Factors Affecting Disabled Consumer Preferences for an Electric Vehicle for Rural Mobility: An Italian Experimental Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- to promote the presence and use of adequate services, tools, and resources throughout the country, in accordance with the principles of equal opportunity, for the benefit of citizens with disabilities and businesses interested in regulation on targeted employment;
- to support the standardization of implementation processes across the country through relevant services to reduce the territorial gaps that negatively affect large areas of the country;
- to direct the actions of the system towards the continuous improvement of performance efficacy, encouraged by the monitoring activities and by sharing of good practices among different local contexts.
2. Background
2.1. Willingness to Drive an Electric Vehicle by Disabled People
2.2. Willingness to Pay for an Electric Vehicle by Disabled People
2.3. Conceptual Model
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Sample
3.2. Statistic Techniques
4. Analysis and Results
4.1. Preliminary Analysis
- i.
- Attitudes towards environmental issues (Environment): respect for the environment;
- ii.
- Attitudes towards vehicle attributes (Vehicle attributes): importance for technical, environmental, and economic aspects of cars;
- iii.
- Attitudes towards environmentally friendly cars (Friendly car): positive attitude
- iv.
- The perceived utility from using the new functions of products (Functional motivation): consumers apply new technology to improve their status;
- v.
- Customers’ anticipated emotional experience (Hedonic motivation): new technology positively stimulates consumers’ senses;
- vi.
- Customers’ intention to buy (Purchase intention).
4.2. The Econometric Model: The Willingness to Drive
4.3. The Econometric Model: The Willingness to Pay
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- World Bank Group. Disability Inclusion and Accountability Framework. 2022. Available online: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/437451528442789278/disability-inclusion-and-accountability-framework (accessed on 8 February 2023).
- ISTAT. Audizione dell’Istat presso il Comitato Tecnico Scientifico dell’Osservatorio Nazionale sulla condizione delle persone con disabilità. 2021. Available online: https://www.osservatoriodisabilita.gov.it/it/notizie/audizione-dell-istat-presso-il-comitato-tecnico-scientifico-dell-osservatorio/ (accessed on 8 February 2023).
- Semeijn, J.; Gelderman, C.J.; Schijns, J.M.C.; van Tiel, R. Disability and pro environmental behavior—An investigation of the determinants of purchasing environmentally friendly cars by disabled consumers. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2019, 67, 197–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, H.J.; Yurchisin, J.; Hodges, N.; Watchravesringkan, K.; Ackerman, T. An investigation of self-concept, clothing selection motivation, and life satisfaction among disabled consumers. Fam. Consum. Sci. Res. J. 2013, 42, 162–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lovelock, B. Disability and going green: A comparison of the environmental values and behaviours of persons with and without disability. Disabil. Soc. 2010, 25, 467–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbott, D.; Porter, S. Environmental hazard and disabled people: From vulnerable to expert to interconnected. Disabil. Soc. 2013, 28, 839–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldred, R.; Woodcock, J. Transport: Challenging disabling environments. Local Environ. 2008, 13, 485–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monbiot, G. Heat: How We Can Stop the Planet Burning; Penguin: London, UK, 2007; ISBN 0141026626. [Google Scholar]
- Woodcock, J.; Banister, D.; Edwards, P.; Prentice, A.M.; Roberts, I. Energy and transport. Lancet 2007, 370, 1078–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Imrie, R.; Thomas, H. The interrelationships between environment and disability. Local Environ. 2008, 13, 477–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DPTAC. Attitudes of Disabled People to Public Transport Research Study Conducted for Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee. Jpn. Railw. Transp. Rev. 2002, 56–57. Available online: https://trimis.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/project/documents/20060811_110503_45123_UG395_Final_Report.pdf (accessed on 8 February 2023).
- Lamb, J.M. Disability and the social importance of appearance. Cloth. Text. Res. J. 2001, 19, 134–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministero del Lavoro e delle Politiche Sociali Ministero del Lavoro e delle Politiche Sociali. Available online: https://www.lavoro.gov.it/Pagine/default.aspx (accessed on 6 March 2023).
- Dai Ministeri del Lavoro e delle Linee guida in materia di collocamento mirato delle persone con disabilità. Available online: https://www.ticonsiglio.com/lavoro-disabili-linee-guida/ (accessed on 6 March 2023).
