SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Düşünce Dünyasında Türkiz / 2026 / Cilt: 17 Sayı: 1

The Potential Impact of Electric Mobility at the Intersection of Economic Activity and the Environment: A Microeconometric Analysis Within the Framework of Intentions to Acquire Electric Vehicles in Türkiye

İKTİSADİ FAALİYET VE ÇEVRE KESİŞİMİNDE ELEKTRİKLİ MOBİLİTENİN POTANSİYEL ETKİSİ: TÜRKİYE’DE ELEKTRİKLİ ARAÇ EDİNME NİYETİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE MİKROEKONOMETRİK BİR ANALİZ

Zafer Beyiz(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0002-1529-7332
Erdem Söyler(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0001-5627-6696
Pages
211–242
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal that perceived social and environmental benefits are stronger determinants of intention compared to perceptions of cost and risk.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In today’s world, where economic activity is pushing ecological limits, the electrification of transportation represents a transformation worth exploring at the level of individual preferences.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study analyzes the determinants of the intention to acquire electric vehicles using the ordered logit model, based on a representative sample of Türkiye as a whole (NUTS-1, N=1,092).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal that perceived social and environmental benefits are stronger determinants of intention compared to perceptions of cost and risk.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir kalkınma · Elektrikli araç benimseme · Yeşil ulaşım

Abstract

In today’s world, where economic activity is pushing ecological limits, the electrification of transportation represents a transformation worth exploring at the level of individual preferences. This study analyzes the determinants of the intention to acquire electric vehicles using the ordered logit model, based on a representative sample of Türkiye as a whole (NUTS-1, N=1,092). The findings reveal that perceived social and environmental benefits are stronger determinants of intention compared to perceptions of cost and risk. Gender and income level emerge as key structural differentiators. While women exhibit a distinctly higher intention trend, low- and middle-income groups are almost entirely concentrated in the low-intention category. The findings point to the need for policy design focused on perceptions and trust, in addition to financial instruments.

Özet

İktisadi faaliyetin ekolojik sınırları zorladığı günümüzde ulaşım faaliyetinin elektrifikasyonu, bireysel tercih düzleminde araştırmaya değer bir dönüşüm alanı oluşturmaktadır. Bu çalışma, Türkiye genelini temsil eden (İBBS-1, N=1.092) bir örneklem üzerinden elektrikli araç edinme niyetinin belirleyicilerini sıralı logit model yaklaşımıyla analiz etmektedir. Bulgular, algılanan sosyal ve çevresel faydaların, maliyet ve risk algısına kıyasla daha güçlü bir niyet belirleyicisi olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Cinsiyet ve gelir düzeyi ise yapısal ayrışma noktaları olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Kadın bireyler belirgin biçimde yüksek niyet eğilimi sergilerken, düşük ve orta gelir grupları neredeyse tamamen düşük niyet kategorisinde yığılmaktadır. Bulgular; finansal araçların yanı sıra algı ve güven odaklı politika tasarımının gerekliliğine işaret etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Beyiz, Z., Söyler, E. (2026). The Potential Impact of Electric Mobility at the Intersection of Economic Activity and the Environment: A Microeconometric Analysis Within the Framework of Intentions to Acquire Electric Vehicles in Türkiye. Düşünce Dünyasında Türkiz, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 1, 211–242. https://doi.org/10.59281/turkiz.1922692

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (40)

