Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Some Theoretical Considerations on Consumption Behaviour

This article discusses the theoretical considerations on consumption behavior in hybrid electric vehicles and its contribution to reducing emissions and achieving a more sustainable transport system. It also analyzes the economic factors affecting consumers' behavior in the choice of hybrid electric vehicles and provides policy recommendations.

sustainability
Article
Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Some Theoretical
Considerations on Consumption Behaviour
Fabio Carlucci1,* ID , Andrea Cirà2 ID and Giuseppe Lanza2
1 Department of Economics and Statistics, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II 132,
Fisciano 84084, Italy
2 Department of Economics, University of Messina, Piazza Pugliatti 1, Messina 98122, Italy;
[e-mail] (A.C.); [e-mail] (G.L.)
* Correspondence: [e-mail]
Received: 10 March 2018; Accepted: 18 April 2018; Published: 23 April 2018
Abstract:Solving the problem of the lack of environmental sustainability in transport activities
requires the involvement of new technologies,particularly in populated cities where mobility
activities play a major role in generating externalities. The move from cars powered by conventional
internalcombustion engines to cars powered by alternative energies can make an important
contribution to reducing emissions and achieving a more sustainable transport system. Unfortunately,
green car market development still remains uncertain because of the higher production costs of
batteries and engines. In this context, surprisingly little attention has been devoted to analysing the
economic factors affecting consumers’ behaviour in the choice of hybrid electric vehicles. To fill this
gap, the diffusion process of hybrid technology as well as intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and
the crowding-out effect on consumers’ purchasing decisions are taken under consideration. Finally,
some policy recommendations are provided.
Keywords:transport sustainability; hybrid vehicles; technological innovation; consumer behaviour
1. Introduction
Environmental literature highlights that the impact of fossil fuel-based energy on the environment,
particularly in terms of global climate change, has emerged as one of the biggest problems facing the
planet [1].
In its last report (2014) [2] the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that
“warming in the climate system is unequivocal, with many of the observed changes unprecedented
over decades to millennia: warming of the atmosphere and the ocean, diminishing snow and ice, rising
sea levels and increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases”.
Despite the fact that a number of sceptics stillcontinue to debate these propositions,and
independently of their reliability, it is undeniable that this way of thinking has increased consumers’
concern for environmentalproblems,slowly changing their efforts to save energy and pushing
technological innovation to the top of the policy agenda of many countries’ governments.
Environmental quality is a key issue, particularly in developed countries, due to the high value of
natural resources as perceived by the population.
The sustainability of transport activities plays a key role for many cities and countries across the
globe, because mobility activities generate relevant negative externalities for natural environments [1].
Moreover, agents lack economic incentives to adopt new “green” technologies that would reduce
pollution levels as, in many cases, these agents are unmotivated to protect public goods such as the
environment. Therefore, public intervention in the form of policies is needed to stimulate the adoption
of environmentally-friendly innovations.
Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302; doi:10.3390/su10041302 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 2 of 11
Nowadays, the increases in miles driven and the growth in the number of vehicles on the road
offset the progress made towards cleaner engines.
In this context, alternative fuel vehicles play a key role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Still, market share still remains limited because of the production costs of the batteries and engines
required by these vehicles [3].
In Europe in 2016, the percentage of new alternative vehicles (Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG),
natural gas, and Ethanol E85 fuels) was only 1.3%, whereas the share of diesel and petrol engines was
49.5% and 45.8%, respectively. The percentage of electric cars bought increased from the preceding
year, going from 1.7% in 2015 to 2.1% in 2016 for hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and from 1.4% to
1.5% for electrically chargeable vehicles (ECV). Thus, overall, a reduction in consumers’ preference for
traditional fuel cars and an increase in electric cars purchased was registered in 2016 (Figure 1).
Sustainability 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 11
Nowadays, the increases in miles driven and the growth in the number of vehicles on the road
offset the progress made towards cleaner engines.
In this context, alternative fuel vehicles play a key role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Still, market share still remains limited because of the production costs of the batteries and engines
required by these vehicles [3].
In Europe in 2016, the percentage of new alternative vehicles (Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG),
natural gas, and Ethanol E85 fuels) was only 1.3%, whereas the share of diesel and petrol engines
was 49.5% and 45.8%, respectively. The percentage of electric cars bought increased from the
preceding year, going from 1.7% in 2015 to 2.1% in 2016 for hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and from
1.4% to 1.5% for electrically chargeable vehicles (ECV). Thus, overall, a reduction in consumer
preference for traditional fuel cars and an increase in electric cars purchased was registered in 2016
(Figure 1).
