CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 203Electric Vehicles and InfrastructureElectric and Hybrid Vehicle TechnologiesTransportation and Mobility Innovations

Identification and Analysis of Barriers against Electric Vehicle Use

Open access
Adhikari, Madhusudhan, Ghimire, Laxman Prasad, Kim, Yeonbae, Aryal, Prakash, Khadka, Sundar Bahadur·2020·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su12124850
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Electric vehicles (EVs) can be considered an alternative technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector. However, numerous barriers need to be overcome in this regard. This study is aimed at presenting the framework for the identification and analysis of barriers against the use of EVs. Then, the framework was applied to identify the challenges and rank them in order of importance against the diffusion of EVs in Nepal. Seventeen barriers were identified from previous studies, reports, policy documents, and interactions with experts. The identified barriers were classified into five categories: technical, policy, economic, infrastructure, and social. Then, a comparative survey was performed to obtain experts’ opinions on the identified barriers and the analytical hierarchical process was used to analyze and rank them. The results revealed that infrastructure, policy, economic, and technical barriers pose more pressing concerns than social barriers. The lack of charging stations, relatively higher purchase price of EVs compared to internal combustion vehicles, and poor long-term planning and goal setting on the part of the government were ranked as the top three barriers against EV uptake in Nepal. This framework can be applied to replicate the study in other countries, taking their inherent relevant factors into account.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su12124850

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Limited driving range per charge and associated range anxiety are one of the biggest barriers for customers against adopting BEVs.

    “In the particular case of battery electric vehicles (BEVs), the limited driving range per charge, coupled with the associated range anxiety, is one of the biggest barriers for customers today against adopting EVs [5][6][7][8][9].”

    From Effect of Low Temperature on Electric Vehicle Range (2021) · cites this paper as [7]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 70 · Cited by 203

