Joshua D. Newton , Jubin Jacob John , Jeff D. Rotman , Virginia Weber , Jay Zenkić
{"title":"领先还是落后?验证一种简单的措施,以前瞻性地确定低排放技术的采用者类别","authors":"Joshua D. Newton , Jubin Jacob John , Jeff D. Rotman , Virginia Weber , Jay Zenkić","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Adopting low emission technologies will be fundamental to mitigating climate change, yet many consumers have yet to do so. Rogers' (2003) diffusion of innovations model, and its categorisation of consumers to motivationally distinct adopter categories defined by how fast an innovation is adopted, would appear to be a useful tool for addressing this challenge, allowing low emission technology adoption strategies to be tailored to consumers in different adopter categories. Preventing this potential application, however, is the retrospective means by which adopter category classification traditionally occurs. The purpose of this research was therefore to evaluate a prospective method for determining adopter category: asking consumers to self-identify the low emission technology adopter category to which they belong. Across two Australian samples (combined <em>n</em> = 2645), we found that current and planned adoption patterns for three low emission technologies (electric vehicles, electric space heating, electric/solar water heating) were generally consistent with those theorised by Rogers, even after controlling for potential barriers to adoption (e.g., financial resources, length of time residing in one's home, adoption costs). The one exception was for innovators vs. early adopters, where no consistent adoption differences were observed. Notwithstanding this exception, self-identified adopter category represents a valid and expeditious means for prospectively classifying a consumer's adopter category, allowing for the development of low emission technology adoption strategies that are tailored to the motivational profile of each adopter category.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"129 ","pages":"Article 104366"},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leading the pack or lagging behind? Validating a simple measure to prospectively identify adopter categories for low emission technologies\",\"authors\":\"Joshua D. Newton , Jubin Jacob John , Jeff D. Rotman , Virginia Weber , Jay Zenkić\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104366\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Adopting low emission technologies will be fundamental to mitigating climate change, yet many consumers have yet to do so. Rogers' (2003) diffusion of innovations model, and its categorisation of consumers to motivationally distinct adopter categories defined by how fast an innovation is adopted, would appear to be a useful tool for addressing this challenge, allowing low emission technology adoption strategies to be tailored to consumers in different adopter categories. Preventing this potential application, however, is the retrospective means by which adopter category classification traditionally occurs. The purpose of this research was therefore to evaluate a prospective method for determining adopter category: asking consumers to self-identify the low emission technology adopter category to which they belong. Across two Australian samples (combined <em>n</em> = 2645), we found that current and planned adoption patterns for three low emission technologies (electric vehicles, electric space heating, electric/solar water heating) were generally consistent with those theorised by Rogers, even after controlling for potential barriers to adoption (e.g., financial resources, length of time residing in one's home, adoption costs). The one exception was for innovators vs. early adopters, where no consistent adoption differences were observed. Notwithstanding this exception, self-identified adopter category represents a valid and expeditious means for prospectively classifying a consumer's adopter category, allowing for the development of low emission technology adoption strategies that are tailored to the motivational profile of each adopter category.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"129 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104366\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625004475\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625004475","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Leading the pack or lagging behind? Validating a simple measure to prospectively identify adopter categories for low emission technologies
Adopting low emission technologies will be fundamental to mitigating climate change, yet many consumers have yet to do so. Rogers' (2003) diffusion of innovations model, and its categorisation of consumers to motivationally distinct adopter categories defined by how fast an innovation is adopted, would appear to be a useful tool for addressing this challenge, allowing low emission technology adoption strategies to be tailored to consumers in different adopter categories. Preventing this potential application, however, is the retrospective means by which adopter category classification traditionally occurs. The purpose of this research was therefore to evaluate a prospective method for determining adopter category: asking consumers to self-identify the low emission technology adopter category to which they belong. Across two Australian samples (combined n = 2645), we found that current and planned adoption patterns for three low emission technologies (electric vehicles, electric space heating, electric/solar water heating) were generally consistent with those theorised by Rogers, even after controlling for potential barriers to adoption (e.g., financial resources, length of time residing in one's home, adoption costs). The one exception was for innovators vs. early adopters, where no consistent adoption differences were observed. Notwithstanding this exception, self-identified adopter category represents a valid and expeditious means for prospectively classifying a consumer's adopter category, allowing for the development of low emission technology adoption strategies that are tailored to the motivational profile of each adopter category.
期刊介绍:
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers.
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.