Figure 1. Distribution of cars by fuel type in European Union (EU) 28 (Years 2015 and 2016). Source:
Our elaboration on Eurostat data.
The high price of green cars and the lack of refuelling/charging infrastructure, as well as long
refuelling times and restricted driving ranges compared to conventional vehicles are, among others,
some of the important factors that slow the development of the market for green cars [4].
The presence of network externalities can also cause inertia in the development and diffusion of
green cars. Consumers are reluctant to switch to a new vehicle if refuelling/charging infrastructures
are not widely available and, of course, will prefer conventional technologies if refuelling stations
are abundant [5].
Nonetheless, new technological progress and innovative business models are emerging and
many environmentally conscious consumers increasingly choose to purchase green cars and, in
particular, electric hybrid vehicles.
One of the simplest ways to extend the range of an electric car is to carry fuel and an efficient
combustion engine on-board to generate extra electricity when needed. Hybrid vehicles run on a
conventional internal combustion engine and are equipped with an electric propulsion system.
These cars also use regenerative brakes in order to charge the battery, converting kinetic energy to
electrical energy. Hybrid electric technology also generates less pollution because a hybrid gasoline
engine is usually smaller than a pure gasoline one.
This paper is organized into six sections, the first being this introduction. The next section gives
an overview of the relevant literature related to the choice of alternative fuel vehicles. In Section 3,
we discuss the possible determining factors of consumers’ willingness to pay for hybrid electri
vehicles. In the fourth and fifth sections the theory of diffusion of innovation and the different types
Figure 1.Distribution of cars by fuel type in European Union (EU) 28 (Years 2015 and 2016). Source:
Our elaboration on Eurostat data.
The high price of green cars and the lack of refuelling/charging infrastructure, as well as long
refuelling times and restricted driving ranges compared to conventional vehicles are, among others,
some of the important factors that slow the development of the market for green cars [4].
The presence of network externalities can also cause inertia in the development and diffusion of
green cars. Consumers are reluctant to switch to a new vehicle if refuelling/charging infrastructures
are not widely available and, of course, will prefer conventional technologies if refuelling stations are
abundant [5].
Nonetheless, new technological progress and innovative business models are emerging and many
environmentally conscious consumers increasingly choose to purchase green cars and, in particular,
electric hybrid vehicles.
One of the simplest ways to extend the range of an electric car is to carry fuel and an efficient
combustion engine on-board to generate extra electricity when needed.Hybrid vehicles run on
a conventional internal combustion engine and are equipped with an electric propulsion system.
These cars also use regenerative brakes in order to charge the battery, converting kinetic energy to
electrical energy. Hybrid electric technology also generates less pollution because a hybrid gasoline
engine is usually smaller than a pure gasoline one.
This paper is organized into six sections, the first being this introduction. The next section gives
an overview of the relevant literature related to the choice of alternative fuel vehicles.In Section 3,
we discuss the possible determining factors of consumers’ willingness to pay for hybrid electric

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 3 of 11
vehicles. In the fourth and fifth sections the theory of diffusion of innovation and the different types
of consumer purchasing motivation are described and adapted to the hybrid vehicle case. Section 6
concludes with some important policy recommendations.
2. Methodology Used in Literature Analysis
In the last 10 years, many studies devoted to analysing consumer preferences in adopting electric
vehicles have been produced.These can be divided into two main groups.The first one is mainly
focused on analysis related to defining which experimental design and modelling techniques are more
suitable in predicting consumer behaviour [3,6,7]. The second group is focused on defining which
attributes mainly affect consumers’ preferences when they choose among different vehicle propulsion
systems (fuel, gasoline, gas, hybrid, etc.) [8–11].
From the methodological point of view, almost all of the authors use the stated preference (SP)
model to analyse and predict the behaviour of consumers when they face a choice between traditional
and electric vehicles [12–14].
Another group of studies is mainly focused on the analysis of variables that influence consumer
choices.These studies generally include different kinds of variables considering technical aspects
of the power system used by a car [5,15], financial aspects such as vehicle costs [3,16], savings in
operating costs, etc. [8,17], and the availability of infrastructure to recharge the cars [10,18].
