Factors Affecting Electric Vehicle Purchasing Intention

Abstract

Electric vehicles, which are an innovative technology, are more economical compared to gasoline and diesel vehicles due to their reduced energy consumption. In addition, it is expected that transportation emissions will decrease with the increase in the use of electric vehicles, which are pioneers in the green economy. The use of electric vehicle in Turkey is increasing day by day, but it is not clear which factors will be more prominent in consumers' decision to buy electric cars. In this direction, the aim of the study is to try to understand the effects of perceived usefulness, ease of use, price, hedonic innovation and environmental concern on the intention to buy electric cars, as perceived by consumers in choosing electric cars in Turkey. In the study, data were collected from 439 consumers through an online questionnaire and analyzed with structural equation modeling. According to the findings obtained in the research; It has been determined that perceived usefulness affects the purchase intention the most.

Keywords

• Electric Vehicle
• Electric Car
• Ease of Use
• Consumer Innovation
• Environmental Concern
• Purchase İntention

Elektrikli Araç Satın Alma Niyetini Etkileyen Faktörler

Abstract

Yenilikçi bir teknoloji olan elektrikli araçlar, benzinli ve motorinli araçlarla karşılaştırıldığında, azaltılmış enerji tüketimi bakımından daha ekonomiktir. Ayrıca yeşil ekonomide öncü olan elektrikli araçların kullanımının artmasıyla, ulaşım emisyonlarının azalması beklenmektedir. Türkiye’de elektrikli araçların kullanımı her geçen gün yaygınlaşmakta, ancak tüketicilerin elektrikli otomobil satın alma kararında hangi faktörlerin ön plana çıkacağı pek belirgin değildir. Bu doğrultuda, çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de tüketicilerin elektrikli otomobil tercihinde algıladığı kullanışlılığın, kullanım kolaylığının, fiyatın, hedonik yenilikçiliğin ve çevresel kaygının elektrikli otomobil satın alma niyetine etkisini anlamaya çalışmaktır. Çalışmada 439 tüketiciden, çevrimiçi anket yoluyla veriler toplanmış ve yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ile analiz edilmiştir. Araştırmada elde edilen bulgulara göre en fazla algılanan kullanışlılığın, satın alma niyetini etkilediği tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

• Elektrikli Araç
• Elektrikli Otomobil
• Kullanım Kolaylığı
• Tüketici Yenilikçiliği
• Çevresel Kaygı
• Satın Alma Niyeti

References

1. ACKAAH, W., KANTON, A. T., ve OSEI, K. K. (2022). Factors influencing consumers’ intentions to purchase electric vehicles in Ghana. Transportation Letters. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2021.1990828
2. AĞBULUT, Ü., ve BAKİR, H. (2019). The investigation on economic and ecological impacts of tendency to electric vehicles instead of internal combustion engines. Düzce Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 7(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.457914
3. BARIN, A., Bİ̇NGÖL, M., ve KARAASLAN, M. H. (2021). Türkiye’deki Elektrikli Otomobil Markalarının Pazarlama İletişimi Kanalı Olarak Youtube Gönderilerinin İncelenmesi. Uluslararası Bankacılık Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 78–107. https://doi.org/10.52736/UBEYAD.970255
4. BELDAD, A., ve HEGNER, S. (2018). Determinants of Fair Trade Product Purchase Intention of Dutch Consumers According to the Extended Theory of Planned Behaviour: The Moderating Role of Gender. Journal of Consumer Policy, 41(3), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10603-018-9384-1/TABLES/6
5. BJERKAN, K. Y., NØRBECH, T. E., ve NORDTØMME, M. E. (2016). Incentives for promoting Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) adoption in Norway. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 43, 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2015.12.002
6. BOCKARJOVA, M., ve STEG, L. (2014). Can Protection Motivation Theory predict pro-environmental behavior? Explaining the adoption of electric vehicles in the Netherlands. Global Environmental Change, 28(1), 276–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2014.06.010
7. CARLEY, S., KRAUSE, R. M., LANE, B. W., ve GRAHAM, J. D. (2013). Intent to purchase a plug-in electric vehicle: A survey of early impressions in large US cites. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 18(1), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2012.09.007
8. CHAO, C. W., HUNG, Y. C., ve SUN, L. (2022). Does Consumer Innovativeness Matter in Electrified Vehicle? The Moderation Role of Consumer Involvement. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 34(3), 298-311.