- Secinaro, S.; Calandra, D.; Lanzalonga, F.; Ferraris, A. Electric vehicles’ consumer behaviours: Mapping the field and providing a research agenda. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 150, 399–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bockarjova, M.; Rietveld, P.; Knockaert, J.; Steg, L. Dynamic Consumer Heterogeneity in Electric Vehicle Adoption; National Academy: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Dimitropoulos, A.; Rietveld, P.; Van Ommeren, J.N. Consumer valuation of changes in driving range: A meta-analysis. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2013, 55, 27–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helveston, J.P.; Liu, Y.; Feit, E.M.; Fuchs, E.; Klampfl, E.; Michalek, J.J. Will subsidies drive electric vehicle adoption? Measuring consumer preferences in the US and China. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2015, 73, 96–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hess, S.; Fowler, M.; Adler, T.; Bahreinian, A. A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: Evidence from a cross-nested logit study. Transportation 2012, 39, 593–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jensen, A.F.; Cherchi, E.; Mabit, S.L. On the stability of preferences and attitudes before and after experiencing an electric vehicle. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 25, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Achtnicht, M.; Bühler, G.; Hermeling, C. The impact of fuel availability on demand for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2012, 17, 262–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hackbarth, A.; Madlener, R. Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: A discrete choice analysis. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 25, 5–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Molin, E.; van Stralen, W.; van Wee, B. Car Drivers’ Preferences for Electric Cars; National Academy: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Mabit, S.L.; Fosgerau, M. Demand for alternative-fuel vehicles when registration taxes are high. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2011, 16, 225–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Potoglou, D.; Kanaroglou, P.S. Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2007, 12, 264–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valeri, E.; Danielis, R. Simulating the market penetration of cars with alternative fuelpowertrain technologies in Italy. Transp. Policy 2015, 37, 44–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liao, F.; Molin, E.; van Wee, B. Consumer preferences for electric vehicles: A literature review. Transp. Rev. 2017, 37, 252–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chorus, C.G.; Koetse, M.J.; Hoen, A. Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: Comparing a utility maximization and a regret minimization model. Energy Policy 2013, 61, 901–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoen, A.; Koetse, M.J. A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2014, 61, 199–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Fan, J.; Zhao, D.; Yang, S.; Fu, Y. Predicting consumers’ intention to adopt hybrid electric vehicles: Using an extended version of the theory of planned behavior model. Transportation 2016, 43, 123–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukherjee, S.C.; Ryan, L. Factors influencing early battery electric vehicle adoption in Ireland. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 118, 109504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ziegler, A. Individual characteristics and stated preferences for alternative energy sources and propulsion technologies in vehicles: A discrete choice analysis for Germany. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2012, 46, 1372–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musti, S.; Kockelman, K.M. Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: Anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2011, 45, 707–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mock, P.; Yang, Z. Driving Electrification: A global comparision of fiscal incentive policy for EV. ICCT White Pap. 2014, 3, 7–10. [Google Scholar]
- Horne, M.; Jaccard, M.; Tiedemann, K. Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions. Energy Econ. 2005, 27, 59–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rasouli, S.; Timmermans, H. Influence of social networks on latent choice of electric cars: A mixed logit specification using experimental design data. Netw. Spat. Econ. 2016, 16, 99–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burnett, J.J.; Baker, H.B. Assessing the Travel-Related Behaviors of the Mobility-Disabled Consumer. J. Travel Res. 2001, 40, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daziano, R.A.; Chiew, E. Electric vehicles rising from the dead: Data needs for forecasting consumer response toward sustainable energy sources in personal transportation. Energy Policy 2012, 51, 876–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coelho, P.S. Creating customer loyalty through service customization. Eur. J. Mark. 2012, 46, 331–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, J.; Yeo, S.; Lee, Y.; Moon, S.; Lee, D.J. Factors affecting consumers’ preferences for electric vehicle: A Korean case. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2021, 41, 100666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.; Sheng, N.; Zhao, D.; Cai, K.; Yang, G.; Song, Q. Are Residents More Willing to Buy and Pay for Electric Vehicles Under the “Carbon Neutrality”? SSRN Electron. J. 2022, 9, 510–521. [Google Scholar]
- Bell, E.; Bryman, A.; Harley, B. Business Research Methods; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2018; ISBN 0198869444. [Google Scholar]
- Mazo, M.; Rodriguez, F.J.; Lázaro, J.L.; Ureña, J.; Garcia, J.C.; Santiso, E.; Revenga, P.; Garcia, J.J. Wheelchair for physically disabled people with voice, ultrasonic and infrared sensor control. Auton. Robot. 1995, 2, 203–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Feng, Q.; Hui, P.C. What are the factors that influence the adaptive market? An empirical study with wheelchair users in Hong Kong. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. Int. J. 2022, 1–25, ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armenio, S.; Bergantino, A.S.; Intini, M.; Morone, A. Cheaper or eco-friendly cars: What do consumers prefer? An experimental study on individual and social preferences. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 193, 107323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmieri, N.; Suardi, A.; Pari, L. Italian consumers’ willingness to pay for eucalyptus firewood. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Palmieri, N.; Suardi, A.; Alfano, V.; Pari, L. Circular economy model: Insights from a case study in south Italy. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wright, K.B. Researching Internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. J. Comput. Commun. 2005, 10, JCMC1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- COWI. Stated Preference Survey of New Car Purchases Det Strategiske Forskningsråd Stated Preference Survey of New Car Purchases Report; COWI: Lyngby, Denmark, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Auto Elettrica per Disabili Kangaroo. Available online: http://www.disabilistore.com/firenze/SCOOTER-ELETTRICI/Scooter-Elettrici-Cabinati-/AUTO-ELETTRICA-PER-DISABILI-KANGAROO.html (accessed on 8 February 2023).