In this paper, differing from other literature, we deal with some socioeconomic considerations of
consumer behaviour related to the purchase of a hybrid vehicle.So, in order to give an idea of the
relevant literature on this specific topic, we carried out a systematic literature review of the Scopus
database using the Boolean search parameters “hybrid + vehicle + demand OR hybrid + vehicle +
consumer+ behavior”. Through this search, we sought to find the literature concerning two different
kinds of problems in the adoption of hybrid vehicles. The first problem concerned the identification of
papers that apply traditional literature from the field of technological diffusion to the hybrid vehicle
sector. The second concerned understanding which variables affect consumers’ behaviour when facing
the purchasing choice of an expensive durable good.In this regard, it should be noted that hybrid
vehicles incorporate a new technology with many uncertain endpoints regarding its quality and future
maintenance costs.
The literature review returned a huge number of documents, 3335 in total. To narrow down the
documents to be analysed we introduced two more parameters:the language, “English”, and the
document source, “journals”; in this way we reduced the number of documents to 1482.Since this
number of documents was still too large to analyse, we concentrated our research on the title, abstract,
and keywords, in this way obtaining 30 documents containing the words “hybrid + vehicle + demand
OR hybrid + vehicle + consumer + behaviour”.
Analysing the contents of the 30 documents, we found that only 27 of them were economic papers
that analysed consumer demand for alternative-fuel vehicles. In Table 1, we report the most significant
papers that have a Scopus index and that are classified as papers published in journals.Moreover,
we grouped in the table the considered papers according to the model used and summarised the type
of research performed (empirical, theoretical, and so on) and the year of issue in order to present a clear
idea of how the research in this field has evolved in the last decade as well as the different directions
that it has followed.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 4 of 11
Table 1.Economic papers related to consumer demand for vehicles with alternative fuel grouped
according to the employed models.
Number of Paper References Year Type of Research
Stated Preferences
1 [4] 2018 Empirical
1 [6] 2017 Empirical
2 [8,19] 2016 Empirical
1 [15] 2015 Empirical
1 [9] 2014 Empirical
3 [10,20,21] 2013 Empirical
2 [18,22] 2011 Empirical
1 [11] 2010 Empirical
1 [17] 2008 Empirical
1 [12] 2007 Empirical
1 [16] 2005 Empirical
1 [7] 2004 Empirical
1 [23] 2002 Empirical
Results Comparison among Different Kinds of Models
1 [3] 2015 Empirical
Regression Analysis
1 [24] 2018 Empirical
1 [25] 2011 Empirical
1 [13] 2007 Empirical
Ownership Cost Model
1 [26] 2013 Empirical
Nested Logit
1 [27] 2012 Empirical
Microsimulation
1 [5] 2016 Empirical
1 [28] 2014 Empirical
Environmental Propensity Framework
1 [14] 2010 Empirical
Paper Description
1 [29] 2017 Review
1 [30] 2016 Review
1 [31] 2013 Review
Meta data analysis
1 [32] 2013 Review
Table 1 clearly shows that almost all of the analysed economic literature related to consumer
behaviour when purchasing an alternative fuel vehicle is focused on empirical work, and that the
main techniques used are stated preferences or a discrete choice analysis. This literature gap generates
an incomplete empirical model to explain the effective process that causes a consumer to choose a
hybrid vehicle.In a similar situation, it is hard to answer questions such as:is it possible to treat
hybrid vehicles as public goods so that we can hope that public intervention will favour its diffusion?
What kind of public intervention can guarantee a higher diffusion rate of hybrid vehicles? Should
governments implement better policies to reduce consumer information asymmetries? Or, is it better
to undertake measures to encourage hybrids through tax benefits? And so on.On the other hand,
the producer may have different alternatives to foster the sale of hybrid cars. For example, they may
rely on advertising and, in more general terms, on marketing to increase the consumer information
about the advantage of hybrids or increase the after-sales assistance to reduce the risk involved

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 5 of 11
in acquiring a durable good that incorporates a new technology with a high degree of uncertainty
about quality.
In the following sections, we attempt to describe, from a theoretical point of view, the major factors
that influence consumers’ willingness to pay for hybrid vehicles in order to gain a better understanding
of what may be the most appropriate policies for encouraging their diffusion.
3. Hybrid Electric Vehicles: An Alternative
Cars are infrequently bought and are considered expensive durable goods. Therefore, considering
that it may cost a lot to rectify a wrong choice,consumer choice is a high-involvement process.
Consumers will ponder different factors and dimensions, such as price, running costs, performance,
aesthetics, fuel economy, and emissions [33].
Many studies on purchasing decisions regarding green cars have primarily focused on fuel cost
and public incentives.Caulfield et al.(2010) [11], for example, found that one of the main reasons
behind the decision to buy these vehicles is the reduction in fuel costs, whereas Ozaki and Sevastyanova
(2011) [18] reported that financial incentives are the key motivating factor in purchasing. In the same
paper, using a survey of drivers of hybrid vehicles, the authors found that car performance attributes
(such as quietness and comfort of driving) are also important factors influencing consumers’ choices.
