Dovgal О. А. Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Professor of the Department of International Economic Relations and Logistics, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0003-3219-9731
e-mail: e.dovgal@karazin.ua

World experience of state stimulation of demand for electric vehicles

Abstract. Introduction. Electrification of transport has become one of the main global trends in the development of the automotive industry. The growing attention to technologies used in electric transport is primarily due to stricter environmental requirements. The use of electric motors can reduce air pollution, so they began to be considered as an alternative to internal combustion engines (ICE). At the same time, despite the impressive dynamics of the expansion of the electric vehicle fleet, various countries are taking a number of additional measures to stimulate demand for electric vehicles. 

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to analyze the world experience of government stimulation of demand for electric vehicles. The article analyzes the key areas of incentive measures for consumers, allowing to achieve optimal results based on the generalization of the best practices of the world experience of popularization of electric vehicles.

Results. The growth of demand for electric vehicles in the world is significantly supported by government incentives, such as subsidies, purchase benefits, preferences in operation, as well as restrictive measures for cars with ICE. The conducted analysis of stimulation of demand for electric vehicles in various countries of the world confirmed that the majority of those who doubt the advisability of switching to electric transport change their minds in the event of the introduction of direct and indirect financial measures by the state, mainly direct subsidies for the purchase of electric vehicles. This measure is useful for stimulating demand for electric vehicles in all national markets. In addition, direct financing is easier to control, since the distribution of funds is more transparent compared to indirect stimulation. Subsequently, it can be reduced while maintaining indirect measures, such as exemption from transport tax and free travel on toll roads. 

Conclusions. Thus, the development of the electric vehicle market does not guarantee an increase in demand for this type of transport among the population. Both financial and restrictive (non-financial) incentive measures become important, since technologies are only developing and there are many prejudices about their effectiveness. It is important to note that, although the development of the electric vehicle market has been motivated by the “green” agenda, especially in the EU countries, for buyers from other countries and regions the environmental factor does not yet play a significant role, both among those planning to buy an electric vehicle and among those doubting its feasibility.

Keywords: automotive industry; electric vehicle market; demand for electric vehicles; switching to electric transport; environmental requirements.

References:

1. Berkeley N., Jarvis D., Jones A. (2018). Analysing the Take Up of Battery Electric Vehicles: An Investigation of Barriers amongst Drivers in the UK. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 63, pp. 466-481. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2018.06.016
2. Bjerkan K., Norbech T., Nordtomme M. (2016). Incentives for Promoting Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) Adoption in Norway. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 43, pp. 169-180. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2015.12.002
3. Coad A., de Haan P., Woersdorfer J. (2009). Consumer Support for Environmental Policies: An Application to Purchases of Green Vehicles s. Ecological Economics, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 2078-2086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.01.015
4. Egbue O., Long S. (2012). Barriers to Widespread Adoption of Electric Vehicles: An Analysis of Consumer Attitudes and Perceptions. Energy Policy, vol. 48, pp. 717-729. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009
5. Eppstein M., Grover D., Marshall J., Rizzo D. (2011). An Agent-Based Model to Study Market Penetration of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Energy Policy, vol. 39, pp. 3789-3802. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.04.007
6. Funke S., Sprei F., Gnann T., Plötz P. (2019). How Much Charging Infrastructure do Electric Vehicles Need? A Review of the Evidence and International Comparison. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 77, pp. 224-242. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2019.10.024
7. Gallagher K., Muehlegger E. (2011). Giving Green to Get Green? Incentives and Consumer Adoption of Hybrid Vehicle Technology. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 1-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2010.05.004
8. Gül T., Fernandez Pales A. Connelly E. и др. Global EV Outlook 2023. IEA. 2023. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/dacf14d2-eabc-498a-8263-9f97fd5dc327/GEVO2023.pdf  Irle R. Global EV Sales for 2022. EV-volumes.com. 2023. https://www.ev-volumes.com/
9. Gong S., Ardeshiri A. (2020). Impact of Government Incentives on the Market Penetration of Electric Vehicles in Australia. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 83, article 102353. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102353
10. Hardman S. (2019). Understanding the Impact of Reoccurring and Non-Financial Incentives on Plug-In Electric Vehicle Adoption  – A Review. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 119, pp. 1-14. DOI: 10.1016/j. tra.2018.11.002
11. Honda ditches diesel and phases out pure petrol models three years early. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/honda-ditch
12. Kohn E., Huang C., Kong N., Hardman S. (2024) Electric Vehicle Incentives in 15 Leading Electric Vehicle Markets. UCDAVIS: PHEV, January. https://escholarship.org/content/qt0tn2p4x6/qt0tn2p4x6.pdf.
13. Larson P., Viáfara J., Parsons R., Elias A. (2014). Consumer Attitudes about Electric Vehicles s: Pricing Analysis and Policy Implications. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 69, pp. 299-314. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2014.09.002
14. Lévay P., Drossinos Y., Thiel C. (2017). The Effect of Fiscal Incentives on Market Penetration of Electric Vehicles: A Pairwise Comparison of Total Cost of Ownership. Energy Policy, vol. 105, pp. 524-533. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.054
15. Lieven T., Mühlmeier S., Henkel S., Waller J. (2010). Who Will Buy Electric Vehicles s? An Empirical Study in Germany. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2011, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 236-243. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.001
16. 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 Vehicles d”. Energy Policy, vol. 107, pp. 381-393. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.04.052
17. Mersky A., Sprei F., Samaras C., Qian Z. (2016). Effectiveness of Incentives on Electric Vehicle Adoption in Norway. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 46, pp. 56-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2016.03.011. 
18. Münzel C., Plötz P., Sprei F., Gnann T. (2019). How Large Is the Effect of Financial Incentives on Electric Vehicle Sales? A Global Review and European Analysis. Energy Economics, vol. 84, article 104493. DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2019.10449319. 
19. Nie Y., Ghamami M., Zockaie A., Xiao F. (2016). Optimization of Incentive Polices for Plug-In Electric Vehicles. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 84, pp. 103-123. DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2015.12.011
20. Palmer K., Tate J., Wadud Z., Nellthorp J. (2018). Total Cost of Ownership and Market Share for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles in the UK, US and Japan. Applied Energy, vol. 209, pp. 108-119. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.08914. 
21. Sierzchula W., Bakker S., Maat K., van Wee B. (2014). The Influence of Financial Incentives and Other Socio-Economic Factors on Electric Vehicle Adoption. Energy Policy, vol. 68, pp. 183-194. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.01.043
22. Sovacool B., Hirsh R. (2009). Beyond Batteries: An Examination of the Benefits and Barriers to Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) and a Vehicle-To-Grid (V2G) Transition. Energy Policy, vol. 37, no 3, pp. 1095-1103. DOI: 10.1016/j. enpol.2008.10.005
23. Tesla Owners In Norway Get $134,000 Tax Break, Which Is More Than The Base Price Of The Model S// International business times. https://www.ibtimes.com/tesla-owners-norway-get134000-tax-break-which-more-base-price-model-s-1507740
24. Yang Z., Slowik P., Lutsey N., Searle S. (2016). Principles for Effective Electric Vehicle Incentive Design., ICCT June. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_IZEV-incentives-comp_201606.pdf.