Research works printed but not linked: 71

  1. Egbue, O.; Long, S. Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy 2012, 48, 717-729. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  2. Tsita, K.G.; Pilavachi, P.A. Evaluation of alternative fuels for the Greek road transport sector using the analytic hierarchy process. Energy Policy 2012, 48, 677-686. [CrossRef] · DOI
  3. Yong, T.; Park, C. A qualitative comparative analysis on factors affecting the deployment of electric vehicles. Energy Procedia 2017, 128, 497-503. [CrossRef] · DOI
  4. Steenberghen, T.; Lopez, E. Overcoming barriers to the implementation of alternative fuels for road transport in Europe. J Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 577-590. [CrossRef] · DOI
  5. Rezvani, Z.; Jansson, J.; Bodin, J. Advances in consumer electric vehicle adoption research: A review and research agenda. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2015, 34, 122-136. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  6. Schuitema, G.; Anable, J.; Skippon, S.; Kinnear, N. The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2013, 48, 39-49. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  7. Broadbent, G.H.; Drozdzewski, D.; Metternicht, G. Electric vehicle adoption: An analysis of best practice and pitfalls for policy making from experiences of Europe and the US. Geogr. Compass 2018, 12, e12358. [CrossRef] · DOI
  8. Quak, H.; Nesterova, N.; van Rooijen, T. Possibilities and barriers for using electric-powered vehicles in city logistics practice. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 12, 157-169. [CrossRef] · DOI
  9. Xue, Y.; You, J.; Shao, L. Understanding socio-technical barriers to sustainable mobility-insights from demonstration program of EVs in China. Probl. Ekorozw. Probl. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 9, 29-36.
  10. Van Der Straten, P.; Wiegmans, B.W.; Schelling, A.B. Enablers and barriers to the adoption of alternatively powered buses. Transp. Rev. 2007, 27, 679-698. [CrossRef] · DOI
  11. Schneidereit, T.; Franke, T.; Günther, M.; Krems, J.F. Does range matter? Exploring perceptions of electric vehicles with and without a range extender among potential early adopters in Germany. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2015, 8, 198-206. [CrossRef] · DOI
  12. Noel, L.; de Rubens, G.Z.; Sovacool, B.K.; Kester, J. Fear and loathing of electric vehicles: The reactionary rhetoric of range anxiety. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2019, 48, 96-107. [CrossRef] · DOI
  13. She, Z.Y.; Qing, S.; Ma, J.J.; Xie, B.C. What are the barriers to widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles? A survey of public perception in Tianjin, China. Transp. Policy 2017, 56, 29-40. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  14. Ghimire, L.P.; Kim, Y. An analysis on barriers to renewable energy development in the context of Nepal using AHP. Renew. Energy 2018, 129, 446-456. [CrossRef] · DOI
  15. Saaty, T.L. The Analytical Hierarchy Process, Planning, Priority; Resource allocation RWS publication; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 1980.
  16. Ramanathan, R. Data envelopment analysis for weight derivation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process. Comput. Oper. Res. 2006, 33, 1289-1307. [CrossRef] · DOI
  17. Buwana, E.; Hasibuan, H.S.; Abdini, C. Alternatives selection for sustainable transportation system in Kasongan City. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 227, 11-18. [CrossRef] · DOI
  18. Iea, C. Emissions from Fuel Combustion. Int. Energy Agency 2012, 13, 2895-2902.
  19. Brady, J.; O'Mahony, M. Travel to work in Dublin. The potential impacts of electric vehicles on climate change and urban air quality. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2011, 16, 188-193. [CrossRef] · DOI
  20. Wikström, M.; Hansson, L.; Alvfors, P. Investigating barriers for plug-in electric vehicle deployment in fleets. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2016, 49, 59-67. [CrossRef] · DOI
  21. Christensen, T.B.; Wells, P.; Cipcigan, L. Can innovative business models overcome resistance to electric vehicles? Better Place and battery electric cars in Denmark. Energy Policy 2012, 48, 498-505. [CrossRef] · DOI
  22. Yavuz, M.; Oztaysi, B.; Onar, S.C.; Kahraman, C. Multi-criteria evaluation of alternative-fuel vehicles via a hierarchical hesitant fuzzy linguistic model. Expert Syst. Appl. 2015, 42, 2835-2848. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  23. Haddadian, G.; Khodayar, M.; Shahidehpour, M. Accelerating the global adoption of electric vehicles: Barriers and drivers. Electr. J. 2015, 28, 53-68. [CrossRef] · DOI
  24. Krupa, J.S.; Rizzo, D.M.; Eppstein, M.J.; Lanute, D.B.; Gaalema, D.E.; Lakkaraju, K.; Warrender, C.E. Analysis of a consumer survey on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2014, 64, 14-31. [CrossRef] · DOI
  25. Lewis, A.M.; Kelly, J.C.; Keoleian, G.A. Evaluating the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from a lightweight plug-in hybrid electric vehicle in a regional context. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology (ISSST), Boston, MA, USA, 16-18 May 2012; IEEE: Piscataway Township, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 1-6.
  26. Bellekom, S.; Benders, R.; Pelgröm, S.; Moll, H. Electric cars and wind energy: Two problems, one solution? A study to combine wind energy and electric cars in 2020 in The Netherlands. Energy 2012, 45, 859-866. [CrossRef] · DOI
  27. Sovacool, B.K. Rejecting renewables: The socio-technical impediments to renewable electricity in the United States. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 4500-4513. [CrossRef] · DOI
  28. Lane, B.; Potter, S. The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the UK: Exploring the consumer attitude-action gap. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 1085-1092. [CrossRef] · DOI
  29. Browne, D.; O'Mahony, M.; Caulfield, B. How should barriers to alternative fuels and vehicles be classified and potential policies to promote innovative technologies be evaluated? J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 35, 140-151. [CrossRef] · DOI
  30. Farla, J.; Alkemade, F.; Suurs, R.A.A. Analysis of barriers in the transition toward sustainable mobility in the Netherlands. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2010, 77, 1260-1269. [CrossRef] · DOI
  31. Gan, L. Globalization of the automobile industry in China: Dynamics and barriers in greening of the road transportation. Energy Policy 2003, 31, 537-551. [CrossRef] · DOI
  32. Zhang, L.; Yu, J.; Ren, J.; Ma, L.; Zhang, W.; Liang, H. How can fuel cell vehicles bring a bright future for this dragon? Answer by multi-criteria decision making analysis. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016, 41, 17183-17192. [CrossRef] · DOI
  33. Sovacool, B.K.; Bambawale, M.J.; Gippner, O.; Dhakal, S. Electrification in the Mountain Kingdom: The implications of the Nepal power development project (NPDP). Energy Sustain. Dev. 2011, 15, 254-265. [CrossRef] · DOI
  34. Gurung, A.; Gurung, O.P.; Oh, S.E. The potential of a renewable energy technology for rural electrification in Nepal: A case study from Tangting. Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 3203-3210. [CrossRef] · DOI
  35. Pohekar, S.D.; Ramachandran, M. Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning-A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004, 8, 365-381. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  36. Saaty, T.L. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces (Providence) 1994, 24, 19-43. [CrossRef] · DOI
  37. Painuly, J.P. Barriers to renewable energy penetration; a framework for analysis. Renew. Energy. 2001, 24, 73-89. [CrossRef] · DOI
  38. Greene, W.H.; Hensher, D.A. A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: Contrasts with mixed logit. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2003, 37, 681-698. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  39. Higgins, C.D.; Mohamed, M.; Ferguson, M.R. Size matters: How vehicle body type affects consumer preferences for electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 100, 182-201. [CrossRef] · DOI
  40. Jensen, A.F.; Cherchi, E.; Mabit, S.L. On the stability of preferences and attitudes before and after experiencing an electric vehicle. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 25, 24-32. [CrossRef] · DOI
  41. Bonges, H.A., III; Lusk, A.C. Addressing electric vehicle (EV) sales and range anxiety through parking layout, policy and regulation. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2016, 83, 63-73. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  42. Franke, T.; Neumann, I.; Bühler, F.; Cocron, P.; Krems, J.F. Experiencing range in an electric vehicle: Understanding psychological barriers. Appl. Psychol. 2012, 61, 368-391. [CrossRef] · DOI
  43. Carley, S.; Krause, R.M.; Lane, B.W.; Graham, J.D. Intent to purchase a plug-in electric vehicle: A survey of early impressions in large US cites. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 18, 39-45. [CrossRef] · DOI
  44. Cairns, E.J.; Albertus, P. Batteries for electric and hybrid-electric vehicles. Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 2010, 1, 299-320. [CrossRef] · DOI
  45. Energy, E. Pathways to High Penetration of Electric Vehicles-Report Prepared for Committee on Climate Change; Element Energy Limited: Cambridge, UK, 2013.
  46. Cherchi, E. A stated choice experiment to measure the effect of informational and normative conformity in the preference for electric vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 100, 88-104. [CrossRef] · DOI
  47. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations; The Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1983.
  48. Sovacool, B.K.; Hirsh, R.F. 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 2009, 37, 1095-1103. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  49. Kim, M.-K.; Oh, J.; Park, J.-H.; Joo, C. Perceived value and adoption intention for electric vehicles in Korea: Moderating effects of environmental traits and government supports. Energy 2018, 159, 799-809. [CrossRef] · DOI
  50. Weiller, C.; Neely, A. Using electric vehicles for energy services: Industry perspectives. Energy 2014, 77, 194-200. [CrossRef] · DOI
