Throughout the developed world, consumers are increasingly being encouraged to adopt cleaner, more eco-friendly behaviours. However, hybrid car adoption remains low, which impedes the move towards a lower carbon economy. In this paper, we examine the risks and drivers of hybrid car purchases, drawing on consumer behaviour and cultural dimensions theory to account for the heterogeneous, segmented nature of the market. As risk perceptions differ across cultures, and in order to address the lack of cross cultural research on eco-friendly cars, we focus on Australian, South Korean, and Japanese consumers. Based on a survey of 817 respondents we examine how five types of risk (social, psychological, time, financial, and network externalities) and three factors that drive purchasing behaviour (product advantages, product attractiveness, and product superiority) influence consumers perceptions of hybrid cars. Four segments of consumers are identified (pessimists, realists, optimists, and casualists) that also vary according to their environmental selfimage, and underlying cultural values. Our results extend theory by incorporating self-image and cultural dimension theories into a multi-country analysis of the risks and drivers of hybrid car adoption. Our findings have practical implications in terms of marketing strategies and potential policy interventions aimed at mitigating risk perceptions and promoting the factors that drive hybrid car adoption.
The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.