In the evaluation process, the probability of adopting a car crucially depends on these characteristics,
and will be relatively higher when they address the well-established decision parameters of a consumer.
It might be useful to describe this concept using the standard microeconomic theory of utility
maximization. For this purpose, let us indicate the consumer facing the choice problem byi and the
set of alternatives she faces byΩi . Let us denote the vector of all relevant characteristics of vehiclex as
faced by consumer i with the symbol ωi,x.
In addition, the utility of purchasing a car also depends on a vectorθi which describes the personal
characteristics of the decision-maker,such as income,age,education,family size and household
composition, type of personality (conformist or innovative), personal attitudes toward environmental
problems, and so on. It seems obvious to expect that an innovative environmentalist will have a higher
willingness to pay for a hybrid vehicle than a conformist non-environmentalist consumer [13].
Knez [9] and Carley [10], among others, found that the higher the age, the education, and/or the
income of the consumer, the higher the probability of a hybrid purchase.
Moreover, since there is asymmetric information and a lack of product knowledge about hybrid
cars, a risk adverse individual will be less likely to adopt this new technology [14].
Given the fact that a hybrid vehicle is perceived as a risky durable good, the consumer’s objective
is to maximize the expected discounted value of the utility level gained over the years of the product’s
life expectancy. Of course, a consumer will ponder the purchase of an alternative only if this discounted
utility net price level is positive (i.e.,the consumer surplus).It seems,therefore,also appropriate
to incorporate in this evaluation process a vectorλx of financial incentives and policy instruments
related to vehiclex. Incentives and policy instruments are developed to encourage the adoption of
alternative vehicles. We can distinguish between monetary incentives (for example, a purchase bonus
and subsidies, or the reduction or exemption of certain taxes, such as registration and circulation taxes)
and non-monetary incentives (road toll exemptions, free parking, free public charging) [12,25].
Therefore, the utility level of consumer i of purchasing alternative x can be written as a function
of these relevant sets of factors as follows:
Ui,x = U(ωi,x , θi, λx) (1)
Given the price of alternativex, px , we can then assume that driveri will certainly choose
automobile x in Ωi if and only if:
U(ωi,x , θi, λx) − px ≥ U ωi,y , θi, λy − py (2)

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 6 of 11
for allx andy in Ωi . In other words, a consumer will choose an alternative only if its discounted utility
level net price is the highest, compared with the other available alternatives.
Based on the previous relation (Equation (2)), we can derive the aggregated demand function for
hybrid electric cars for a given market. Denoting the hybrid electric alternative with the letterh, for a
given population, the aggregating demand for alternative h is defined as:
Dh = # i : (Ui,h − ph) > (Ui,x − px) (3)
where the aggregating demand,Dh, is equal to the cardinality of the set, which is the sum of all the
consumers that have the highest surplus in purchasing a hybrid alternative.
Given this reasoning, we can further investigate the determinants of the market share of hybrid
electric vehicles:
Sh = f ωh, ph, λh, θ (4)
where the hybrid market share,Sh, is still a function of the attributes,price,and financial policy
instruments of the hybrid vehicle, but the consumer’s preferences and socioeconomic characteristics
are now replaced by the characteristics of the overall population of the country/market being analysed,
and so the vectorθ will list the average income, the average education level, the average environmental
sensibility, and so on.
It is clear that all of the factors that positively or negatively influence individual demand for
hybrids will also have the same kind of effect on both aggregate demand and market share.
To date,car consumers have not been truly satisfied by the performance of hybrid vehicles
regarding speed, acceleration, and cruising range.Even though there is an evident environmental
awareness, the market share of hybrid vehicles is still limited because of the small demand segment [16]
that considers gas emissions and fuel efficiency as the main characteristics of the cars.However,
the improvement of new models accelerates market penetration and will probably make the take-off of
this technology possible [28].
If the rate of diffusion of hybrid vehicles increases, the technology could make a difference in
terms of emissions and energy consumption [6].
At the moment, hybrid cars are a small but growing share of the vehicle fleet. In order to increase
this share, it is necessary to know what characteristics are influencing consumers’ decisions when
they choose to buy hybrids rather than conventional vehicles.Why do people buy hybrid cars?