9. CHOİ, J. K., ve JI, Y. G. (2015). Investigating the Importance of Trust on Adopting an Autonomous Vehicle. Https://Doi.Org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1070549, 31(10), 692–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1070549
10. CONGAR, K. (2021). Mercedes elektrikli araçlara 40 milyar dolar yatırım yapacak, 2030'da tam geçiş tamamlanacak. https://tr.euronews.com/2021/07/22/mercedes-elektrikli-araclara-40-milyar-dolar-yat-r-m-yapacak-2030-da-tam-gecis-tamamlanaca. (Erişim Tarihi: 12.12.2022)
11. DAVIS, F. D., BAGOZZI, R. P., ve WARSHAW, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Http://Dx.Doi.Org/10.1287/Mnsc.35.8.982, 35(8), 982–1003.
12. DEGİRMENCİ, K., ve BREITNER, M. H. (2017). Consumer purchase intentions for electric vehicles: Is green more important than price and range? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 51, 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2017.01.001
13. EHSANI, M., GAO, Y., ve EMADI, A. (2003). Modern Electric, Hybrid Electric, and Fuel Cell Vehicles: Fundamentals, Theory, and Design. CRC Press.
14. EGBUE, O., ve LONG, S. (2012). Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy policy, 48, 717-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009
15. GASANA, J., DILLIKAR, D., MENDY, A., FORNO, E., ve VIEIRA, E. R. (2012). Motor vehicle air pollution and asthma in children: a meta-analysis. Environmental Research, 117, 36-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2012.05.001
16. GREAVES, M., ZIBARRAS, L. D., ve STRIDE, C. (2013). Using the theory of planned behavior to explore environmental behavioral intentions in the workplace. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVP.2013.02.003
17. HACKBARTH, A., & MADLENER, R. (2013). Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: A discrete choice analysis. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 25, 5-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.002
18. HELMERS, E., ve MARX, P. (2012). Electric cars: technical characteristics andenvironmental impacts. Environmental Sciences Europe, 24(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/2190-4715-24-14
19. HIDRUE, M. K., PARSONS, G. R., KEMPTON, W., ve GARDNER, M. P. (2011). Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resource and Energy Economics, 33(3), 686-705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2011.02.002
20. HIGUERAS-CASTILLO, E., KALINIC, Z., MARINKOVIC, V., ve LİÉBANA-CABANILLAS, F. J. (2020). A mixed analysis of perceptions of electric and hybrid vehicles. Energy Policy, 136, 111076. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2019.111076
21. HWANG, J., PARK, S., ve KIM, I. (2020). Understanding motivated consumer innovativeness in the context of a robotic restaurant: The moderating role of product knowledge. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHTM.2020.06.003
22. IEA, (2023). Explore and download the full data behind the Global EV Outlook. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/global-ev-data-explorer (Erişim Tarihi: 26.04.2023).
23. KARAMEHMET, B., ve MORGÜL, E. (2018). Tüketicilerin Elektrikli Araç Tercihleri: Literatür Taraması ve Türkiye’de Tanıtımına Yönelik Öneriler. Karadeniz Uluslararası Bilimsel Dergi, 40, 246–260. https://doi.org/10.17498/KDENIZ.425914
24. KEMPTON, W., ve LETENDRE, S. E. (1997). Electric vehicles as a new power source for electric utilities. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3) 157-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00001-1
25. KOCAGÖZ, E., İĞDE, Ç. S., ve ÇETİNDAĞ, G. (2020). Elektrikli ve akıllı, yerli ve milli: Türkiye’nin Otomobili Girişim Grubu’nun tanıttığı araçlara yönelik tüketicilerin ilk değerlendirmeleri. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(49), 55–74. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/erusosbilder/issue/58345/841712
26. KRISHNAN, R., ve BUTT, B. (2022). “The gasoline of the future:” points of continuity, energy materiality, and corporate marketing of electric vehicles among automakers and utilities. Energy Research ve Social Science, 83, 102349. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ERSS.2021.102349
27. LANE, B., ve POTTER, S. (2007). The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the UK: exploring the consumer attitude–action gap. Journal of cleaner production, 15(11-12), 1085-1092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.05.026
28. MASSIANI, J. (2015). Cost-Benefit Analysis of policies for the development of electric vehicles in Germany: Methods and results. Transport Policy, 38, 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRANPOL.2014.10.005
29. MELTON, N., AXSEN, J., ve GOLDBERG, S. (2017). Evaluating plug-in electric vehicle policies in the context of long-term greenhouse gas reduction goals: Comparing 10 Canadian provinces using the “PEV policy report card.” Energy Policy, 107, 381–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2017.04.052
30. MOCK, P., ve YANG, Z. (2014). Driving Electrification: A Global Comparison of Fiscal Incentive Policy for Electric Vehicles. International Council on Clean Transportation. (White Paper). Washington, DC.
31. MOHAMED, M., HIGGINS, C. D., FERGUSON, M., ve RÉQUİA, W. J. (2018). The influence of vehicle body type in shaping behavioural intention to acquire electric vehicles: A multi-group structural equation approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 116, 54–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2018.05.011