  51. Lévay, P.Z.; Drossinos, Y.; Thiel, C. The effect of fiscal incentives on market penetration of electric vehicles: A pairwise comparison of total cost of ownership. Energy Policy 2017, 105, 524-533. [CrossRef] · DOI
  52. Lemoine, D.M.; Kammen, D.M.; Farrell, A.E. An innovation and policy agenda for commercially competitive plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Environ. Res. Lett. 2008, 3, 14003. [CrossRef] · DOI
  53. Tanaka, M.; Ida, T.; Murakami, K.; Friedman, L. Consumers' willingness to pay for alternative fuel vehicles: A comparative discrete choice analysis between the US and Japan. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2014, 70, 194-209. [CrossRef] · DOI
  54. Zhang, Y.; Yu, Y.; Zou, B. Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: The case of EV. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 7015-7024. [CrossRef] · DOI
  55. Linzenich, A.; Arning, K.; Bongartz, D.; Mitsos, A.; Ziefle, M. What fuels the adoption of alternative fuels? Examining preferences of German car drivers for fuel innovations. Appl. Energy 2019, 249, 222-236. Available online: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S030626191930666X (accessed on 20 April 2020). [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  56. Harrison, G.; Thiel, C. An exploratory policy analysis of electric vehicle sales competition and sensitivity to infrastructure in Europe. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2017, 114, 165-178. [CrossRef] · DOI
  57. Ninh, P.; Bentzen, K.; Laugesen, M.S. Why should transportation companies join Public Private Partnership (PPP) proposed by the public sector to support the implementation process of Freight Electric Vehicles (FEVs) in Copenhagen Municipality. NSR Act. 2014, 7, 92.
  58. Sierzchula, W.; Bakker, S.; Maat, K.; Van Wee, B. The influence of financial incentives and other socio-economic factors on electric vehicle adoption. Energy Policy 2014, 68, 183-194. [CrossRef] · DOI
  59. Council, N.R. Overcoming Barriers to Electric-Vehicle Deployment: Interim report; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
  60. Gallagher, K.S.; Muehlegger, E. Giving green to get green? Incentives and consumer adoption of hybrid vehicle technology. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2011, 61, 1-15. [CrossRef] · DOI
  61. Mairesse, O.; Macharis, C.; Lebeau, K.; Turcksin, L. Understanding the attitude-action gap: Functional integration of environmental aspects in car purchase intentions. Psicol. Int. J. Methodol. Exp. Psychol. 2012, 33, 547-574.
  62. Li, J.; Jin, X.; Xiong, R. Multi-objective optimization study of energy management strategy and economic analysis for a range-extended electric bus. Appl. Energy 2017, 194, 798-807. [CrossRef] · DOI
  63. Saaty, R.W. The analytic hierarchy process-What it is and how it is used. Math. Model 1987, 9, 161-176. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  64. Saaty, T.L. Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Manag. Sci. 1986, 32, 841-855. [CrossRef] · DOI
  65. Saaty, T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 2008, 1, 83-98. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  66. Qureshi, M.E.; Harrison, S.R. Application of the analytic hierarchy process to riparian revegetation policy options. Small-Scale For. Econ. Manag. Policy. 2003, 2, 441. [CrossRef] · DOI
  67. Singh, R.P.; Nachtnebel, H.P. Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) application for reinforcement of hydropower strategy in Nepal. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 55, 43-58. [CrossRef] · DOI
  68. Saaty, T.L. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1990, 48, 9-26. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  69. Kim, Y.; Jeong, G.; Ahn, J.; Lee, J.-D. Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles in South Korea. Int. J. Automot. Technol. Manag. 2007, 7, 327-342. [CrossRef] · DOI
  70. Yu, Z.; Li, S.; Tong, L. Market dynamics and indirect network effects in electric vehicle diffusion. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2016, 47, 336-356. [CrossRef] · DOI
  71. Shi, X.; Pan, J.; Wang, H.; Cai, H. Battery electric vehicles: What is the minimum range required? Energy 2019, 166, 352-358. [CrossRef] · DOI

Authors
Adhikari, M., Ghimire, L. P., Kim, Y., Aryal, P., & Khadka, S. B.
Affiliations
  • Tribhuvan University (NP)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
  • Monash University (AU)
Corresponding author
Ghimire, Laxman Prasad
ORCID
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-06-14
Volume
12
Issue
12
Pages
4850
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/su12124850
OpenAlex
W3034729907
Cited by
203
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
9.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
Keywords
electric vehicles, barriers to adoption, technology diffusion, charging infrastructure, charging stations, purchase price, transport policy, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, expert opinion, barrier ranking, Nepal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review