Even though some network effects still remain (as an example of network externality, higher hybrid
penetration may lead to more mechanics able to service hybrids, which would lower their cost and
increase adoptions), the crucial factors that really make the difference in the relation (Equation (2)),
and thus in market share, are costs (including purchase price and running costs) and personal attitude
towards the environment [34].
Generally, hybrid cars are more expensive than conventional vehicles.Moreover, energy cost
savings can hardly offset the price difference. Hence, according to a rational behaviour decision-making
process, a consumer should not buy a hybrid car and economic theory should predict little interest
for this market. On the contrary, hybrid demand is very high compared with other green cars, giving
reason to assume that, in the near future, market share will experience further growth, as more models
are offered and production costs are expected to decline due to learning and scale benefits. For these
reasons, analysts are confident that hybrid technology will surely play a key role in determining an
environmentally sustainable transport solution.
Because hybrids are a newer pro-environmental technology, we briefly introduce the theory of
diffusion of innovation below. In addition, two important types of consumer motivations are described.
4. Theory of Diffusion of Innovations
According to a seminal paper by Rogers (1962) [35], the diffusion of innovations is a social process
in which individuals create and share information through communication. In other words, through

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 7 of 11
diffusion, an idea or an object perceived as new is disseminated over time among the members of
a social system.Moreover,different social systems have different innovation values and beliefs,
which will influence the costs and benefits of innovations. Innovations are adopted in a sequence and
actors can be distinguished in terms of time of adoption. The degree to which an individual is relatively
earlier in adopting new ideas compared to other members of a system is defined as “innovativeness”.
Rogers (1962) [35] categorized the adopting population into five classes: innovators, early adopters,
early majority, late majority, and laggards.
Typically, “innovators” are a small fraction of highly educated, risk-loving individuals who can
easily embrace new ideas. The “early adopters” are opinion leaders, disseminating information for
a larger social network.These two groups generally have a great concern for environmental issues.
Once they have received information from their peers, the categories of “early” and “late majority”
take more time over the decision-making process. Finally, “laggards” are rather risk-adverse in their
consumption behaviour, with low financial resources and/or with very limited social interactions and
a very slow decision-making process.
The communication process is the core element of the diffusion process related to information
concerning hybrid vehicle characteristics and quality. Once opinion leaders are informed via the mass
media, they then inform and persuade the masses. For technology to diffuse throughout society as a
whole, in this context, social networks are of central importance. As shown in the approaches used
in traditional literature, innovation and former technologies are compared to alternatives and the
relative advantage of a new technology is a crucial factor influencing its adoption,encompassing
characteristics such as social status and market price, thus increasing its probability of adoption.
However, consumers are heterogeneous in terms of motivational states and attitude towards
environmental problems; in this respect, Rogers’ model falls short. Assuming a normal distribution
of individual thresholds to adoption and normally distributed intrinsic motivation intensity towards
environmental issues, the diffusion process will typically show an S-shaped curve.
An important issue concerning the adoption of environmentally-friendly behaviour regarding
consumption is related to the incentives that drive the consumption decisions of leading consumers.
To investigate this, we next introduce two different types of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
5. Intrinsic, Extrinsic Motivations and the Crowding-Out Effect
Intrinsic motivation appears to be an important reason why environmentally-minded consumers
adopt eco-friendlier products [36,37]. Strictly following Deci’s definition,“to be intrinsically
motivated means to engage in an activity because the activity itself is interesting and enjoyable” [38],
i.e., an individual is moved towards making a choice for behavioural motives coming from the inner
person (inner feelings,morality),rather than because of externalreward or financialincentives.
If actors are strictly concerned aboutthe environment,consumer behaviour can be driven by
environmental morality even if it means an increase in cost. Moreover, the literature highlights that
the use of communication supporting and reinforcing environmental morality can amplify intrinsic
motivation [39].
Extrinsic motivation is related to the type of behaviour described in standard economic theory.
Consumers are assumed to base their decisions on expected payoffs and, in this sense, a choice is made
in order to attain some separable outcome. It is also possible that extrinsic rewards such as popularity,
image, or social status may be a more relevant reason for some consumers to adopt environmentally
friendly products,e.g.,Griskevicius et al.(2010) [33], Jansson et al.(2009) [40], Clark (2003) [41].
This is not to say that these consumers do not possess intrinsic motivations, but that extrinsic reasons
appear to play a more powerful role in their decision-making process.Financial measures, such us
subsidies that lower the relative cost of a pro-environment product, can induce individuals to adopt
green technologies. Polluting behaviour can be corrected through the threat of deterrence even though,
as previously stated in Section 3, age, education, and income greatly affect the probability of a hybrid
purchase [9,10].

