Research Interests
Sustainable product, Public policy, Political actions, Structural modeling
Working Papers
The Effects of Government Policies and Charger Types on Electric Vehicle Adoption , with George John and Linli Xu (Job market paper)
My job market paper investigates the effects of government policies on electric vehicle (EV) adoption, focusing on charger types and EV types. EVs, including battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions than internal combustion engine vehicles. To promote EV adoption, governments have implemented three key policies: (1) EV purchase subsidies, (2) public charger installation subsidies, and (3) direct investment in charger deployment. While prior research examined the impact of subsidies, few studies consider how different charger types and policies interact to shape both consumer demand and strategic charger deployment. This study fills that gap using a structural model of consumer vehicle choice and L2 charger deployment by charging network companies. Using data from Seoul, South Korea’s largest EV market, we find that (1) L2 chargers and purchase subsidies significantly increase both BEV and PHEV sales, while L3 chargers have limited impact on BEVs; (2) L2 chargers influence PHEV adoption more than BEVs; (3) government investment in L3 chargers induces additional private L2 charger installation; and (4) subsidizing only L2 chargers is the most budget-efficient policy. However, we find a policy trade-off. The most budget-efficient policy leads to higher PHEV adoption but a lower BEV share. If the government’s primary goal is to promote BEVs for environmental impact, then L2-only subsidies may not be optimal. These findings highlight the importance of aligning policy design with specific policy goals, while accounting for differences in EV and charger types, when supporting EV adoption.
Work in Progress Papers
Presidential Advertisement Campaign and Hate Crimes, with Linli Xu and Yi Zhu (targeting Science)
This paper investigates whether presidential campaigns have broader social impacts beyond influencing voting outcome. Presidential advertising campaigns are crucial means to communicate their positions on key political issues and persuade voters. However, we questioned if the amount of exposure to those advertisements could lead to unexpected outcomes, such as an increase in the number of hate crimes. In this paper, we asked two main research questions; 1) What is the relationship between presidential advertising and the number of hate crimes? 2) How does the relationship vary by the source of the presidential advertising campaign (political parties)? To answer those questions, we assembled data from multiple sources over three U.S presidential election cycles (2012, 2016 and 2020) and applied the border identification strategy. The results consistently indicate that presidential advertising campaigns by Republican candidates have positive relationships with the number of hate crimes across all three election cycles. In addition, this effect is stronger in counties with a greater Democratic voter turnout. We empirically examine the mechanism behind this finding using the contents of the presidential advertisements from our assembled data. This finding warns politicians and advertisers about unexpected outcomes of presidential campaigns, especially in light of the recent rise in hate crimes in the U.S.
How Natural Disasters Drive EV Adoption: The Changing Impact Across Distance