32. MOHD SUKI, N., ve MOHD SUKI, N. (2019). Examination of peer influence as a moderator and predictor in explaining green purchase behaviour in a developing country. Journal of Cleaner Production, 228, 833–844. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.04.218
33. MOONS, I., ve De PELSMACKER, P. (2012). Emotions as determinants of electric car usage intention. Journal of marketing management, 28(3-4), 195-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.659007
34. NAZAN, Ö. Ö. (2022). Yenlikçi Tüketici Davranışları: Türkiye ve Almanya’da Elektrikli Araçların Kabulü Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir Araştırma. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.Denizli.
35. NIAN, V., HARI, M. P., ve YUAN, J. (2019). A new business model for encouraging the adoption of electric vehicles in the absence of policy support. Applied Energy, 235, 1106–1117. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APENERGY.2018.10.126
36. NYKVIST, B., ve NILSSON, M. (2015). Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles. Nature Climate Change, 5(4), 329-332. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2564
37. OZAKI, R., ve SEVASTYANOVA, K. (2011). Going hybrid: An analysis of consumer purchase motivations. Energy Policy, 39(5), 2217–2227. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2010.04.024
38. PETERS, A., ve DÜTSCHKE, E. (2014). How do consumers perceive electric vehicles? A comparison of German consumer groups. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 16(3), 359-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2013.879037
39. ROGERS, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations. London: The Free Press.
40. SAHOO, D., HARICHANDAN, S., KAR, S. K., ve S, S. (2022). An empirical study on consumer motives and attitude towards adoption of electric vehicles in India: Policy implications for stakeholders. Energy Policy, 165, 112941. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2022.112941
41. SCHUITEMA, G., ANABLE, J., SKIPPON, S., ve KINNEAR, N. (2013). The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 48, 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.004
42. SEMEIJN, J., GELDERMAN, C. J., SCHIJNS, J. M. C., ve Van TIEL, R. (2019). Disability and pro environmental behavior – An investigation of the determinants of purchasing environmentally friendly cars by disabled consumers. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 67, 197–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2018.11.016
43. SIERZCHULA, W., BAKKER, S., MAAT, K., ve Van WEE, B. (2014). The influence of financial incentives and other socio-economic factors on electric vehicle adoption. Energy policy, 68, 183-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.01.043
44. STEVENS, J. (1996). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.
45. TABACHNICK, B. G., ve FIDELL, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Pearson.
46. TUNÇEL, N. (2021). Intention to purchase electric vehicles: Evidence from an emerging market. Research in Transportation Business ve Management, 100764. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RTBM.2021.100764
47. VAFAEI-ZADEH, A., WONG, T. K., HANIFAH, H., TEOH, A. P., ve NAWASEr, K. (2022). Modelling electric vehicle purchase intention among generation Y consumers in Malaysia. Research in Transportation Business ve Management, 100784. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RTBM.2022.100784
48. VANDECASTEELE, B., ve GEUENS, M. (2010). Motivated Consumer Innovativeness: Concept, measurement, and validation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(4), 308–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJRESMAR.2010.08.004
49. VENKATESH, V., THONG, J. Y. L., ve XU, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
50. WANG, S., WANG, J., LI, J., WANG, J., ve LIANG, L. (2018). Policy implications for promoting the adoption of electric vehicles: Do consumer’s knowledge, perceived risk and financial incentive policy matter? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 117, 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2018.08.014
51. WU, J., LIAO, H., WANG, J. W., ve CHEN, T. (2019). The role of environmental concern in the public acceptance of autonomous electric vehicles: A survey from China. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 60, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRF.2018.09.029
52. WUEBBLES, D. J., ve JAIN, A. K. (2001). Concerns about climate change and the role of fossil fuel use. Fuel processing technology, 71(1-3), 99-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3820(01)00139-4
53. YILMAZ, A., ULAŞ, M., ve YEŞİL, A. (2022). Etnosentrizm ve Tüketici İlişkiselliği: Yerli Otomobil Satın Alma Niyetinin Öngörüsü. Journal of Selcuk Communication, 15(1), 110–141.
54. YOON, T., CHERRY, C. R., RYERSON, M. S., ve BELL, J. E. (2019). Carsharing demand estimation and fleet simulation with EV adoption. Journal of Cleaner Production, 206, 1051–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.09.124
55. ZHANG, Y., YU, Y., ve ZOU, B. (2011). Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: The case of EV. Energy Policy, 39(11), 7015-7024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.07.055
56. ZHANG, Y., XIAO, C., ve ZHOU, G. (2020). Willingness to pay a price premium for energy-saving appliances: Role of perceived value and energy efficiency labeling. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118555. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.118555