Advertisement

The Present and Future Market for PEVs in Canada: Evidence from a Mixed-Method Research Program

  • Jonn AxsenEmail author
  • Zoe Long
Chapter
  • 21 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)

Abstract

Understanding the current and future market for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) requires an understanding of consumers, technology suppliers, policy, and the interplay between. We illustrate a mixed-method research program that explores this interplay, using the case of Canada. Our approach is “reflexive” in two ways. As researchers, we connect insights from several research methods, including qualitative interviews, quantitative surveys, choice models, technology adoption models, and policy evaluation. For consumers, we prompt reflexivity by helping them to learn about PEVs, and how the technology may (or may not) connect with their lifestyle. Consumer data were collected from samples of “Pioneers” (the earliest buyers of PEVs), and “Mainstream” new-vehicle buyers. Results show that Mainstream consumers have low awareness of PEVs, though one-quarter demonstrate interest in purchasing one after learning about it. Interview and survey results indicate diverse consumer perceptions and motivations, including orientations towards new technology, the environment, and practicality. We combine these survey data with technological constraint data (supply and charging access) to construct a technology adoption model, which can help explain limited market share (1–2% PEV sales) and simulate how policy might increase future sales. Finally, we demonstrate how insights from this research can be used to evaluate PEV-supportive policies.

Keywords

Consumer research Plug-in electric vehicles Consumer behaviour Technology forecasting Policy evaluation 