  1. Agresti, A. (2010). Analysis of Ordinal Categorical Data. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470594001
  2. Agresti, A. (2019). An introduction to categorical data analysis (Third edition). Wiley.
  3. American Lung Association. (2022). Zeroing in on Healthy Air: Health and Climate Benefits of Zero-Emission Transportation and Electricity. American Lung Association Report.
  4. Baum, C. F. (2006). An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata. Stata Press.
  5. Bhutto, M. H., Shaikh, A. A., & Sharma, R. (2021). Factors Affecting the Consumers’ Purchase Intention and Willingness-to-Pay More for Electric-Vehicle Technology. Proceedings of the International Conference on Electronic Business (ICEB 2021), 4.
  6. Boulding, K. E. (1966). The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth. İçinde H. Jarrett (Ed.), Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy, Resources for the Future (s. xv + 173). Johns Hopkins University Press.
  7. Bozkurt, M. E. (2024). The Effect of Environmental Awareness, Knowledge Level, Price Perception, Battery Charging Power On Electric Vehicle Purchasing Intention: A Quantitative Research. Ekonomi, İşletme ve Bilişim Dergisi, 1(1), 21-43.
  8. Brant, R. (1990). Assessing Proportionality in the Proportional Odds Model for Ordinal Logistic Regression. Biometrics, 46(4), 1171-1178.
  9. Camilleri, S. F., Montgomery, A., Visa, M. A., Schnell, J. L., Adelman, Z. E., Janssen, M., Grubert, E. A., Anenberg, S. C., & Horton, D. E. (2023). Air quality, health and equity implications of electrifying heavy-duty vehicles. Nature Sustainability, 6(12), 1643-1653. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01219-0
  10. Chen, C., Zarazua de Rubens, G., Noel, L., Kester, J., & Sovacool, B. K. (2020). Assessing the socio-demographic, technical, economic and behavioral factors of Nordic electric vehicle adoption and the influence of vehicle-to-grid preferences. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 121, 109692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109692
  11. Climate Watch. (2026). Buildings: Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector. Climate Watch Data. https://www.climatewatchdata.org
  12. Costanza, R., Cumberland, J. H., Daly, H., Goodland, R., Norgaard, R. B., Kubiszewski, I., & Franco, C. (2014). An Introduction to Ecological Economics. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b17829
  13. Darıcı, G., Bilgin, P., Tengilimioğlu, D., & Reyhanoğlu, İ. (2025). Elektrikli Otomobil ve Otonom Otomobil Satın Alma Niyetlerini Etkileyen Faktörlerin İncelenmesi: Bir Alan Çalışması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 16(46), 636-657. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1562985
  14. Degirmenci, K., & Breitner, M. H. (2017). Consumer purchase intentions for electric vehicles: Is green more important than price and range? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 51, 250-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.01.001
  15. Efendioğlu, İ. H. (2024). Elektrikli Araç Satın Alma Niyetini Etkileyen Faktörler. İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 106-122. https://doi.org/10.17336/igusbd.1124491
  16. Egbue, O., & Long, S. (2012). Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy, 48, 717-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.009
  17. Greene, W. H. (2018). Econometric Analysis. Pearson.
  18. Habich-Sobiegalla, S., Kostka, G., & Anzinger, N. (2018). Electric vehicle purchase intentions of Chinese, Russian and Brazilian citizens: An international comparative study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 205, 188-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.318
  19. Hülsmann, M., & Fornahl, D. (Ed.). (2014). Evolutionary Paths Towards the Mobility Patterns of the Future. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37558-3
  20. IPCC. (2021). Summary for Policymakers. İçinde V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J. B. R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, & B. Zhou (Ed.), Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
  21. IPCC. (2023). Transport. İçinde Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Ed.), Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ss. 1049-1160). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.012
  22. Kocagöz, E., & İğde, Ç. S. (2022). Elektrikli Araç Satın Alma Niyetini Hangi Faktörler Etkiler? Bir Tüketici Araştırması. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. https://doi.org/10.33437/ksusbd.1133892
  23. Kuhnimhof, T., Feige, I., & Phleps, P. (2014). Mobility Scenarios for the Year 2030: Implications for Individual Electric Mobility (ss. 37-48). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37558-3_3
  24. Lee, J., Baig, F., Talpur, M. A. H., & Shaikh, S. (2021). Public Intentions to Purchase Electric Vehicles in Pakistan. Sustainability, 13(10), 5523. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105523
  25. Li, W., Long, R., Chen, H., & Geng, J. (2017). A review of factors influencing consumer intentions to adopt battery electric vehicles. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 78, 318-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.076
  26. Ling, Z., Cherry, C. R., & Wen, Y. (2021). Determining the Factors That Influence Electric Vehicle Adoption: A Stated Preference Survey Study in Beijing, China. Sustainability, 13(21), 11719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111719
  27. Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2014). Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. Stata Press.
  28. McCullagh, P. (1980). Regression Models for Ordinal Data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 42(2), 109-142. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2984952
  29. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. İçinde P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics (ss. 105-142). Academic Press.
  30. Naseri, H., Waygood, E. O. D., Patterson, Z., & Wang, B. (2024). Who is more likely to buy electric vehicles? Transport Policy, 155, 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.06.013
  31. Pandita, D., Bhatt, V., Kumar, V. V. R., Fatma, A., & Vapiwala, F. (2024). Electrifying the future: Analysing the determinants of electric vehicle adoption. International Journal of Energy Sector Management, 18(6), 1767-1786. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-06-2023-0004
  32. Pearce, D. W. (1992). Economics of the Environment. İçinde M. Bleaney, D. Greenaway, I. Stewart Dr, & I. Stewart (Ed.), Companion to Contemporary Economic Thought. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203980118
  33. Perrings, C. (1987). Economy and Environment. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511664465
  34. Peters, A., & Dütschke, E. (2014). How do Consumers Perceive Electric Vehicles? A Comparison of German Consumer Groups. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 16(3), 359-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2013.879037
  35. Pigou, A. C. (1932). The Economics of Welfare. Macmillan.
  36. Rizza, V., Torre, M., Tratzi, P., Fazzini, P., Tomassetti, L., Cozza, V., Naso, F., Marcozzi, D., & Petracchini, F. (2021). Effects of deployment of electric vehicles on air quality in the urban area of Turin (Italy). Journal of Environmental Management, 297, 113416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113416
  37. Sun, Z., & Lee, B. (2024). Exploring Factors Influencing Electric Vehicle Purchase Intentions through an Extended Technology Acceptance Model. Vehicles, 6(3), 1513-1544. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles6030072
  38. UNEP. (2023). Pollution Action Note – Data you need to know. United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/interactives/air-pollution-note/
  39. Uslu, H., & Demirel, O. (2022). Elektrikli Otomobil Satın Alma İstekliliğini Etkileyen Faktörler: Konya İli Örneği. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 13(35), 961-975. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1024620
  40. Zhang, Y., Yu, Y., & Zou, B. (2011). Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: The case of EV. Energy Policy, 39(11), 7015-7024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.07.055