FACTORS AFFECTING USER SATISFACTION WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES,
POLLACHI.
A report submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
OF
BHARATHIYAR UNIVERSITY, COIMBATORE
Submitted by
DHARMARAJ. V
([Link]:22MBA041)
Under the guidance of
Mr. A. PRASATH KUMAR
Associate Professor, School of Management
SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
SREE SARASWATHI THYAGARAJA COLLEGE
(Autonomous)
(An ISO 21001- 2018 certified and NAAC Re-Accredited (with ‘A’ Grade), Institution)
Approved by AICTE for MBA/MCA and UG for 2(f) status & 12(B)
(Affiliated to BHARATHIYAR UNIVERSITY, COIMBATORE)
Pollachi-624 107
MARCH-2024
SREE SARASWATHI THYAGARAJA COLLEGE, POLLACHI
SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
PROJECT WORK
MARCH 2024
This is to certify that the project entitled
“FACTORS AFFECTING USER SATISFACTION WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES,
POLLACHI.”
is the bonafide record of project work done by
DHARMARAJ.V
Register No: 22MBA041
of Master of Business Administration during the year 2023-2024.
Project Guide Head of the Department
Submitted for the Project Viva-Voce examination held on 27.03.2024
Internal Examiner External Examiner
DECLARATION
I affirm that the project work titled “Factors affecting user satisfaction with electric vehicles,
Pollachi” being submitted in partial fulfilment for the award of Master of Business
Administration is the original work carried out by me. It has not formed the part of any other
project work submitted for award of any degree or diploma, either in this or any other
University.
(Signature of the Candidate)
DHARMARAJ.V
22mba041
I certify that the declaration made above by the candidate is true.
Signature of the Guide,
With Name & Designation
FACTORS AFFECTING USER SATISFACTION WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES,
POLLACHI.
V. Dharmaraj II-MBA,Sree Saraswathi Thyagaraja College, Pollachi,
Mr.A. Prasath Kumar, Assistant Professor, MBA, Sree SaraswathiThyagaraja College,
Pollachi.
Abstract:
The study aimed to identify factors affecting user satisfaction with electric vehicles in Pollachi,
India. A survey of 400 respondents was conducted, and correlation, ANOVA, and regression
analyses were performed. Environmental awareness and driving range emerged as the most
significant factors influencing user satisfaction. Other factors like total cost, infrastructure
readiness, experienced usefulness, and ease of use also showed positive correlations.
Regression analysis revealed that driving range and environmental awareness were key
predictors, explaining around 22.1% of the variance in user satisfaction. The findings highlight
the importance of addressing these factors to enhance user satisfaction with electric vehicles.
Keywords:
Electric vehicles, battery capacity, energy usage, mileage, development power,
customer satisfaction.
Introduction:
Ambient air quality has been deteriorating around the world, particularly in developing
countries. The transportation sector is among the major sources of greenhouse gas emissions
and particulate matter causing air [Link] vehicles contribute to global
warming and are not sustainable modes of transportation. The increasing number of vehicles
gives rise to congestion, which is associated with high emission levels of particulate [Link]
pollution, in general, and the pollution caused by traffic congestion, in particular, poses
significant health risks and a further increase in traffic may aggravate the situation
.Emissions caused by conventional vehicles increase personal exposure to various kinds of air
pollutants. Those exposed to high levels of traffic pollution, such as traffic wardens and
shopkeepers near major roads, may experience respiratory symptoms. Similarly, air pollution
is also linked with cardiovascular dysfunctions, childhood asthma, and cancer.
The reduction in the volume of conventional vehicles can reduce air pollution and save
several lives per year. This could be achieved by the introduction of sustainable mobility
alternatives such as Electric Vehicles (EVs). The increasing environmental pollution has
compelled government authorities and policymakers to promote and incentivize EVs. These
vehicles generally use electric motors for propulsion and are seen as a potential solution for
mitigating traffic-related environmental problems. A study indicated that EVs with a 100%
penetration rate and renewable energy sources may reduce 330 premature deaths per year in
the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area. A numerical simulation study performed along a
highway in Italy found that replacing only about 50% of the conventional vehicles with EVs
may bring about a significant reduction in air pollution. However, the environmental benefits
such as reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and human exposure due to EVs depend on
several factors including the type of electric vehicle, energy source, driving and charging
patterns, availability of charging stations, government policies, and climate.
Like other developing countries, the rising number of conventional private vehicles has
degraded the environmental quality in Pakistan. Moreover, outdoor air pollution has been
found to exceed the standard limits in the major cities causing 22,000 premature adult deaths
in Pakistan. The introduction of EVs in Pakistan may improve the air quality and reduce fuel
dependency; however, there are certain barriers to the adoption of EVs resulting in their low
share in the current traffic situation. Furthermore, there is a dearth of literature on modeling the
intentions to buy and use EVs in Pakistan. It is important to understand the consumer’s
purchase and usage intentions to propose appropriate policy recommendations.
Several studies have attempted to explore and model the people’s intentions to buy and
use EVs. Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) is one of the theoretical frameworks which has
been applied to predict the adoption of EVs. Consumer adoption of an innovation can be
predicted by the behavioural responses which, in turn, can be directly predicted by intentions.
According to the TPB framework, intentions can be predicted by Attitudes towards behaviour,
Subjective Norms (SN), and Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC). An existing study found
the determinants of TPB theory, particularly, attitudes, to be significant predictors of intentions
to purchase EVs. Extended versions of the TPB have also been employed to model consumers’
purchase intentions. For example, factors such as product perception, cognitive status, and
incentive policies coupled with benefits can alter the attitude and PBC to be significant in
extracting the intentions to purchase EVs .
