shop, car and importance to the environment were the most significant factor in each criteria.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Sustainable urban infrastructure

COPYRIGHTS
©2021 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, as long as the original authors and source are cited. No permission is required from the authors or the publishers.

References

Adnan, N.; Nordin, S.M.; Amini, M. H.; Langove, N., (2018). What make consumer sign up to PHEVs? Predicting Malaysian consumer behavior in adoption of PHEVs. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract., 113: 259-278 (20 pages).

Adnan, N.; Nordin, S.M.; Rahman, I.; Vasant, P.M.; Noor, A., (2017). A comprehensive review on theoretical framework‐based electric vehicle consumer adoption research. Int. J. Res., 41(3): 317-335 (19 pages).

Agarwal, A.; Shankar, R.; Tiwari, M.K., (2006). Modeling the metrics of lean, agile and leagile supply chain: An ANP-based approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 173(1): 211-225 (15 Pages).

Allcott, H.; Greenstone, M., (2012). Is there an energy efficiency gap?. JEP., 26(1): 3-28 (26 pages).

Arning, K.; Kowalewski, S.; Ziefle, M., (2014). Health concerns versus mobile data needs: Conjoint measurement of preferences for mobile communication network scenarios. Hum. Ecol. Risk. Assess., 20(5): 1359-1384 (26 pages).

Beul-Leusmann, S.; Samsel, C.; Wiederhold, M.; Krempels, K.H.; Jakobs, E.M.; Ziefle, M., (2014, June). usability evaluation of mobile passenger information systems. In international conference of DUXU. 217-228 (12 pages).

Bigerna, S.; Micheli, S., (2018). Attitudes toward electric vehicles: The case of perugia using a fuzzy set analysis. Sustainability, 10(11): 3999.

Bjerkan, K.Y.; Nørbech, T.E.; Nordtømme, M.E., (2016). Incentives for promoting battery electric vehicle (BEV) adoption in Norway. Transp. Res. D. Transp. Environ., 43: 169-180 (12 pages).

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 (7 pages).

Choi, H.; Shin, J.; Woo, J., (2018). Effect of electricity generation mix on battery electric vehicle adoption and its environmental impact. Energy Policy, 121: 13-24 (12 pages).

Chapman, L., (2007). Transport and climate change: a review. J. Transport Geog., 15(5): 354-367 (14 pages).

Du, J.; Ouyang, D., (2017). Progress of Chinese electric vehicles industrialization in 2015: Rev. Appl. Energy, 188: 529-546 (18 pages).

Dütschke, E.; Schneider, U.; Peters, A., (2013). Who will use electric vehicles? (No. S6/2013). Working Paper Sustainability and Innovation.

Egbue, O.; Long, S., (2012). Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy policy, 48: 717-729 (13 pages).

Franke, T.; Krems, J.F., (2013). Interacting with limited mobility resources: Psychological range levels in electric vehicle use. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract., 48: 109-122 (14 pages).

Gärling, A.; Thøgersen, J., (2001). Marketing of electric vehicles. Bus. Strategy. Environ., 10(1): 53-65 (13 pages).

Gaul, S.; Ziefle, M., (2009), November. Smart home technologies: Insights into generation-specific acceptance motives. In Symposium of the Austrian HCI and usability engineering group. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 312-332 (21 pages).

Gillingham, K.; Palmer, K., (2013). Bridging the energy efficiency gap: insights for policy from theory and empirical analysis. In RFF Discussion Paper 13-02.

Gillingham, K.; Newell, R.G.; Palmer, K., (2009). Energy efficiency economics and policy. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ., 1(1): 597-620 (24 pages).

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. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract., 46(1): 140-153 (14 pages).

Haddadian, G.; Khodayar, M.; Shahidehpour, M., (2015). Accelerating the global adoption of electric ehicles: barriers and drivers. Electr. J., 28(10): 53-68 (16 pages).