- ISTAT. 2022 Istat. Available online: https://www.istat.it/ (accessed on 8 February 2023).
- Library, P.Y.; Hom, H.; Kong, H. Apparel for Wheelchair-Bound User in Hong Kong: Empirical Study of Business Model. Ph.D. Thesis, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
- Team, R.C. Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Brand, C.; Cluzel, C.; Anable, J. Modeling the uptake of plug-in vehicles in a heterogeneous car market using a consumer segmentation approach. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 97, 121–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Axsen, J.; Bailey, J.; Castro, M.A. Preference and lifestyle heterogeneity among potential plug-in electric vehicle buyers. Energy Econ. 2015, 50, 190–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caulfield, B.; Farrell, S.; McMahon, B. Examining individuals preferences for hybrid electric and alternatively fuelled vehicles. Transp. Policy 2010, 17, 381–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Achtnicht, M. German car buyers’ willingness to pay to reduce CO2 emissions. Clim. Chang. 2012, 113, 679–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goebel, C. On the business value of ICT-controlled plug-in electric vehicle charging in California. Energy Policy 2013, 53, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robinson, J.; Brase, G.; Griswold, W.; Jackson, C.; Erickson, L. Business models for solar powered charging stations to develop infrastructure for electric vehicles. Sustainability 2014, 6, 7358–7387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Noppers, E.H.; Keizer, K.; Bolderdijk, J.W.; Steg, L. The adoption of sustainable innovations: Driven by symbolic and environmental motives. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2014, 25, 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | Description | % |
---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 65.22 |
Female | 34.78 | |
Age | 18–34 | 18.00 |
35–49 | 33.83 | |
over 50 | 48.17 | |
Education | Low level (i.e., primary and/or secondary school) | 21.74 |
High level (i.e., degree, Ph.D. and/or masters) | 78.26 | |
Place of residence | Village (less than 5000 inhabitants) | 4.35 |
Little town (5000–30,000 inhabitants) | 30.43 | |
City (more than 30,000 inhabitants) | 65.22 | |
Monthly household income (euro) | <1800 | 13.04 |
1801–2500 | 34.78 | |
2501–3200 | 21.75 | |
3201–3900 | 8.70 | |
3901–4600 | 21.73 |
Items Group | Mean | Standard Deviation |
---|---|---|
Disabled people’s sensitivity to the environment. (Cronbach Alpha = 0.93) How much do you approve of the following expressions? | ||
Environmental pollution is an issue that I consider to be of major importance | 8.57 | 1.39 |
I would like to minimize the ecological repercussions of my vehicle | 8.30 | 1.38 |
I carry out waste sorting on a regular basis | 8.13 | 1.87 |
I consider buying home appliances according to their energy class | 8.43 | 1.35 |
Elements of the vehicle that people with disabilities consider important (Cronbach Alpha = 0.91) How important are the following elements in choosing a car? | ||
Comfort | 7.78 | 2.00 |
Safety | 8.47 | 1.50 |
Pleasure to drive | 8.00 | 1.03 |
Total mileage | 6.65 | 2.44 |
Design | 7.43 | 2.46 |
Operation range | 7.00 | 2.61 |
Eco-friendliness | 6.65 | 2.64 |
Price | 8.01 | 1.03 |
Brand name | 8.35 | 1.35 |
Acceleration | 7.00 | 2.71 |
Resale value (as used car) | 7.04 | 2.64 |
Reliability | 8.52 | 1.43 |
Spaciousness | 7.87 | 1.26 |
Fueling/Charging time | 7.30 | 2.51 |
Gas/ Charging station accessibility | 7.04 | 2.72 |
Electric vehicle (EV) penetration | 7.26 | 2.70 |
Consideration of environmentally friendly cars by people with disabilities (Cronbach Alpha = 0.98) How much do you accept the following opinions? | ||
I consider that the purchase of a sustainable car is… (1. very bad to 10. very good) | 7.87 | 1.72 |
I consider that the purchase of a sustainable car is… (1. very foolish to 10. very wise) | 6.91 | 2.10 |
I consider that the purchase of a sustainable car is… (1. very dissatisfying to 10. very satisfying) | 7.04 | 2.90 |
Functional needs (Cronbach Alpha = 0.97) How much do you accept the following opinions? | ||
Environmentally sustainable cars cannot be adapted to my physical problems | 4.04 | 3.38 |
Environmentally sustainable cars are unhandy for refilling/recharging operations | 5.43 | 3.40 |
Hedonistic needs (Cronbach Alpha = 0.98) How much do you accept the following opinions? | ||
Environmentally sustainable cars are interesting technological innovations | 7.61 | 2.57 |
Environmentally sustainable cars confer high driving pleasure | 6.48 | 2.92 |
Consumer’s propensity to purchase (Cronbach Alpha = 0.90) How much do you agree with the following statements? | ||
In the event of purchasing a new car, I am not opposed to buying an eco-car | 6.17 | 2.92 |
In the event of purchasing a new car, I am planning to buy an eco-car | 4.74 | 3.05 |
In the event of purchasing a new car, I am going to buy an eco-car | 5.78 | 3.18 |
Variables | β | Standard Error | z-Value | Marginal Effects |
---|---|---|---|---|
Intercept | 3.55 | 0.53 | 4.01 | 0.63 |
Gender (male) | 2.43 *** | 0.32 | 5.04 | 3.54 |
Age | 3.01 ** | 0.45 | 2.45 | 3.05 |
Education | 1.77 | 0.56 | 1.09 | 0.07 |
Place of residence | 2.33 | 0.44 | 0.09 | 0.56 |
Monthly household income | 3.45 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.09 |
Driving frequency | 5.06 * | 0.77 | 2.04 | 2.07 |
Main purpose of driving | 3.58 *** | 0.07 | 0.05 | 3.13 |
Engine type of owned cars | 4.98 | 0.12 | 0.79 | 1.35 |
Number of owned vehicle | 4.78 | 3.49 | 2.33 | 2.56 |
Environment | 4.55 *** | 2.88 | 1.79 | 3.87 |
Vehicle attributes | 6.80 ** | 3.89 | 4.99 | 1.08 |
Friendly car | 5.67 *** | 2.45 | 3.99 | 1.89 |
Functional motivation | −5.09 | 4.89 | 5.01 | -3.01 |
Hedonic motivation | 4.76 * | 2.67 | 4.66 | 2.03 |
Purchase intention | 4.00 * | 3.66 | 2.33 | 1.43 |
AIC: 301.21 | Mc Fadden Pseudo-R2: 0.69 |
Coef. | Std. Err | |
---|---|---|
Gender (male) | 0.981 *** | 0.053 |
Age | 0.886 ** | 0.004 |
Education | 1.417 | 0.003 |
Place of residence | −1.212 | 0.013 |
Monthly household income | 1.266 ** | 0.071 |
Driving frequency | 1.613 ** | 0.057 |
Main purpose of driving | 0.176 | 0.0680 |
Engine type of owned cars | 0.025 | 0.074 |
Number of owned vehicle | 0.017 | 0.023 |
Environment | 2.354 ** | 0.089 |
Vehicle attributes | 1.325 *** | 0.461 |
Friendly car | 0.237 *** | 0.050 |
Functional motivation | -1.349 * | 0.088 |
Hedonic motivation | 0.127 ** | 0.036 |
Purchase intention | 0.072 * | 0.024 |
Threshold 1 | 0.1355 | 0.575 |
Threshold 2 | 3.1130 | 0.256 |
LR chi2 = 99.05 | Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 | |
PseudoR2 = 0.58 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Palmieri, N.; Tomasone, R.; Cedrola, C.; Puri, D.; Pagano, M. Factors Affecting Disabled Consumer Preferences for an Electric Vehicle for Rural Mobility: An Italian Experimental Study. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065570
Palmieri N, Tomasone R, Cedrola C, Puri D, Pagano M. Factors Affecting Disabled Consumer Preferences for an Electric Vehicle for Rural Mobility: An Italian Experimental Study. Sustainability. 2023; 15(6):5570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065570
Chicago/Turabian StylePalmieri, Nadia, Roberto Tomasone, Carla Cedrola, Daniele Puri, and Mauro Pagano. 2023. "Factors Affecting Disabled Consumer Preferences for an Electric Vehicle for Rural Mobility: An Italian Experimental Study" Sustainability 15, no. 6: 5570. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065570