IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i21p7428-d1273679.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Policies and Factors Drive Electric Vehicle Use in Nepal?

Author

Listed:
  • Laxman Prasad Ghimire

    (Alternative Energy Promotion Center (AEPC), Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu 44600, Nepal
    Technology Management, Economics and Policy Program (TEMEP), Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea)

  • Yeonbae Kim

    (Technology Management, Economics and Policy Program (TEMEP) & Graduate School of Engineering Practice, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea)

  • Nawa Raj Dhakal

    (Alternative Energy Promotion Center (AEPC), Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu 44600, Nepal)

Abstract

Electric vehicles (EVs) offer a viable technological solution for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation industry, addressing pressing societal concerns regarding climate change, air pollution, and sustainable energy consumption. To effectively promote widespread adoption of EVs, it is crucial to understand consumer preferences and evaluate market dynamics. In Nepal, where proven fossil fuel reserves are absent, the government is actively working towards accelerating EV adoption, leveraging the nation’s significant hydroelectric power generation potential to fulfill EVs’ charging demands. To gain insight into consumer preferences and evaluate market dynamics regarding EVs in Nepal, this study employs a comprehensive approach. Stated preference data are collected through a meticulously designed survey, and sophisticated analytical techniques, namely, the mixed logit model and latent class model, are applied for estimation purposes. The results of this study show that potential EV consumers with small family sizes, lower monthly travel distances, heightened environmental awareness, and substantial knowledge about electric vehicles are more inclined to embrace EV technology. Notably, the study highlights that a reduction in the purchase price exerts the most significant influence on increasing consumers’ likelihood of adopting battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Market simulation results suggest that a policy mix scenario, encompassing a combination of supportive measures, proves more effective in promoting EV adoption compared to relying on single policy initiatives. Furthermore, through latent class estimation, the study identifies three distinct classes of consumers within Nepal, each exhibiting significant variations in preferences. Recognizing and addressing these variations within policy frameworks is crucial for the successful promotion and widespread acceptance of EVs in Nepal.

Suggested Citation

  • Laxman Prasad Ghimire & Yeonbae Kim & Nawa Raj Dhakal, 2023. "Which Policies and Factors Drive Electric Vehicle Use in Nepal?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:21:p:7428-:d:1273679
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/21/7428/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/21/7428/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Javid, Roxana J. & Nejat, Ali, 2017. "A comprehensive model of regional electric vehicle adoption and penetration," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 30-42.
    2. Tamara L. Sheldon & J. R. DeShazo & Richard T. Carson, 2017. "Electric And Plug-In Hybrid Vehicle Demand: Lessons For An Emerging Market," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 695-713, April.
    3. Ghimire, Laxman Prasad & Kim, Yeonbae, 2018. "An analysis on barriers to renewable energy development in the context of Nepal using AHP," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 129(PA), pages 446-456.
    4. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    5. Gurung, Anup & Gurung, Om Prakash & Oh, Sang Eun, 2011. "The potential of a renewable energy technology for rural electrification in Nepal: A case study from Tangting," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 3203-3210.
    6. Arne Risa Hole, 2013. "Mixed logit modeling in Stata--an overview," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2013 23, Stata Users Group.
    7. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    8. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    9. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    10. Daniele Pacifico & Hong il Yoo, 2013. "lclogit: A Stata command for fitting latent-class conditional logit models via the expectation-maximization algorithm," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(3), pages 625-639, September.
    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. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Gutsche, Gunnar & Ziegler, Andreas, 2019. "Which private investors are willing to pay for sustainable investments? Empirical evidence from stated choice experiments," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 193-214.
    4. Grilli, Gaetano & Andrews, Barnaby & Ferrini, Silvia & Luisetti, Tiziana, 2022. "Could a mix of short- and long-term policies be the solution to tackle marine litter? Insights from a choice experiment in England and Ireland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    5. Shin, Jungwoo & Hwang, Won-Sik, 2017. "Consumer preference and willingness to pay for a renewable fuel standard (RFS) policy: Focusing on ex-ante market analysis and segmentation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 32-40.
    6. Chen, Gang & Ratcliffe, Julie & Milte, Rachel & Khadka, Jyoti & Kaambwa, Billingsley, 2021. "Quality of care experience in aged care: An Australia-Wide discrete choice experiment to elicit preference weights," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    7. Daniele Pacifico, 2012. "Fitting nonparametric mixed logit models via expectation-maximization algorithm," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 12(2), pages 284-298, June.
    8. Madhusudhan Adhikari & Laxman Prasad Ghimire & Yeonbae Kim & Prakash Aryal & Sundar Bahadur Khadka, 2020. "Identification and Analysis of Barriers against Electric Vehicle Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Lemeilleur, S. & Subervie, J. & Presoto, A.E. & de Castro Souza, R. & Macchione Saes, M.S., 2016. "Eco-certified contract choice among coffee farmers in Brazil," Working Papers MoISA 201604, UMR MoISA : Montpellier Interdisciplinary center on Sustainable Agri-food systems (social and nutritional sciences): CIHEAM-IAMM, CIRAD, INRAE, L'Institut Agro, Montpellier SupAgro, IRD - Montpellier, France.
    10. Daniele Pacifico, 2010. "Estimating nonparametric mixed logit models via EM algorithm," Center for the Analysis of Public Policies (CAPP) 0072, Universita di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Dipartimento di Economia "Marco Biagi".
    11. Gunnar Gutsche & Andreas Ziegler, 2016. "Are private investors willing to pay for sustainable investments? A stated choice experiment," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201640, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    12. Meron Tekalign & Nicole Groot Zevert & Amanuel Weldegebriel & Jean Poesen & Jan Nyssen & Anton Van Rompaey & Lindsey Norgrove & Bart Muys & Liesbet Vranken, 2018. "Do Tourists’ Preferences Match the Host Community’s Initiatives? A Study of Sustainable Tourism in One of Africa’s Oldest Conservation Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    13. Rudolph, Christian, 2016. "How may incentives for electric cars affect purchase decisions?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 113-120.
    14. Martin Achtnicht, 2012. "German car buyers’ willingness to pay to reduce CO 2 emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 679-697, August.
    15. Hole, Arne Risa, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity in patients' preferences for the attributes of a general practitioner appointment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1078-1094, July.
    16. Péter Czine & Péter Balogh & Zsanett Blága & Zoltán Szabó & Réka Szekeres & Stephane Hess & Béla Juhász, 2024. "Is It Sufficient to Select the Optimal Class Number Based Only on Information Criteria in Fixed- and Random-Parameter Latent Class Discrete Choice Modeling Approaches?," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, August.
    17. Allais, Olivier & Etilé, Fabrice & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2015. "Mandatory labels, taxes and market forces: An empirical evaluation of fat policies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 27-44.
    18. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    19. An, Wookhyun & Alarcón, Silverio, 2021. "Rural tourism preferences in Spain: Best-worst choices," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.

    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:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:21:p:7428-:d:1273679. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.