IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i1p274-d1313461.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the User Adoption Mechanism of Green Transportation Services in the Context of the Electricity–Carbon Market Synergy

Author

Listed:
  • Dong Pan

    (Economic Technology Research Institute, State Grid Anhui Electric Power Co., Ltd., Hefei 230061, China)

  • Bao Wang

    (Economic Technology Research Institute, State Grid Anhui Electric Power Co., Ltd., Hefei 230061, China)

  • Jun Li

    (School of Economics, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230601, China)

  • Fei Wu

    (State Grid Anhui Electric Power Co., Ltd., Hefei 230601, China)

Abstract

Promoting green transportation development in the context of electric–carbon market synergy can help promote sustainable transport and tackle climate change. The sharing economy has given rise to innovative and successful business models in recent years. To occupy current and potential markets, many enterprises that participate in sharing economy activities have engaged in a fiercely competitive environment. It is an important way for enterprises to generate profits and improve competitiveness by encouraging consumers’ continuous consumption or stimulating repurchase intentions. This study investigates the effects of consumer satisfaction on consumer repurchase intention (CRI) and how such effects are moderated by the consumer’s risk perception and sustainability awareness in the case of ride-sharing services, which are viewed as a mode of green transportation service. The results of a survey of 358 Chinese consumers who have used ride-sharing services suggest that transaction-based and experience-based satisfaction have positive and significant effects on the CRI of ride-sharing services. Moreover, the results indicate that consumer risk perception negatively moderates the relationships between satisfaction and CRI, while consumer sustainability awareness plays different roles depending on the type of satisfaction (transaction-based versus experience-based). Finally, implications and suggestions for future studies are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Dong Pan & Bao Wang & Jun Li & Fei Wu, 2024. "Exploring the User Adoption Mechanism of Green Transportation Services in the Context of the Electricity–Carbon Market Synergy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:1:p:274-:d:1313461
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/1/274/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/1/274/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mourad, Abood & Puchinger, Jakob & Chu, Chengbin, 2019. "A survey of models and algorithms for optimizing shared mobility," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 323-346.
    2. Martin, Chris J., 2016. "The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 149-159.
    3. Kahn, Matthew E., 2007. "Do greens drive Hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 129-145, September.
    4. Barnes, Stuart J. & Mattsson, Jan, 2016. "Understanding current and future issues in collaborative consumption: A four-stage Delphi study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 200-211.
    5. Brown, Keith C. & Harlow, W. V. & Tinic, Seha M., 1988. "Risk aversion, uncertain information, and market efficiency," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 355-385, December.
    6. Yu-Shan Chen & Ching-Hsun Chang, 2013. "Greenwash and Green Trust: The Mediation Effects of Green Consumer Confusion and Green Perceived Risk," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 489-500, May.
    7. Mohamed Khalifa & Moez Limayem & Vanessa Liu, 2002. "Online Customer Stickiness: A Longitudinal Study," Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), IGI Global, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, July.
    8. Ying-Hueih Chen & Jyh-Jeng Wu & Yu-Shuo Chung, 2008. "Cultural Impact on Trust: A Comparison of Virtual Communities in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan," Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 28-48, January.
    9. Mattia De Rosa & Vincenzo Bianco & Henrik Barth & Patricia Pereira da Silva & Carlos Vargas Salgado & Fabiano Pallonetto, 2023. "Technologies and Strategies to Support Energy Transition in Urban Building and Transportation Sectors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-16, May.
    10. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226316529 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Johnson, Michael D. & Fornell, Claes, 1991. "A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across individuals and product categories," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 267-286, June.
    12. Li, Yan & Feng, Tian-tian & Liu, Li-li & Zhang, Meng-xi, 2023. "How do the electricity market and carbon market interact and achieve integrated development?--A bibliometric-based review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    13. Shanyong Wang & Jun Li & Dingtao Zhao, 2018. "Institutional Pressures and Environmental Management Practices: The Moderating Effects of Environmental Commitment and Resource Availability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 52-69, January.