He, X.; Zhan, W., (2018). How to activate moral norm to adopt electric vehicles in China? An empirical study based on extended norm activation theory. J. Clean. Prod., 172: 3546-3556 (11 pages).

Hidrue, M.K.; Parsons, G.R.; Kempton, W.; Gardner, M.P., (2011). Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resour. Energy Econ., 33(3): 686-705 (20 pages).

Hosseini, L.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.; Vahdani, B.; Mousavi, S.M.; Kia, R., (2013). Using the Analytical Network Process to Select the Best Strategy for Reducing Risks in a Supply Chain. J. Eng., 2013 (4)

Hsu, C.; Li, H.; Lu, S., (2013). A dynamic marketing model for hybrid electric vehicles: A case study of Taiwan. Transp. Res. D. Transp. Environ., 20: 21-29 (9 pages).

Huda, M.; Aziz, M.; Tokimatsu, K. (2019). The future of electric vehicles to grid integration in Indonesia. Energy Procedia, 158: 4592-4597 (6 pages).

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 (9 pages).

Joffe, H., (2003). Risk: From perception to social representation. Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 42(1): 55-73 (19 pages).

Johansson, C.; Lövenheim, B.; Schantz, P.; Wahlgren, L.; Almström, P.; Markstedt, A.; Strömgren, M.; Forsberg, B.; Sommar, J.N., (2017). Impacts on air pollution and health by changing commuting from car to bicycle. Sci. Total Environ., 584: 55-63 (9 pages).

Junquera, B.; Moreno, B.; Álvarez, R., (2016). Analyzing consumer attitudes towards electric vehicle purchasing intentions in Spain: Technological limitations and vehicle confidence. Technol. Forcast. Soc. Cange., 109: 6-14 (9 pages).

Khalil, S.; Inam, Z., (2006). Is trade good for environment? A unit root cointegration analysis. Pak. Dev. Rev., 1187-1196 (10 pages).

Khazaei, H., (2016). Predictors of acceptance of electric cars in Malaysia: Moderating effects of driving experience and voluntariness of use. Eur. J. Innov. Manage., 1893 (1 page).

Khooban, M.H.; Niknam, T.; Sha-Sadeghi, M., (2016). Speed control of electrical vehicles: a time-varying proportional–integral controller-based type-2 fuzzy logic. IET Sci. Meas. Technol., 10(3): 185-192 (8 pages).

Krupa, J.S.; Rizzo, D.M.; Eppstein, M.J.; Lanute, D.B.; Gaalema, D.E.; Lakkaraju, K.; Warrender, C.E., (2014). Analysis of a consumer survey on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract., 64: 14-31 (18 pages).

Kumar, R.R.; Kumar, A., (2019). Adoption of electric vehicle: a literature review and prospects for sustainability. J. Clean. Prod., 119911 (1 page).

Lane, B.; Potter, S., (2007). The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the UK: exploring the consumer attitude–action gap. J. Clean. Prod., 15(11-12): 1085-1092 (8 pages).

Lee, H.; Kim, M., Park, Y., (2012). An analytic network process approach to operationalization of five force model. Appl. Math. Model., 36(4): (11-12): 1783-1795 (13 pages).

Leurent, F.; Windisch, E., (2011). Triggering the development of electric mobility: a review of public policies Eur. Transp. Res. Rev., 3(4): 221-235 (15 pages).

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12544-011-0064-3

Melenhorst, A.S.; Rogers, W.A.; Bouwhuis, D.G., (2006). Older adults' motivated choice for technological innovation: Evidence for benefit-driven selectivity. Psychol Aging., 21(1): 190 (1 page).

Müller, D., Klingelhöfer, D., Uibel, S.; Groneberg, D.A., (2011). Car indoor air pollution- analysis of potential sourses. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol., 6: 33 (1 page).

Ozaki, R.; Sevastyanova, K., (2011). Going hybrid: An analysis of consumer purchase motivations. Energy policy, 39(5): 2217-2227 (11 pages).

