One challenge with moving to more sustainable technology is that EVs are politically divisive. In the US whether you drive an electric vehicle (EV) is seen as a political statement. Nicole Sintov and colleagues investigated this back in 2020.
Symbolic Attributes Matter
It is important to understand, as pretty much every marketer does but occasionally other people don’t, that products are not just a collection of verifiable attributes. EVs are describable by verifiable attributes like the size of their batteries, charging speed, and associated range. Vehicles in general are distinguishable by the speed of acceleration or presence of fancy attributes like heated seats. (Which I think are just weird. I would happily pay not to have a seat that creates a strange warming sensation in your nethers when you accidentally hit the button).
But these verifiable attributes in no way capture any product and especially not highly visible and contentious ones like EVs. Driving an EV says something about the person driving it.
EVs Are Politically Divisive
The world would be a better place if we all drove EVs and so it is sad that EVs are politically divisive. Some people actively wouldn’t want to drive one even if they thought the tech was better. Doing so would send a message they don’t want to send.
Today’s research looked at the attitudes of potential EV adopters in the state of Ohio back in 2020. Ohio was known as a swing state. Although recently it has swung a bit more rightward and hasn’t swung back quite yet, (August 2026).
The authors surveyed members of the public to test whether their social identities impacted their willingness to adopt. Surprise! They did.
In our sample of central Ohioans, Democrats are significantly more willing to adopt EVs than Republicans.
Sintov et al., 2020, page 8
EVs Are Just A More Efficient Technology
The authors weren’t looking to understand objectively what is the case, but people’s perceptions. I would still suggest that the writing could have been clearer. The authors sought to explain why environmental attributes seemed less impactful in Ohio than California. (In Ohio social concerns — ‘doing my bit’ — and embracing technology were more important than being perceived as an environmentalist). The authors correctly say:
Thus, the impact of charging an EV does not have the same environmental implications across locations [Ohio versus California which uses cleaner energy sources].
Sintov et al., 202, page 9
That said, they suggested that respondents might have been right to think that EV use had limited environmental benefit in Ohio. This simply isn’t correct. There may be less benefit from EVs given the dirtier electricity of Ohio compared to California but the environmental benefits are still usually large given EVs are more efficient. They use less energy so even when fossil fuels power the grid, EVs are almost certainly significantly better environmentally. It would be helpful if researchers shared this message.
For more on polarization see Polarization And Brand Preference and You Are What You buy
Read: Nicole D. Sintov, Victoria Abou-Ghalioum, and Lee W. White (2020) The Partisan Politics of Low-Carbon Transport: Why Democrats Are More Likely To Adopt Electric Vehicles Than Republicans In The United States, Energy Research & Social Science, 68, 101576
