Does lower electric vehicle production cost spur traditional automaker electrification? Spillovers of cost-reduction investments

IF 2.6 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Resource and Energy Economics Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101477
Zhenyang Pi , Ke Wang
{"title":"Does lower electric vehicle production cost spur traditional automaker electrification? Spillovers of cost-reduction investments","authors":"Zhenyang Pi ,&nbsp;Ke Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cost-reduction investments by leading electric vehicle (EV) automakers like Tesla are essential in lowering EV prices and accelerating market adoption. However, the impact of these investments on the electrification strategies of traditional gasoline vehicle (GV) automakers remains unclear, particularly when spillovers to GV automakers producing perfectly substitutable EVs are possible. This study examines the interaction between these factors within a Cournot competition model involving one EV automaker and one GV automaker, revealing three key insights. First, the EV automaker’s cost-reduction investments do not necessarily encourage the GV automaker to pursue electrification, even with significant spillovers; the outcome also depends on product substitutability between GVs and EVs. Second, the EV automaker tends to increase investments under low spillovers and decrease them under high spillovers in response to GV automaker electrification. Nevertheless, these investments cannot fully offset the profit erosion caused by GV automaker electrification. Third, these findings remain qualitatively robust across several extended scenarios, including asymmetric consumer reservation prices, imperfect EV substitution, a shift from quantity to price competition, and a Stackelberg game framework. The model is also extended to evaluate the effects of three government interventions—purchase subsidies, carbon taxes, and emission standards—alongside the impact of oligopolistic competition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":"81 ","pages":"Article 101477"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resource and Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765525000016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cost-reduction investments by leading electric vehicle (EV) automakers like Tesla are essential in lowering EV prices and accelerating market adoption. However, the impact of these investments on the electrification strategies of traditional gasoline vehicle (GV) automakers remains unclear, particularly when spillovers to GV automakers producing perfectly substitutable EVs are possible. This study examines the interaction between these factors within a Cournot competition model involving one EV automaker and one GV automaker, revealing three key insights. First, the EV automaker’s cost-reduction investments do not necessarily encourage the GV automaker to pursue electrification, even with significant spillovers; the outcome also depends on product substitutability between GVs and EVs. Second, the EV automaker tends to increase investments under low spillovers and decrease them under high spillovers in response to GV automaker electrification. Nevertheless, these investments cannot fully offset the profit erosion caused by GV automaker electrification. Third, these findings remain qualitatively robust across several extended scenarios, including asymmetric consumer reservation prices, imperfect EV substitution, a shift from quantity to price competition, and a Stackelberg game framework. The model is also extended to evaluate the effects of three government interventions—purchase subsidies, carbon taxes, and emission standards—alongside the impact of oligopolistic competition.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Resource and Energy Economics provides a forum for high level economic analysis of utilization and development of the earth natural resources. The subject matter encompasses questions of optimal production and consumption affecting energy, minerals, land, air and water, and includes analysis of firm and industry behavior, environmental issues and public policies. Implications for both developed and developing countries are of concern. The journal publishes high quality papers for an international audience. Innovative energy, resource and environmental analyses, including theoretical models and empirical studies are appropriate for publication in Resource and Energy Economics.
期刊最新文献
Split-incentives in energy efficiency investments? Evidence from rental housing Social norms and energy conservation in China Costs and benefits of e-roads versus battery trucks: Uncertainty and coordination No end in sight: End-of-life management of oil wells in Alberta Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1