Park, E.; Lim, J.; Cho, Y., (2018). Understanding the emergence and social acceptance of electric vehicles as next-generation models for the automobile industry. Sustainability, 10(3): 662 (1 page).

Plötz, P.; Schneider, U.; Globisch, J.; Dütschke, E., (2014). Who will buy electric vehicles? Identifying early adopters in Germany. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract., 67: 96-109 (14 pages).

Saaty, T.L., (2004).Decision making-the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes (AHP/ANP).
J. Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng., 13: 1-35 (35 pages).

Sang, Y.N.; Bekhet, H.A., (2015). Modelling electric vehicle usage intentions: an empirical study in Malaysia. J. Clean. Prod., 92: 75-83 (9 pages).

Song, C.H.; Aaldering, L.J., (2019). Strategic intentions to the diffusion of electric mobility paradigm: The case of internal combustion engine vehicle. J. Clean. Prod., 230: 898-909 (12 pages).

Tamor, A.M.; Gearhart, H.; Soto, C., (2013). A statistical approach to estimating acceptance of electric vehicles and electrification of personal transportation. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol., 26: 125-134 (10 pages).

Tian, W.; He, J.; Jiang, J.; Niu, L.; Wang, X., (2012). Multi-objective optimization of charging dispatching for electric vehicle battery swapping station based on adaptive mutation particle swarm optimization. Power Syst. Technol., 36(11): 25-29 (5 pages).

Tu, J.C.; Yang, C., (2019). Key factors influencing consumers’ purchase of electric vehicles. Sustainability, 11(14): 3863 (1 page).

Turcksin, L.; Mairesse, O.; Macharis, C.; Mierlo, J.V., (2013). Encouraging environmentally friendlier cars via fiscal measures: General methodology and application to Belgium. Energies, 6(1): 471-491 (21 pages).

Wang, N.; Tang, L.; Pan, H., (2017). Effectiveness of policy incentives on electric vehicle acceptance in China: A discrete choice analysis. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract., 105: 210-218 (9 pages).

Wang, N.; Tang, L.; Pan, H., (2019). A global comparison and assessment of incentive policy on electric vehicle promotion. Sustain. Cities Soc., 44: 597-603 (7 pages).

Wilkowska, W.; Ziefle, M., (2013). User diversity as a challenge for the integration of medical technology into future smart home environments. In user-driven healthcare: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications. IGI Global, 553-582 (29 pages).

Wilkowska, W.; Farrokhikhiavi, R.; Ziefle, M.; Vallée, D., (2014). Mobility requirements for the use of carpooling among different user groups. In proceedings of the 5th AHFE conference 19(23): 129-140 (12 pages).

Yuksel, I.; Dag, M., (2007). Using the analytic network process (ANP) in a SWOT analysis-A case study for a textile firm. Inf. Sci., 16: 3364-3382 (19 pages).

Ziefle, M.; Beul-Leusmann, S.; Kasugai, K.; Schwalm, M., (2014). Public perception and acceptance of electric vehicles: exploring users’ perceived benefits and drawbacks. In international conference of design, user experience, and usability Springer, Cham, 628-639 (12 pages).

LETTERS TO EDITOR

International Journal of Human Capital in Urban Management (IJHCUM) welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in IJHCUM should be sent to the editorial office of IJHCUM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.

[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.

[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.

[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.

[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.

[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.

[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.

Name *

Email Address *

Affiliation *

Comments *

Security Code *

International Journal of Human Capital in Urban Management

Identification and prioritization of factors affecting the adoption of electric vehicles using analytic network process

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 6, Issue 3 - Serial Number 23
July 2021
Pages 323-336

Identification and prioritization of factors affecting the adoption of electric vehicles using analytic network process

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 6, Issue 3 - Serial Number 23July 2021Pages 323-336

Volume 6, Issue 3 - Serial Number 23
July 2021
Pages 323-336