Exam ticket

• Write down and explain the two hypotheses and the main results of the paper ‘Beyond purchasing'.

In recent years, people increasingly use smart energy technologies, such as photovoltaic solar panels and electric vehicles (EV). Such smart energy technologies can significantly reduce fossil energy use and the emission of greenhouse gases. However, to do so, it is important not only to adopt smart technology, but also to use it in a sustainable way. The present study aims to provide insight into which factors affect the likelihood of using EVs in a sustainably way.

Which factors affect whether EV adoption encourages other types of sustainable energy behavior?

Spill-over effects reflect the extent to which engaging in one sustainable energy behavior affects the likelihood on engaging in other sustainable energy behaviors. Spill-over affects can be positive and negative. A positive spill-over effect refers to the situation in which engagement in one sustainable energy behavior increases the likelihood of engaging in other sustainable energy behavior. However, the reverse can also occur: when people feel licensed to counteract (thus not engaging in sustainable energy behavior) after doing a ‘good job’ by engaging in certain sustainable energy behavior. This is called negative spill-over effect.
In prior studies, it is found that people are more likely to show positive spill-over effects, when the initial sustainable energy behavior increases environmental self-identity. Environmental self-identity is the extent to which you see yourself as a type of person who acts environmentally-friendly. To encourage positive spill-over effects, it is thus important to identify which factors support the likelihood that using EV increases one’s environmental self-identity.
The present study examines whether the motivation for EV adoption is key in developing environmental self-identity, and hence to create a positive spill-over effect. More specifically, when a person adopts using EV for environmental reasons, the likelihood that this persons perceives his or her choice to adopt an EV as a sustainable choice, increases. Vice versa, when people adopt an EV for other reasons (for example financial or technological reasons), they are less likely to develop environmental self-identity, thereby lowering the likelihood of a positive spill-over affect.

In sum, the present study examines two hypotheses:

1. The more people adopt an electric vehicle (EV) for environmental reasons, the more likely the EV adoption is to increase environmental self-identity, thereby promoting consistent sustainable energy behavior (positive spill-over effect).

2. The more people adopt an electric vehicle (EV) for other (here: financial and technological) reasons, the less likely the EV adoption is to increase environmental self-identity, thereby not promoting consistent sustainable energy behavior (negative spill-over effect).

How is the (positive) spill-over effect studied?

To study which factors affect whether EV adoption encourages other types of sustainable energy behavior, two studies are conducted, which are summarized below.

Study 1

Participants were recruited via Dutch for a and Facebook pages, devoted to EV’s. All participants possessed an EV. Of the 112 people who started the questionnaire, 74 completed the questionnaire. Most participants were highly educated men with a relative high income. This is also the typical profile of EV users.
The participants were shown different environmental, financial and technological motivations to adopt an EV and asked to indicate how important those reasons where for their decision to adopt an EV. Some examples of motivations are given below:

• Environmental motivation: my EV emits little CO₂.

• Financial motivation: I pay little or no vehicle tax for my EV.

• Technological motivation: An EV is equipped with the latest technology.

In addition, they measured how often participants engaged in several other types of sustainable energy behavior. These sustainable energy behaviors were subdivided in the following four categories:

1. Sustainable EV use (e.g. I charge my EV with renewable energy)

2. Direct energy saving behavior (e.g. I shower less than 3 minutes)

3. Indirect energy saving behavior (e.g. I buy seasonal products)

4. Energy efficient investment behavior (e.g. My house has double-glazed windows)

Each mediation analysis was conducted separately in PROCESS macro for SPSS with bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals. Thus, each analysis analysed the effect of one adoption motivation (independent variable) on sustainable use of EV and other types of sustainable energy behavior (dependent variable) via environmental self-identity (mediator), controlling for all other adoption motivations.
The results partly support the first hypothesis: the more people adopted an EV for environmental reasons, the stronger their self-identity, which next was positively related with direct and indirect energy saving behavior, but not to sustainable EV use and energy efficient investment behavior. In other words: environmental motivation is a mediator for both direct and indirect energy saving behavior, but environmental behavior is not a mediator between environmental motivation and sustainable use of the EV.
The results partly support hypothesis 2: non-environmental motivations (financial and technological) resulted in a lower likelihood to strengthen environmental self-identity and to encourage consistent sustainable energy. It is important to understand that the results did not show a negative relationship between non-environmental motivation and development of environmental self-identity, but a positive and significant relationship, which was much weaker than the relationship between environmental motivation and environmental self-identity. Furthermore, financial motivation to adopt an EV did not lead to a higher likelihood of using the EV in a sustainable way via environmental self-identity.

Study 2

A second study is conducted aimed to replicate the findings of study 1 with a larger sample. In addition, some items of adoption motivation are changed with the aim to increase the internal consistency of the financial and technological EV adoption motivation scales.
Participants are members of a Dutch organization, which connects the Dutch electricity grid with the public charging stations for EVs. Participants are recruited via e-mail. The final sample consisted of 251 people, of which, again, the majority male (231), highly educated and a relatively high income.
The same instruments are used, except some adaptions for the financial and technological motivational scales. Consequently, the internal consistency of these scales increased, but remained somewhat low for the financial EV adoption motivation scale. Most scales used a 7-point scale ranging.
This second study confirmed both hypotheses. Thus,

1. A mediating relationship is found for environmental motivation to adopt an EV  strengthen environmental self-identity  sustainable use of the EV (and several other types of sustainable energy behavior)

2. It is found that, when people about an EV for non-environmental (thus: financial or technological) reasons, this is not consistently related to environmental self-identity and sustainable energy behavior.

What is the take-home message from this paper?

Because this study conducted two cross-sectional questionnaire studies among individuals who already had adopted an EV, rather than focusing on behavior induced in a lab setting, the external validity of these two studies increased.
This study shows that having environmental reasons to adopt an EV increases the likelihood to strengthen one’s environmental self-identity, which in turn increases the likelihood to use the EV in a sustainable way. In contrast, when people adopt an EV for other (financial or technological) reasons, this behavior is less likely to strengthen one’s environmental self-identity, which in turn does not increase the likelihood of using an EV in a sustainable way.
The current study is the first to show that motivation for engaging in initial sustainable energy behavior can play an important role in promoting positive spill-over effects. More specifically, other study already showed the first relationship (environmental reasons strengthen environmental self-identity) but this study adds to prior findings by proving the second relationship (strengthened environmental self-identity increases the likelihood of consistent sustainable energy behavior). Future studies could aim to replicate these findings by other smart technologies, such as solar panels. In addition, other samples could be used (this study merely focused on male, highly educated and with a relatively high income). Finally, policy makers are recommended to emphasize environmental, rather than financial or technological reasons for adopting an EV, because people seem more likely to use the EV in a sustainable way and to engage in other types of energy saving behavior, when they adopt an EV for environmental reasons.

BulletPoints

• Hypothesis 1 is confirmed: environmental motivation for EV adoption leads to strengthened environmental self-identity, which in turn leads to sustainable use of the EV (and several other types of sustainable energy behavior)

• It is found that, when people about an EV for other than environmental (financial or technological) reasons, this is not consistently related to strengthening environmental self-identity and, in turn does not increase the likelihood to show sustainable energy behavior.