    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. Xiulan Jiang & Yukun Li & Jun Yang & Sen Wang & Chunjia Han, 2024. "Host–Guest Interaction and Sustainable Consumption Behaviour on Sharing-Accommodation Platforms: Using a Big Data Analytic Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-22, June.
    2. Isabel Miralles & Domenico Dentoni & Stefano Pascucci, 2017. "Understanding the organization of sharing economy in agri-food systems: evidence from alternative food networks in Valencia," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 833-854, December.
    3. Frederik Plewnia & Edeltraud Guenther, 2017. "Advancing a sustainable sharing economy with interdisciplinary research [Der Beitrag interdisziplinärer Forschung zu einer nachhaltigen Sharing Economy]," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 117-124, June.
    4. Manuel Sánchez-Pérez & Nuria Rueda-López & María Belén Marín-Carrillo & Eduardo Terán-Yépez, 2021. "Theoretical dilemmas, conceptual review and perspectives disclosure of the sharing economy: a qualitative analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1849-1883, October.
    5. Venkateswaran, Viswanathan & S Kumar, Deepak & Gupta, Deepak, 2021. "‘To Trust or Not’: Impact of camouflage strategies on trust in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 110-126.
    6. Meisam Ranjbari & Gustavo Morales-Alonso & Ruth Carrasco-Gallego, 2018. "Conceptualizing the Sharing Economy through Presenting a Comprehensive Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    7. Maria J. Pouri & Lorenz M. Hilty, 2018. "Conceptualizing the Digital Sharing Economy in the Context of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Florian Hawlitschek & Nicole Stofberg & Timm Teubner & Patrick Tu & Christof Weinhardt, 2018. "How Corporate Sharewashing Practices Undermine Consumer Trust," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, July.
    9. Sirkeci Kübra & Arıkan Esra, 2021. "The Infinite Wardrobe: Female Consumers’ Value Perceptions Regarding Collaborative Consumption of Apparel," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 16(2), pages 150-170, December.
    10. Yuya Mitake & Atsuto Nagayama & Yusuke Tsutsui & Yoshiki Shimomura, 2022. "Exploring Motivations and Barriers to Participate in Skill-Sharing Service: Insights from Case Study in Western Part of Tokyo," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, April.
    11. Anne Bäro & Felix Toepler & Timo Meynhardt & Vivek K. Velamuri, 2022. "Participating in the sharing economy: The role of individual characteristics," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 3715-3735, December.
    12. Wilhelms, Mark-Philipp & Henkel, Sven & Falk, Tomas, 2017. "To earn is not enough: A means-end analysis to uncover peer-providers' participation motives in peer-to-peer carsharing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 38-47.
    13. Jancsik, András & Michalkó, Gábor & Csernyik, Márta, 2018. "Megosztás megosztottság nélkül - az Airbnb és a budapesti szálláshelypiac átalakulása [Shared but not divided: Airbnb and transformation of the accommodation market in Budapest]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 259-286.
    14. Mazzucchelli, Alice & Gurioli, Martina & Graziano, Domenico & Quacquarelli, Barbara & Aouina-Mejri, Chiraz, 2021. "How to fight against food waste in the digital era: Key factors for a successful food sharing platform," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 47-58.
    15. Lim, Weng Marc, 2020. "The sharing economy: A marketing perspective," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 4-13.
    16. Akbari, Morteza & Foroudi, Pantea & Khodayari, Maryam & Zaman Fashami, Rahime & Shahabaldini parizi, Zahra & Shahriari, Elmira, 2022. "Sharing Your Assets: A Holistic Review of Sharing Economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 604-625.
    17. Chan Liu & Raymond K. H. Chan & Maofu Wang & Zhe Yang, 2020. "Mapping the Sharing Economy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Murillo, David & Buckland, Heloise & Val, Esther, 2017. "When the sharing economy becomes neoliberalism on steroids: Unravelling the controversies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 66-76.
    19. Thomas Sabitzer & Barbara Hartl & Sarah Marth & Eva Hofmann & Elfriede Penz, 2018. "Preventing Conflicts in Sharing Communities as a Means of Promoting Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    20. Sk Abu Khalek & Anirban Chakraborty, 2023. "‘Do I share because I care?’: Investigating the factors influencing consumer's adoption of shared consumption," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5669-5685, December.

    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:17:y:2024:i:1:p:274-:d:1313461. 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.