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 8 of 11
One of the main problems with this system of extrinsic incentives is that actors may start to
base their behaviour on the belief that they have the “right” to pollute if they bear the associated
financial cost. The crowding-out effect may then intervene since any intrinsic motivation to protect the
environment could be “crowded out” by a strictly monetary logic.
Moreover, environmental issues may then not be the only reasons to switch to an energy-efficient
car, whereas a subsidy may push a consumer to purchase an energy-efficient car. Even if, in the short
term, consumers attribute their behavioural changes to either incentives or to intrinsic motivation,
in the long term other effects may arise. If consumers chose a car in order to obtain a financial reward
or avoid a punishment, they will probably stop this behaviour if the financial incentive is removed.
For instance, if people purchase a green car in order to get a subsidy, they are not likely to purchase
another energy-efficient product without a subsidy. On the other hand, if consumers purchase a green
car in order to save the environment, they are more likely to purchase other energy-efficient products
for the same reason.
Finally,policy-makers would benefit from considering both intrinsic and extrinsic factors in
environmental policy. Policy intervention should crowd out the intrinsic motivation controlling them
or giving the impression that they have acknowledged the problem [24]. Moreover, if people participate
in decision-making, intrinsic motivation also increases.This suggests that legal and financial tools
should be as “democratic” as possible.
6. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations
The diffusion of full electric vehicles may play a major role in reducing environmental pollution
and neutralizing the impacts of fossil fuel-based energy, particularly in urban areas.
From a pro-environmentalpoint of view,people consider fullelectric vehicles to be more
sustainable than hybrid vehicles, given that the latter still create some air-polluting emissions while
driving [34]. Around the world, policy-makers implement new strategies in order to increase the
market share of green cars. Nevertheless, the purchase price and other costs over the ownership period
and the limited range of battery are, among others, major factors that inhibit the market diffusion of full
electric cars. Moreover, economic and technical attributes have a major impact on consumers’ choice.
As reported above, the main techniques used to analyse consumer behaviour for alternative fuel
vehicle purchasing are stated preferences or a discrete choice analysis.
It is also unquestionable that hybrid electric cars are,in turn,a superior pro-environmental
alternative to traditional cars and could play an important role in the transition to a more sustainable
transportation system.
Currently, we believe that a transportation system based on hybrid technology could be, in the
midterm,even more sustainable than a transportation system based only on full electric vehicles.
First of all, a relatively rapid massive diffusion of full electric vehicles in our society would likely
create extra demand for additional electric power generation,far beyond what the electric power
generating industry can provide with its current generating capacity. Second, if in the meantime the
current electric power generating industry fails to switch to more sustainable energy sources and
continues with the prevalent use of fossil fuels, such a transition would result in much more adverse
environmental consequences.In this sense, the diffusion of hybrid electric vehicles can be seen as
an intermediate step towards the full sustainability of both the transportation and electric power
systems [42].
Now,the crucial question is:are hybrid cars destined to be a niche market,adopted by only
a small fraction of the environmentally conscious population, or will they, sooner or later, become
the standard?
To date, in many countries—with the only exception being Japan, which has the world’s highest
market penetration—the process of adoption of new hybrid technology is still the preserve of the first
two groups of “innovators” and “early adopters”. At this stage, the best policy to encourage hybrid
car market penetration should be based on enhancing awareness of and social concern about the threat

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 9 of 11
of climate change combined with clever marketing and communication campaigns to promote hybrid
vehicles as a possible mitigation of that problem. It is important to highlight that the knowledge of
consumer preferences should contribute to making policy strategies more effective and efficient.
The transition from “innovators” to “early adopters” (often called “crossing the chasm”) status is
a key stage that can determine the success or the failure of a new technology. Unlike monetary tools,
information policies do not run the risk of crowding out intrinsic pro-environmental motivation, so at
this key stage of the diffusion process, governments should provide information to foster intrinsic
motivation and limit the use of tax credits and subsidies in order to partially mitigate the higher initial
purchase prices of hybrids. As time passes and the diffusion of hybrid cars reaches the “early” and the
“late majority”, it will be possible to introduce strong financial incentives.At this point, given that
the intensity of consumers’ intrinsic motivations decreases, it is unlikely that a crowding-out effect
will occur. In this stage, governments should combine information policies and financial incentives to
finally help hybrid technology take off. Finally, given that all intrinsically motivated green consumers
have already “democratically” switched to hybrid technology, the government can surely also use
legal devices, such as taxing the use of conventional vehicles or punishments to persuade “laggards”,
or, as many governments are now planning, drastically banning the production and sale of vehicles
powered only by fossil fuels.
