IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v46y2012i8p1372-1385.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Individual characteristics and stated preferences for alternative energy sources and propulsion technologies in vehicles: A discrete choice analysis for Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Ziegler, Andreas

Abstract

With respect to the German goal of a transition to a lead market for electromobility within a short time period, this paper empirically examines the preferences for alternative energy sources or propulsion technologies in vehicles and particularly for electric vehicles. The data stem from a stated preference discrete choice experiment with 598 potential German car buyers. In order to simulate a realistic future purchase situation, seven vehicle types were incorporated in each of the six choice sets, i.e. hybrid, gas, biofuel, hydrogen, and electric vehicles besides common gasoline and diesel vehicles. The econometric analysis with flexible multinomial probit models reveals that potential car buyers in Germany currently have a low stated preference for electric, hydrogen, and hybrid vehicles. While our paper also discusses the impact of common vehicle attributes such as purchase price or service station availability, it particularly considers the effect of socio-demographic and environmental awareness variables. The estimation results reveal that younger potential car buyers have a higher stated preference for hydrogen and electric vehicles, males have a higher stated choice of hydrogen vehicles, and environmentally aware potential car buyers have a higher stated preference for hydrogen and electric vehicles. These results suggest that common policy instruments such as the promotion of research and development, taxation, or subsidization in the field of electromobility could be supplemented by strategies to increase the social acceptance of alternative vehicle types that are directly oriented to these population groups. Methodologically, our study highlights the importance of the inclusion of taste persistence across the choice sets and a high number of random draws in the Geweke–Hajivassiliou–Keane simulator in the simulated maximum likelihood estimation of the multinomial probit models.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:46:y:2012:i:8:p:1372-1385
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2012.05.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856412000912
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2012.05.016?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. Adrián Saldarriaga-Isaza, C. & Vergara, Carlos, 2009. "Who switches to hybrids? A study of a fuel conversion program in Colombia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 572-579, June.
    2. McFadden, Daniel & Ruud, Paul A, 1994. "Estimation by Simulation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 591-608, November.
    3. Keane, Michael P, 1994. "A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimator for Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 95-116, January.
    4. Arimura, Toshi H. & Hibiki, Akira & Katayama, Hajime, 2008. "Is a voluntary approach an effective environmental policy instrument?: A case for environmental management systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 281-295, May.
    5. Dansie, B. R., 1985. "Parameter estimability in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 526-528, December.
    6. Geweke, John & Keane, Michael P & Runkle, David, 1994. "Alternative Computational Approaches to Inference in the Multinomial Probit Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 609-632, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Karplus, Valerie J. & Paltsev, Sergey & Reilly, John M., 2010. "Prospects for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the United States and Japan: A general equilibrium analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 620-641, October.
    9. Horne, Matt & Jaccard, Mark & Tiedemann, Ken, 2005. "Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 59-77, January.
    10. Charles, Michael B. & Ryan, Rachel & Ryan, Neal & Oloruntoba, Richard, 2007. "Public policy and biofuels: The way forward?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5737-5746, November.
    11. Musti, Sashank & Kockelman, Kara M., 2011. "Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: Anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 707-720, October.
    12. Borsch-Supan, Axel & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A., 1993. "Smooth unbiased multivariate probability simulators for maximum likelihood estimation of limited dependent variable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 347-368, August.
    13. Dagsvik, John K. & Wennemo, Tom & Wetterwald, Dag G. & Aaberge, Rolf, 2002. "Potential demand for alternative fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 361-384, May.
    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," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt02n9j6cv, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    15. Benno Torgler & María A.García-Valiñas & Alison Macintyre, 2007. "Differences in Preferences Towards the Environment: The Impact of a Gender, Age and Parental Effect," CREMA Working Paper Series 2008-01, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    16. 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.
    17. White, Halbert, 1982. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Misspecified Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-25, January.
    18. Bunch, David S., 1991. "Estimability in the Multinomial Probit Model," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1gf1t128, University of California Transportation Center.
    19. Silvestrini, A. & Monni, S. & Pregernig, M. & Barbato, A. & Dallemand, J.-F. & Croci, E. & Raes, F., 2010. "The role of cities in achieving the EU targets on biofuels for transportation: The cases of Berlin, London, Milan and Helsinki," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 403-417, July.
    20. Yeh, Sonia, 2007. "An empirical analysis on the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles: The case of natural gas vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5865-5875, November.
    21. Geweke, John F. & Keane, Michael P. & Runkle, David E., 1997. "Statistical inference in the multinomial multiperiod probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 125-165, September.
    22. Sperling, Dan & Wang, Guihua & Ogden, Joan M., 2008. "Comparing air quality impacts of hydrogen and gasoline," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt9215h1m8, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    23. Yeh, Sonia, 2007. "An empirical analysis on the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles:The case of natural gas vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2k09h787, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    24. 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.
    25. Yeh, Sonia, 2007. "An empirical analysis on the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles:The case of natural gas vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt92h7g194, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    26. Andreas Ziegler, 2007. "Simulated classical tests in multinomial probit models," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 655-681, October.
    27. Bunch, David S., 1991. "Estimability in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-12, 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. Andreas Ziegler, 2010. "Individual Characteristics and Stated Preferences for Alternative Energy Sources and Propulsion Technologies in Vehicles: A Discrete Choice Analysis," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 10/125, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    2. Ziegler, Andreas, 2001. "Simulated z-tests in multinomial probit models," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-53, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Ziegler Andreas, 2010. "Z-Tests in Multinomial Probit Models under Simulated Maximum Likelihood Estimation: Some Small Sample Properties," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 230(5), pages 630-652, October.
    4. Rennings, Klaus & Ziegler, Andreas & Zwick, Thomas, 2001. "Employment changes in environmentally innovative firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-46, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. 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.
    6. Daziano, Ricardo A. & Achtnicht, Martin, 2012. "Forecasting adoption of ultra-low-emission vehicles using the GHK simulator and Bayes estimates of a multinomial probit model," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-017, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Klaus Rennings & Andreas Ziegler & Thomas Zwick, 2004. "The effect of environmental innovations on employment changes: an econometric analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 374-387, November.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Zhang, Yong & Yu, Yifeng & Zou, Bai, 2011. "Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: The case of EV," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7015-7024.
    11. Geweke, John & Keane, Michael P & Runkle, David, 1994. "Alternative Computational Approaches to Inference in the Multinomial Probit Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 609-632, November.
    12. Daziano, Ricardo A., 2015. "Inference on mode preferences, vehicle purchases, and the energy paradox using a Bayesian structural choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-26.
    13. 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.
    14. Loría, Luis Enrique & Watson, Verity & Kiso, Takahiko & Phimister, Euan, 2019. "Investigating users' preferences for Low Emission Buses: Experiences from Europe's largest hydrogen bus fleet," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    15. 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.
    16. Jose J. Soto & Victor Cantillo & Julian Arellana, 2018. "Incentivizing alternative fuel vehicles: the influence of transport policies, attitudes and perceptions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1721-1753, November.
    17. 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.
    18. 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).
    19. 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.
    20. Andreas Ziegler, 2008. "Disentangling Specific Subsets of Innovations : A Micro-Econometric Analysis of their Determinants," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 08/100, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.

    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:transa:v:46:y:2012:i:8:p:1372-1385. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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.