4.7 Article

Vehicle purchasing behaviors comparison in two-stage choice perspective before and after eco-car promotion policy in Japan

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2014.11.001

关键词

Vehicle type choice; Consideration set; Conjunctive screening rule; MCMC; Hierarchical Bayes

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [24246087]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25289164] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper compares the vehicle purchasing behaviors in Japan between before and after the eco-car (environmental friendly vehicle) promotion policy implemented. Consumer behaviors are modeled as a two-stage decision process: a consideration set formation stage and a choice-making stage. In the first stage, all available vehicle types are included in the choice set, and consumers are assumed to apply a conjunctive screening rule to construct consideration sets. In the second stage, consumers only evaluate the vehicles in the consideration set and choose the one with maximum utility. The applied Hierarchical Bayes model can avoid the issue of an indifferentiable and irregular likelihood surface caused by thresholds and discontinuities, and the data augmentation and Markov-Chain Monte Carlo estimation methods make it possible to estimate two stages simultaneously using only the information about the consumers' actual choices. The estimations indicate that the change of consumer behavior during the formation of consideration sets after the policy implemented: more people preferred compact and hybrid vehicles because of their better fuel efficiency and more competitive prices under the tax reduction policy. The results show, however, that most of consumers who purchase hybrid vehicles after the policy implemented are only including hybrid vehicles in their consideration sets, and oil price and vehicle price still play important roles in the choice-making stage for these who consider both gasoline and hybrid vehicles. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据