As it has previously been pointed out, the few analyses that have been performed on this topic
do not provide a clear-cut answer to questions about the benefits of public intervention in order to
promote the diffusion of hybrid vehicles.
In light of the findings reported in this study, we conclude that, nowadays, hybrid cars have a
growing share of the market. In order to increase the market penetration of these cars, it is necessary
to analyse consumers’ behaviour in their choice to buy hybrids rather than conventional vehicles.
Our results show that the crucial factors making the difference are total costs, comprising purchase
price and running costs, while personal attitude towards the environment plays a secondary role.
However, the issue needs to be further investigated in order to better inform policy-makers.
Finally, our prospective study will concentrate on further analysing the findings generated in this
manuscript by undertaking cross-country comparative research.
Acknowledgments:The authors would like to thank Sustainability Editor and Reviewers for valuable comments
on the earlier version of the manuscript.
Author Contributions:This work is the outcome of joint efforts of Fabio Carlucci, Andrea Cirà and Giuseppe Lanza,
who contributed equally to conceive and design the research. They read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Arbolino, R.; Carlucci, F.; Cirà, A.; Ioppolo, G.; Yigitcanlar, T. Efficiency of the EU regulation on greenhouse
gas emissions in Italy: The hierarchical cluster analysis approach. Ecol. Indic. 2017, 81, 115–123. [CrossRef]
2. IPCC—Intergovernmental Panel on Climat Change. Climate Change 2014 Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability
IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015.
3. Dumortier, J.; Siddiki, S.; Carley, S.; Cisney, J.; Krause, R.M.; Lane, B.W.; Rupp, J.A.; Graham, J.D. Effects of
providing total cost of ownership information on consumers’ intent to purchase a hybrid or plug-in electric
vehicle. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2015, 72, 71–86. [CrossRef]
4. Olson, E.L. Lead market learning in the development and diffusion of electric vehicles. J. Clean. Prod.2018,
172, 3279–3288. [CrossRef]
5. Plötz, P.; Gnann, T.; Sprei, F. Can policy measures foster plug-in electric vehicle market diffusion? World Electr.
Veh. J. 2016, 8, 783–791.
6. Liu, H.-C.;You, X.-Y.;Xue, Y.-X.;Luan, X. Exploring critical factors influencing the diffusion of electric
vehicles in China: A multi-stakeholder perspective. Res. Transp. Econ. 2017, 66, 46–58. [CrossRef]
7. Batley, R.P.; Toner, J.P.; Knight, M.J. A mixed logit model of U.K. household demand for alternative-fuel
vehicles. Int. J. Transp. Econ. 2004, 31, 55–77.

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 10 of 11
8. Hackbarth, A.; Madlener, R. Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice
study for Germany. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2016, 85, 89–111. [CrossRef]
9. Knez, M.; Jereb, B.; Obrecht, M. Factors influencing the purchasing decisions of low emission cars: A study
of Slovenia. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2014, 30, 53–61. [CrossRef]
10. Carley, S.; Krause, R.M.; Lane, B.W.; Graham, J.D. Intent to purchase a plug-in electric vehicle: A survey of
early impressions in large US cites. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 18, 39–45. [CrossRef]
11. Caulfield, B.; Farrell, S.; McMahon, B. Examining individuals preferences for hybrid electric and alternatively
fuelled vehicles. Transp. Policy 2010, 17, 381–387. [CrossRef]
12. Potoglou, D.; Kanaroglou, P.S. Household demand and willingness to pay for clean vehicles. Transp. Res.
Part D Transp. Environ. 2007, 12, 264–274. [CrossRef]
13. Kahn, M.E. Do greens drive Hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer
choice. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2007, 54, 129–145. [CrossRef]
14. Oliver, J.D.; Rosen, D.E. Applying the Environmental Propensity Framework: A Segmented Approach to
Hybrid Electric Vehicle Marketing Strategies. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2010, 18, 377–393. [CrossRef]
15. Mabit, S.L.;Cherchi, E.;Jensen, A.F.;Jordal-Jørgensen, J. The effect of attitudes on reference-dependent
preferences: Estimation and validation for the case of alternative-fuel vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract.