References

  1. Al-Alawi, B., & Bradley, T. (2013). Review of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicle market modeling studies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 21, 190–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Axsen, J., Bailey, J., & Castro, M. A. (2015a). Preference and lifestyle heterogeneity among potential plug-in electric vehicle buyers. Energy Economics, 50, 190–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.05.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Axsen, J., Cairns, J., Dusyk, N., & Goldberg, S. (2018). What drives the Pioneers? Applying lifestyle theory to early electric vehicle buyers in Canada. Energy Research and Social Science, 44, 17–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.04.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Axsen, J., Goldberg, S., & Bailey, J. (2016a). How might potential future plug-in electric vehicle buyers differ from current “Pioneer” owners? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 47, 357–370.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.05.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Axsen, J., Goldberg, S., Bailey, J., Kamiya, G., Langman, B., Cairns, J., et al. (2015b). Electrifying vehicles: Insights from the Canadian plug-in electric vehicle study. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar
  6. Axsen, J., Goldberg, S., & Melton, N. (2016b). Canada’s electric vehicle policy report card. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar
  7. Axsen, J., & Kurani, K. (2009). Early U.S. market for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2139, 64–72.  https://doi.org/10.3141/2139-08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Axsen, J., & Kurani, K. S. (2012). Interpersonal influence within car buyers’ social networks: Applying five perspectives to plug-in hybrid vehicle drivers. Environment and Planning A, 44(5), 1057–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Axsen, J., & Kurani, K. S. (2013a). Connecting plug-in vehicles with green electricity through consumer demand. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1).  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/014045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Axsen, J., & Kurani, K. S. (2013b). Hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or electric—What do car buyers want? Energy Policy, 61, 532–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Axsen, J., Langman, B., & Goldberg, S. (2017). Confusion of innovations: Mainstream consumer perceptions and misperceptions of electric-drive vehicles and charging programs in Canada. Energy Research and Social Science, 27, 163–173.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.03.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Axsen, J., Mountain, D. C., & Jaccard, M. (2009). Combining stated and revealed choice research to simulate the neighbor effect: The case of hybrid-electric vehicles. Resource and Energy Economics, 31(3), 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bahn, O., Marcy, M., Vaillancourt, K., & Waaub, J. P. (2013). Electrification of the Canadian road transportation sector: A 2050 outlook with TIMES-Canada. Energy Policy, 62, 593–606.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. London, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Brand, C., Cluzel, C., & Anable, J. (2017). Modeling the uptake of plug-in vehicles in a heterogeneous car market using a consumer segmentation approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 97(Supplement C), 121–136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.01.017.Google Scholar
  17. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Controversies in mixed method research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). London, UK: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  18. Environment and Climate Change Canada. (2017). Canadian environmental sustainability indicators: Greenhouse gas emissions Gatineau. QC: Government of Canada.Google Scholar
  19. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Government of Quebec. (2017). Analyse d’impact réglementaire du projet de règlement d‘ application de la Loi visant l’augmentation du nombre de véhicules automobiles zéro émission au Quebec afin de réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre et autres polluants.Google Scholar
  21. Greenblat, C. S. (1981). Seeing forests and trees: Gaming-simulation and contemporary problems of learning and communication. In C. S. Greenblat & R. D. Duke (Eds.), Principles and practices of gaming-simulation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Greene, D., Park, S., & Liu, C. (2014). Analyzing the transition to electric drive vehicles in the U.S. Futures, 58, 34–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.07.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. SAGE: Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Hauser, J., Tellis, G. J., & Griffin, A. (2006). Research on innovation: A review and agenda for “marketing science”. Marketing Science, 25(6), 687–717.  https://doi.org/10.2307/40057216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hoeffler, S. (2003). Measuring preferences for really new products. [Article]. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 40(4), 406–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. International Energy Agency. (2015). Energy and climate change: World energy outlook special report. Paris, France: OECD/IEA.Google Scholar
  27. International Energy Agency. (2018). Global EV outlook 2018: Towards cross-modal electrification. Paris, France: OECD/IEA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Klippenstein, M. (2018). Canadian EV sales. www.tinyurl.com/CanadaEVsales. Accessed July 6, 2018.
  29. Kurani, K. S., Turrentine, T., & Sperling, D. (1994). Demand for electric vehicles in hybrid households: An exploratory analysis. Transport Policy, 1, 244–256.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-070X(94)90005-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kurani, K. S., Turrentine, T., & Sperling, D. (1996). Testing electric vehicle demand in ‘hybrid households’ using a reflexive survey. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 1, 131–150.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(96)00007-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee-Gosselin, M. (1996). Scope and Potential of interactive stated response data collection methods. In Conference on Household Travel Surveys: New Concepts and Research Needs, Transportation Research Board Conference Proceedings (pp. 115–133). Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
  32. Long, Z., Axsen, J., & Kormos, C. (2019). Consumers continue to be confused about electric vehicles: Comparing awareness among Canadian new car buyers in 2013 and 2017. Environmental Research Letters, 14(11), 114036.Google Scholar
  33. Mau, P., Eyzaguirre, J., Jaccard, M., Collins-Dodd, C., & Tiedemann, K. (2008). The ‘neighbor effect’: Simulating dynamics in consumer preferences for new vehicle technologies. Ecological Economics, 68, 504–516.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.05.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McCracken, G. (1988). The long interview. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Melton, N., Axsen, J., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Melton, N., Axsen, J., & Sperling, D. (2016a). Moving beyond alternative fuel hype to decarbonize transportation. Nature Energy, 1(3).  https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2016.13.
  37. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  38. Stevens, M. (2016). Electric vehicles sales in Canada: 2015 final numbers.Google Scholar
  39. Sykes, M., & Axsen, J. (2017). No free ride to zero-emissions: Simulating a region’s need to implement its own zero-emissions vehicle (ZEV) mandate to achieve 2050 GHG targets. Energy Policy, 110, 447–460.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2017.08.031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research: Contemporary issues in an emerging field. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). London, UK: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  41. Turrentine, T. S., & Kurani, K. S. (1998). Adapting interactive stated response techniques to a self-completion survey. Transportation, 25, 207–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Urban, L., Weinberg, D., & Hauser, R. (1996). Pre-market forecasting of really-new products. Journal of Marketing, 60(1), 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Williams, J. H., Debenedictis, A., Ghanadan, R., Mahone, A., Moore, J., Iii, W. R. M., et al. (2012). 2050: The pivotal role of electricity. Science (New York, N.Y.), 335, 53–60.Google Scholar
  44. Wolinetz, M., & Axsen, J. (2017). How policy can build the plug-in electric vehicle market: Insights from the respondent-based preference and contraints (REPAC) model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 117, 238–250.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Simon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations