Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 994 Download : 359

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Indonesia is a densely populated country where most people use motorcycles for mobility. With increasing carbon emissions, Indonesia plans to migrate conventional motorcycles toward electric ones by 2040. However, the adoption process of electric motorcycles is relatively slow, considering that the number of electric motorcycles is still far from the government's target. This study aims to investigate what factors influence the adoption process of electric motorcycles in Indonesia. Based on 906 samples, an analysis was conducted using a hybrid choice model on willingness to pay more, which considered three components: socio-demographics, Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), and travel behavior patterns. The results showed that all three components significantly affect the willingness to pay more. Individuals who are older, highly educated, high-income, use public or environmentally friendly transportation, and have a low frequency of mobility for work purposes are more likely to purchase an electric motorcycle. The results of this study provide a new perspective in the unique context of electric motorcycle adoption in Indonesia and conditions that still need improvement when related to the government's long-term targets. This research will be helpful for governments and manufacturers by providing the characteristics of people who are more likely to purchase an electric motorcycle.

Keywords

Hybrid choice model Theory of planned behavior Travel behavior Electric motorcycles Willingness to pay more

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

References

  1. C. M. Annur, “10 Negara dengan Jumlah Penduduk Terbanyak di Dunia Pertengahan 2023,” databooks, 2023. .
  2. BPS, “Perkembangan Jumlah Kendaraan Bermotor Menurut Jenis (Unit), 2019-2021.” https://www.bps.go.id/id/statistics-table/2/NTcjMg==/perkembangan-jumlah-kendaraan-bermotor-menurut-jenis--unit-.html.
  3. J. S. Yeung, Y. D. Wong, and J. R. Secadiningrat, “Lane-harmonised passenger car equivalents for heterogeneous expressway traffic,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 78, pp. 361–370, Aug. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.06.001.
  4. R. Anggrainy, W. Ruslan, D. L. Zariatin, R. A. Gilart, and T. Syam, “Effect of gasoline vaporizer tube (GVT) with magnetic field on spark-ignition engine: Investigation, discussion, and opinion,” Mechanical Engineering for Society and Industry, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 98–106, 2022, doi: 10.31603/mesi.7075.
  5. S. R. Ariyanto, S. Suprayitno, and R. Wulandari, “Design of Metallic Catalytic Converter using Pareto Optimization to Improve Engine Performance and Exhaust Emissions,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 200–2015, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.31603/ae.7977.
  6. W. Purwanto, J. C. T. Su, M. L. Rochman, B. Waluyo, K. Krismadinata, and A. Arif, “Study on the Addition of A Swirling Vane to Spark Ignition Engines Fueled by Gasoline and Gasoline-Ethanol,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 162–172, 2023, doi: 10.31603/ae.7981.
  7. A. B. D. Nandiyanto, R. Ragadhita, M. Setiyo, A. S. M. Al Obaidi, and A. Hidayat, “Particulate matter emission from combustion and non-combustion automotive engine process: Review and computational bibliometric analysis on its source, sizes, and health and lung impact,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 599–623, 2023, doi: 10.31603/ae.10259.
  8. Pande et al., “Lower Pollution, Longer Lives: Life Expectancy Gains if India Reduced Particulate Matter Pollution,” Economic And Political Weekly, vol. 1, no. 8, pp. 40–49, 2015.
  9. Yuniaristanto, W. Sutopo, M. Hisjam, and H. Wicaksono, “Exploring the determinants of intention to purchase electric Motorcycles: The role of national culture in the UTAUT,” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 100, pp. 475–492, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2023.12.012.
  10. Ministry of Industry, “Beli Motor Listrik Dapat Bantuan Pemerintah Rp7 Juta, Ini Syaratnya,” kemenperin, 2023. https://www.kominfo.go.id/content/detail/48097/beli-motor-listrik-dapat-bantuan-pemerintah-rp7-juta-ini-syaratnya/0/berita.
  11. Fea, “Target ESDM Ada 13 Juta Motor Listrik Hasil Konversi 2030,” CNN Indonesia, 2023. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/otomotif/20230614082356-603-961516/target-esdm-ada-13-juta-motor-listrik-hasil-konversi-2030.
  12. C. R. Cherry, J. X. Weinert, and Y. Xinmiao, “Comparative environmental impacts of electric bikes in China,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 281–290, Jul. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2008.11.003.
  13. F. Endrasari, D. W. Djamari, B. A. Budiman, and F. Triawan, “Rollover Stability Analysis and Layout Optimization of a Delta E-trike,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 137–149, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.31603/ae.6136.
  14. M. Hernandez, K. M. Kockelman, J. O. Lentz, and J. Lee, “Emissions and noise mitigation through use of electric motorcycles,” Transportation Safety and Environment, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 164–175, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1093/tse/tdz013.
  15. T. S. Rahmawati, Y. Yuniaristanto, W. Sutopo, and M. Hisjam, “Development of a Model of Intention to Adopt Electric Motorcycles in Indonesia,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 494–506, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.31603/ae.7344.
  16. A. I. Petrov, D. A. Zakharov, and D. A. Petrova, “Experts on Resistance to Reorganization of Structure and Technologies of Urban Mobility Provision in Russia: Challenges, Reasons, Solutions and Prospects,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 38–58, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.31603/ae.7928.
  17. M. Setiyo, “Sustainable Transport: The Role of Clean Energy, Mass Rapid Transit, Non-motorized Mobility, and Challenges to Achievement,” Automotive Experiences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–3, 2023, doi: 10.31603/ae.9108.
  18. K. Hermawan and D.-T. Le, “Examining Factors Influencing the Use of Shared Electric Scooters,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 22, p. 15066, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.3390/su142215066.
  19. C. Balijepalli, S. Shepherd, R. Crastes Dit Sourd, M. Farda, T. Praesha, and H. A.-R. Lubis, “Preferences for electric motorcycle adoption in Bandung, Indonesia,” Urban, Planning and Transport Research, vol. 11, no. 1, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1080/21650020.2023.2238033.
  20. M. Scorrano and R. Danielis, “The characteristics of the demand for electric scooters in Italy: An exploratory study,” Research in Transportation Business & Management, vol. 39, p. 100589, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100589.
  21. T. T. M. Truong, “Effectiveness of policy incentives on electric motorcycles acceptance in Hanoi, Vietnam,” Case Studies on Transport Policy, vol. 13, p. 101020, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.cstp.2023.101020.
  22. R. Chakraborty and S. Chakravarty, “Factors affecting acceptance of electric two-wheelers in India: A discrete choice survey,” Transport Policy, vol. 132, pp. 27–41, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.12.015.
  23. Á. Aguilera-García, J. Gomez, and N. Sobrino, “Exploring the adoption of moped scooter-sharing systems in Spanish urban areas,” Cities, vol. 96, p. 102424, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102424.
  24. R. Mitra and P. M. Hess, “Who are the potential users of shared e-scooters? An examination of socio-demographic, attitudinal and environmental factors,” Travel Behaviour and Society, vol. 23, pp. 100–107, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tbs.2020.12.004.
  25. A. D. Murtiningrum, A. Darmawan, and H. Wong, “The adoption of electric motorcycles: A survey of public perception in Indonesia,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 379, p. 134737, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134737.
  26. T. Eccarius and C.-C. Lu, “Adoption intentions for micro-mobility – Insights from electric scooter sharing in Taiwan,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 84, p. 102327, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102327.
  27. A. Al Mamun, N. R. Zainol, and N. Hayat, “Electric Scooter - An Alternative Mode of Transportation for Malaysian Youth,” Research Square, vol. 1, pp. 1–32, 2020, doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-100232/v1.
  28. J. Li, J. Shen, and B. Jia, “Exploring Intention to Use Shared Electric Bicycles by the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 8, p. 4137, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13084137.
  29. M. Scorrano and L. Rotaris, “The role of environmental awareness and knowledge in the choice of a seated electric scooter,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 160, pp. 333–347, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2022.04.007.
  30. V. Van Acker, B. Van Wee, and F. Witlox, “When Transport Geography Meets Social Psychology: Toward a Conceptual Model of Travel Behaviour,” Transport Reviews, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 219–240, Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1080/01441640902943453.
  31. M. Venkadavarahan and S. Marisamynathan, “Estimation of rider’s shifting intention for electric bike adoption: An integrated choice and latent variable approach,” Transportation Letters, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1151–1161, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1080/19427867.2021.2000815.
  32. I. Ajzen, “The Theory of Planned Behavior,” Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, vol. 50, pp. 179–211, 1991, doi: 10.1080/10410236.2018.1493416.
  33. I. Ajzen, “The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions,” Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 314–324, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1002/hbe2.195.
  34. P. A. Rodríguez-Correa, S. Franco-Castaño, J. Bermúdez-Hernández, A. Valencia-Arias, and J. M. Barandiarán-Gamarra, “Attitudinal Factors Associated with the Use of Bicycles and Electric Scooters,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 10, p. 8191, May 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15108191.
  35. M. Ben-Akiva et al., “Hybrid Choice Models: Progress and Challenges,” Marketing Letters, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 163–175, Aug. 2002, doi: 10.1023/A:1020254301302.
  36. Z. Li, Q. Wu, Y. Ci, C. Chen, X. Chen, and G. Zhang, “Using latent class analysis and mixed logit model to explore risk factors on driver injury severity in single-vehicle crashes,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 129, pp. 230–240, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.04.001.
  37. M. Roessler, J. Schmitt, and O. Schoffer, “Ranking hospitals when performance and risk factors are correlated: A simulation-based comparison of risk adjustment approaches for binary outcomes,” PLOS ONE, vol. 14, no. 12, p. e0225844, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225844.
  38. J. Yu, W. Li, J. Zhang, R. Guo, and Y. Zheng, “Understanding the effect of sociodemographic and psychological latent characteristics on flex-route transit acceptance,” PLOS ONE, vol. 18, no. 2, p. e0279058, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279058.
  39. M. Bierlaire, “Estimating choice models with latent variables with PythonBiogeme,” Lausanne, 2016.
  40. S. Choi, K. Kwak, S. Yang, S. Lim, and J. Woo, “Effects of policy instruments on electric scooter adoption in Jakarta, Indonesia: A discrete choice experiment approach,” Economic Analysis and Policy, vol. 76, pp. 373–384, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.eap.2022.08.015.
  41. I. Ajzen, “Constructing a Theory of Planned Behavior Questionnaire,” Pennsylvania, 2002.
  42. A. Vafaei-Zadeh, T.-K. Wong, H. Hanifah, A. P. Teoh, and K. Nawaser, “Modelling electric vehicle purchase intention among generation Y consumers in Malaysia,” Research in Transportation Business & Management, vol. 43, p. 100784, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2022.100784.
  43. N. K. Jain, K. Bhaskar, and S. Jain, “What drives adoption intention of electric vehicles in India? An integrated UTAUT model with environmental concerns, perceived risk and government support,” Research in Transportation Business & Management, vol. 42, p. 100730, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100730.
  44. Venkatesh, Thong, and Xu, “Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 1, p. 157, 2012, doi: 10.2307/41410412.
  45. A. A. Alalwan, Y. K. Dwivedi, and N. P. Rana, “Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust,” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 99–110, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.002.
  46. R. G. Öztaş Karlı, H. Karlı, and H. S. Çelikyay, “Investigating the acceptance of shared e-scooters: Empirical evidence from Turkey,” Case Studies on Transport Policy, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1058–1068, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.cstp.2022.03.018.
  47. W. Cochran, Sampling techniques, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1977.
  48. N. Adnan, S. Md Nordin, M. Hadi Amini, and N. Langove, “What make consumer sign up to PHEVs? Predicting Malaysian consumer behavior in adoption of PHEVs,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 113, no. March, pp. 259–278, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2018.04.007.
  49. R. D. Cook, Regression Graphics: Ideas for Studying Regressions Through Graphics. John wiley & sons, 2009.
  50. R. Christensen, Log-Linear Models and Logistic Regression. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2006.
  51. J. Hair, W. Black, B. Babin, and R. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed. London: Pearson Prentice, 2019.
  52. A. Colin Cameron and F. A. G. Windmeijer, “An R-squared measure of goodness of fit for some common nonlinear regression models,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 329–342, Apr. 1997, doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(96)01818-0.
  53. F. Korner-Nievergelt, T. Roth, S. von Felten, J. Guélat, B. Almasi, and P. Korner-Nievergelt, “Model Selection and Multimodel Inference,” in Bayesian Data Analysis in Ecology Using Linear Models with R, BUGS, and STAN, Elsevier, 2015, pp. 175–196.
  54. M. Zudhy Irawan, P. Fajarindra Belgiawan, and T. Basuki Joewono, “Investigating the effects of individual attitudes and social norms on students’ intention to use motorcycles – An integrated choice and latent variable model,” Travel Behaviour and Society, vol. 28, pp. 50–58, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.tbs.2022.02.009.
  55. K. Mouratidis, “Bike-sharing, car-sharing, e-scooters, and Uber: Who are the shared mobility users and where do they live?,” Sustainable Cities and Society, vol. 86, p. 104161, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.104161.
  56. M. H. Almannaa, F. A. Alsahhaf, H. I. Ashqar, M. Elhenawy, M. Masoud, and A. Rakotonirainy, “Perception Analysis of E-Scooter Riders and Non-Riders in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Survey Outputs,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 863, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13020863.
  57. Z. Christoforou, A. de Bortoli, C. Gioldasis, and R. Seidowsky, “Who is using e-scooters and how? Evidence from Paris,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 92, p. 102708, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102708.
  58. D. J. Reck and K. W. Axhausen, “Who uses shared micro-mobility services? Empirical evidence from Zurich, Switzerland,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 94, p. 102803, May 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102803.
  59. P. Carroll, “Perceptions of Electric Scooters Prior to Legalisation: A Case Study of Dublin, Ireland, the ‘Final Frontier’ of Adopted E-Scooter Use in Europe,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 18, p. 11376, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141811376.
  60. B. Dutta and H.-G. Hwang, “Consumers Purchase Intentions of Green Electric Vehicles: The Influence of Consumers Technological and Environmental Considerations,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 21, p. 12025, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su132112025.
  61. K. Turoń, A. Kubik, and F. Chen, “When, What and How to Teach about Electric Mobility? An Innovative Teaching Concept for All Stages of Education: Lessons from Poland,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 19, p. 6440, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14196440.
  62. Y. Yuniaristanto, M. W. Dela Utami, W. Sutopo, and M. Hisjam, “Investigating Key Factors Influencing Purchase Intention of Electric Motorcycle in Indonesia,” Transactions on Transport Sciences, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 54–64, May 2022, doi: 10.5507/tots.2022.002.

Most read articles by the same author(s)