2015, 82, 17–28. [CrossRef]
16. Kishi, K.; Satho, K. Evaluation of willingness to buy a low-pollution car in Japan. J. East. Asia Soc. Transp. Stud.
2005, 6, 3121–3134. [CrossRef]
17. Ahn, J.; Jeong, G.; Kim, Y. A forecast of household ownership and use of alternative fuel vehicles: A multiple
discrete-continuous choice approach. Energy Econ. 2008, 30, 2091–2104. [CrossRef]
18. Ozaki, R.; Sevastyanova, K. Going hybrid:An analysis of consumer purchase motivations.Energy Policy
2011, 39, 2217–2227. [CrossRef]
19. Chowdhury, M.; Salam, K.; Tay, R. Consumer preferences and policy implications for the green car market.
Mark. Intell. Plan. 2016, 34, 810–827. [CrossRef]
20. Ito, N.; Takeuchi, K.; Managi, S. Willingness-to-pay for infrastructure investments for alternative fuel vehicles.
Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 18, 1–8. [CrossRef]
21. Hackbarth, A.; Madlener, R. Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: A discrete choice analysis.
Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 25, 5–17. [CrossRef]
22. 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. [CrossRef]
23. Dagsvik, J.K.; Wennemo, T.; Wetterwald, D.G.; Aaberge, R. Potential demand for alternative fuel vehicles.
Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2002, 36, 361–384. [CrossRef]
24. Peters, A.M.; van der Werff, E.; Steg, L. Beyond purchasing: Electric vehicle adoption motivation and consistent
sustainable energy behaviour in The Netherlands. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 39, 234–247. [CrossRef]
25. Gallagher, K.S.; Muehlegger, E. Giving green to get green? Incentives and consumer adoption of hybrid
vehicle technology. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2011, 61, 1–15. [CrossRef]
26. Al-Alawi,B.M.;Bradley,T.H.Total cost of ownership,payback,and consumer preference modeling of
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Appl. Energy 2013, 103, 488–506. [CrossRef]
27. 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. [CrossRef]
28. McCoy, D.;Lyons, S. Consumer preferences and the influence of networks in electric vehicle diffusion:
An agent-based microsimulation in Ireland. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2014, 3, 89–101. [CrossRef]
29. Liao, F.; Molin, E.; van Wee, B. Consumer preferences for electric vehicles: A literature review. Transp. Rev.
2017, 37, 252–275. [CrossRef]
30. Adnan,N.; Nordin,S.M.;Rahman,I.; Vasant,P.M.;Noor,A. A comprehensive review on theoretical
framework-based electric vehicle consumer adoption research.Int. J. Energy Res.2016, 41,317–335.
[CrossRef]
31. Turcksin, L.; Mairesse, O.; Macharis, C. Private household demand for vehicles on alternative fuels and drive
trains: A review. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2013, 5, 149–164. [CrossRef]
32. 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. [CrossRef]

Sustainability 2018, 10, 1302 11 of 11
33. Griskevicius, V.; Tybur, J.M.; Van den Bergh, B. Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous
conservation. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 98, 343–355. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Aldieri,L.; Vinci,P.C.Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Energy Production Efficiency Activity.
Int. Bus. Res. 2017, 10, 39–49. [CrossRef]
35. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations; Free Press of Glencoe: New York, NY, USA, 1962.
36. Chan, T.S. Concerns for Environmental Issues and Consumer Purchase Preferences: A two-Country study.
J. Int. Consum. Mark. 1996, 9, 43–55. [CrossRef]
37. Bamberg, S. How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new
answer to an old question. J. Environ. Psychol. 2003, 23, 21–32. [CrossRef]
38. Deci,E.L.;Ryan,R.M.Self-Determination Theory and the Explanatory Role of Psychological Needs in
Human Well-Being. In Capabilities and Happiness; Bruni, L., Comim, F., Pugno, M., Eds.; Oxford University
Press: Oxford, UK, 2008; pp. 187–223, ISBN 9780199532148.
39. Frey, B.; Jegen, R. Motivation Crowding Theory. J. Econ. Surv. 2001, 15, 589–611. [CrossRef]
40. Jansson,J.; Marell,A.; Nordlund,A. Elucidating green consumers:A cluster analytic approach on
proenvironmental purchase and curtailment behaviors. J. Euromarket. 2009, 18, 245–267. [CrossRef]
41. Clark, C.F.; Kotchen, M.J.; Moore, M.R. Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior:
Participation in a green electricity program. J. Environ. Psychol. 2003, 23, 237–246. [CrossRef]
42. Aldieri,L.; Vinci,P.C.Productivity And Environmental Performance Of Technology Spillovers Effects:
Evidence From European Patents Within The Triad. J. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 10, 123–130. [CrossRef]
©2018 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).