Gumz, J and Fettermann, D C (2022) What improves smart meters' implementation? A statistical meta-analysis on smart meters' acceptance. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 11(4), pp. 1116-1136. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
Purpose: This article aims to compare smart meters' acceptance studies worldwide to consolidate trends and highlight factors that are not a consensus. Design/methodology/approach: This work performs a statistical meta-analysis, using the Hunter–Schmidt method and the UTAUT2 model, of the factors of acceptance of smart meters in the world literature. A meta-regression was also conducted to verify the moderation exercised by gender, level of education and timeline context of the articles. Findings: The main results point to hedonic motivation, performance expectancy and effort expectancy as the leading influencers for smart meter's acceptance. Meta-regression indicates that the influence is more significant among the male gender and that over the years, the social influence must gain weight in the smart meter's acceptance. Social implications: Specific strategies are suggested to improve projects for the implementation of smart meters based on the obtained results. Originality/value: The contribution given by this work is relevant, considering it is the first meta-analysis focused on smart meters' acceptance published in the literature
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | energy; energy consumption; smart cities; smart grid |
| Index terms: | smart city, energy consumption, implementation, meta-analysis, motivation, smart meter, strategy, methodology |
| Subjects: | research evaluation and metrics, research methods, management, psychology, contractual arrangements, energy systems, urban sustainability |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Procurement, Human Resources, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here