4.5 Article

The use of automotive fleets to support the diffusion of Alternative Fuel Vehicles: A Rapid Evidence Assessment of barriers and decision mechanisms

Journal

RESEARCH IN TRANSPORTATION ECONOMICS
Volume 76, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2019.100738

Keywords

Alternative fuel vehicle; Fleet; Innovation; Technology adoption; Strategic niche management; Rapid Evidence Assessment; Systematic review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Automotive fleets in public and private organisations have been identified as offering niche market conditions to support the diffusion of nascent Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) technologies despite technological lock-in. This paper aims to uncover the effectiveness of fleets as early adopters for AFVs by investigating the outcomes of AFV implementations, the barriers hindering AFV adoption, the decision-making mechanisms and the factors contributing to a successful implementation. The evidences from the range of ex-ante and ex-post assessments reviewed point to: i) Adverse operational impacts on fleets due to technical limitations, resulting in degraded service provision; ii) Implementation barriers primarily linked to the refuelling infrastructure scarcity and the high acquisition cost, although lack of information and changing political environment also have a significant influence; iii) Adoption motivations directly related to the types of organisation, with public fleets mostly governed by political mandates, while private fleets adopt AFVs to enhance brand image; iv) Diverse decision-making processes involving numerous stakeholders where vehicle selection may be outside the remit of fleet managers. Consensual findings are that large entities are better positioned to adopt AFVs and that the focus on user experience and particularly on ease of operation is pivotal to ensure the acceptance of the technology during AFV implementation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available