IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v95y2013icp96-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study

Author

Listed:
  • Axsen, Jonn
  • Orlebar, Caroline
  • Skippon, Stephen

Abstract

We investigate the roles of social influence in the formation of consumer perceptions and preferences for pro-environmental technologies, using the example of battery electric vehicles (BEVs). The context was a technology-based workplace in the U.K. with around 500 members of staff, 57 of whom took part in a BEV experience project in 2010. Several months later, we recruited a diverse sample of 21 staff to complete semi-structured interviews. Following a multi-method approach, we elicited details about their perceptions and valuation of BEVs, experiences with BEVs, and social interactions relating to BEVs. Participants reported a wide variety of perceptions of BEV attributes, including environmental benefits and functional drawbacks. The majority of participants indicated that their BEV perceptions were “highly influenced” by at least one social interaction. We use the reflexive layers of influence conceptual framework to categorize social influence according to three processes: diffusion, the sharing of BEV-related information; translation, the discussion of uncertain BEV benefits and drawbacks; and reflexivity, the relating of BEV technology to self-concept. Findings suggest that participant perceptions change in part through social negotiation of meaning, lifestyle and identity. Neglect of social influence processes will underestimate the potential for shifts in consumer preferences regarding emerging pro-environmental technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Axsen, Jonn & Orlebar, Caroline & Skippon, Stephen, 2013. "Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 96-107.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:95:y:2013:i:c:p:96-107
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913002668
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.009?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 search 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. Norton, Bryan & Costanza, Robert & Bishop, Richard C., 1998. "The evolution of preferences: Why 'sovereign' preferences may not lead to sustainable policies and what to do about it," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 193-211, February.
    3. Jolivet, Eric & Heiskanen, Eva, 2010. "Blowing against the wind--An exploratory application of actor network theory to the analysis of local controversies and participation processes in wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6746-6754, November.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Axsen, Jonn & TyreeHageman, Jennifer & Lentz, Andy, 2012. "Lifestyle practices and pro-environmental technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 64-74.
    7. 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.
    8. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2010. "Reflexive layers of influence (RLI): A model of social influence, vehicle purchase behavior, and pro-societal values," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt69h5j2jf, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    9. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    10. Axsen, Jonn & Mountain, Dean C. & Jaccard, Mark, 2009. "Combining stated and revealed choice research to simulate the neighbor effect: The case of hybrid-electric vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt02n9j6cv, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    11. Calfee, John E., 1985. "Estimating the demand for electric automobiles using fully disaggregated probabilistic choice analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 287-301, August.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Axsen, Jonn & Mountain, Dean C. & Jaccard, Mark, 2009. "Combining stated and revealed choice research to simulate the neighbor effect: The case of hybrid-electric vehicles," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 221-238, August.
    15. Frank J. van Rijnsoever & Jacco Farla & Martin J. Dijst, 2009. "Consumer Car Preferences and Information Search Channels," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-07, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2009.
    16. Steg, Linda, 2005. "Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 147-162.
    17. Mau, Paulus & Eyzaguirre, Jimena & Jaccard, Mark & Collins-Dodd, Colleen & Tiedemann, Kenneth, 2008. "The 'neighbor effect': Simulating dynamics in consumer preferences for new vehicle technologies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 504-516, December.
    18. Kahn Matthew E & Vaughn Ryan K., 2009. "Green Market Geography: The Spatial Clustering of Hybrid Vehicles and LEED Registered Buildings," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-24, March.
    19. Frank Goetzke & Tilmann Rave, 2011. "Bicycle Use in Germany: Explaining Differences between Municipalities with Social Network Effects," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(2), pages 427-437, February.
    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. 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.
    2. Axsen, Jonn, 2010. "Interpersonal Influence within Car Buyers’ Social Networks: Observing Consumer Assessment of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) and the Spread of Pro-Societal Values," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8p32d18k, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    3. Dimitropoulos, Alexandros & Rietveld, Piet & van Ommeren, Jos N., 2013. "Consumer valuation of changes in driving range: A meta-analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 27-45.
    4. Alexandros Dimitropoulos & Piet Rietveld & Jos N. van Ommeren, 2011. "Consumer Valuation of Driving Range: A Meta-Analysis," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-133/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Takanori Ida & Kayo Murakami & Makoto Tanaka, 2012. "Keys to Smart Home Diffusion: A Stated Preference Analysis of Smart Meters, Photovoltaic Generation, and Electric/Hybrid Vehicles," Discussion papers e-11-011, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    8. Gabriela D. Oliveira & Luis C. Dias, 2019. "Influence of Demographics on Consumer Preferences for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: A Review of Choice Modelling Studies and a Study in Portugal," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-33, January.
    9. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2011. "Consumer Preferences for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: A Discrete Choice Analysis," FCN Working Papers 20/2011, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    10. Anders F. Jensen & Elisabetta Cherchi & Stefan L. Mabit & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2017. "Predicting the Potential Market for Electric Vehicles," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 427-440, May.
    11. 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.
    12. J�r�me Massiani, 2013. "The use of Stated Preferences to forecast alternative fuel vehicles market diffusion: Comparisons with other methods and proposal for a Synthetic Utility Function," Working Papers 2013:12, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    13. 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.
    14. Oliveira, Gabriela D. & Roth, Richard & Dias, Luis C., 2019. "Diffusion of alternative fuel vehicles considering dynamic preferences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 83-99.
    15. 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.
    16. Makena Coffman & Paul Bernstein & Sherilyn Wee, 2017. "Electric vehicles revisited: a review of factors that affect adoption," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 79-93, January.
    17. Achtnicht, Martin & Bühler, Georg & Hermeling, Claudia, 2008. "Impact of Service Station Networks on Purchase Decisions of Alternative-fuel Vehicles," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-088, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. J�r�me Massiani, 2013. "SP surveys for electric and alternative fuel vehicles: are we doing the right thing?," Working Papers 2013_01, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".

    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:ecolec:v:95:y:2013:i:c:p:96-107. 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/ecolecon .

    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.