There is a lack of literature on the intentions to buy and use EVs in Pakistan. Keeping in
view the emerging market and potential of EVs, this study aims at modelling the people’s
intentions to buy and use EVs in Lahore, Pakistan using the theory of planned behaviour. The
data was collected using a questionnaire-based survey. Structural equation modelling was then
used to verify the model specification of the theory of planned behaviour. A theoretical
framework is also presented to promote the EVs.
The rest of the article is divided into the following sections. Section 2 includes an
overview of the literature relevant to EVs. Section 3 presents the research methods. Section
4 discusses the descriptive statistics; the findings of CFA and SEM. discusses some of the
policy interventions. Finally, the conclusions, limitations, and recommendations are presented
in last.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE:
Su-Hau et al (2004) focused on the highly efficient energy usage of the battery energy and
proposed an integrated management system for electric motor.
David and Sheng-Chung (2004) proposed new parallel-type hybrid-electric-power system
comprises an engine’s energy distribution and a torque-integrated mechanism (specifically
including an engine, a motor/alternator, a CVT device, and PCM as well as a 3-helical gear
set).
Jaiswal [Link] V., Kumar Singh P. (2021) their study “Consumer adoption intention for electric
vehicles: Insights and evidence from Indian sustainable transportation The study tests the Technology
Acceptance Model (TAM) with perceived risk and financial incentives policy to predict consumers'
intention to adopt electric vehicles (EVs).
Asrari A Ansari [Link] P. (2020) their study “A Market Framework for Decentralized Congestion
Management in Smart Distribution Grids Considering Collaboration among Electric Vehicle
Aggregators” The paper presents a day-ahead market framework for congestion management in smart
distribution networks, involving collaboration between DMOs and DTOs.
Lukic et al (2007) tried to develop a driving cycle of the auto rickshaw in a typical large Indian
city, in their case, Delhi. First, they considered the existing driving cycles used in India are
considered as candidates. Since these data were not applicable, GPS data collected at various
times of the day were applied to the analysis. They derived the new driving cycle from the
gathered information via GPS data as well as surveys of auto rickshaw drivers in India, which
helped to get the entire picture for the driving cycle.
Multiple researches have been carried all around the world to understand consumer adoption
of electric Vehicles better. The most common factors are EV price, environmental concern.
availability of charging station, time is taken to charge, sustainability experience, perception
towards the electric vehicle, and social influence.
According to McKinsey, 2014, three factors are driving the use of electric vehicles:
Government stimulation, industrial advancements, and consumer demand.
According to Searle &Lutsey, 2014, policy support for electric vehicles is a powerful growth
factor. There are two types of policies: technological push and market pull. Consumers cost-
effectiveness of EVs can be significantly increased through market pull policies. Financial
levers, regulatory events, for example, varied car taxation, and other mechanisms such as
parking fee waivers. When it comes to promoting electric vehicle sales. purchase incentives are
the most effective.
Almost all major automakers are now manufacturing their electric vehicles. The variety of EV
auto- mobiles has grown, catering to a wider range of consumer groups. The cost of electric
vehicles has been reduced, as has the cost of charging infrastructure. The battery, which is the
most expensive portion of the EV, has undergone significant technological advancements,
making it cheaper, lighter, and with a longer range.
(Sierzchula, Bakker, Maat, & Van Wee, 2014).Many governments have initiated and
implemented policies to stimulate and encourage electric vehicle (EV) production and adoption
(Sierzchula, Bakker, Maat, & Van Wee, 2014). The expectation is that better knowledge of
consumer preferences for EV can make these policies more effective and efficient. Many
empirical studies on consumer preferences for EV have been published over the last decades,
and a comprehensive literature review would be helpful to synthesise the findings and facilitate
a more well-rounded understanding of this topic.
Rezvani, Jonson, and Bodin (2015) In 1999,AVL Company proposed a hybrid system that
used a 50 carburetted lean-burn two-stroke engine with a 0.75 kW electric motor mounted on
the engine crankshaft mainly to provide increased torque during acceleration.
RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY:
Research Design:
The research design used for this research is descriptive. Descriptive research is a concern for
describing the component or element that can influence customers.
Research Instrument:
A well-constructed and developed questionnaire adapted from previous studies was used to get
the desired information from the respondents in Pollachi.
Statistical tool used:
The following statistical tools will be applied for the data analysis: Descriptive statistics such
as median, standard deviation and will be used to describe the sample characteristics and the
variable of interest. Simple percentage analysis, One-way Anova, independent sample t-test,
Correlation and Regression is used for analysis.
Method of Data Collection:
Simple Random sampling technique was used to form a sample size of 400. Of this sample
size53.5 was male and 46.5% were female. The data for this study was collected using an online
survey questionnaire. The survey link was distributed using different online platform such as
social media, messaging apps, email. The questionnaire consists of both open and close ended
questions.
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS:
Demographics Characteristics Frequency Percent
<25 377 94.3
Age Group 25 – 35 13 3.3
> 35 10 2.5
Male 214 53.5
Gender
Female 186 46.5
UG 176 44.0
Education
PG 224 56.0
Student 159 39.8
Employed 136 34.0
Occupation
Self employed 94 23.5
Others 11 2.8
Rural 235 58.8
Area of Residence
Urban 165 41.3
Two-Wheeler 246 61.5
Type of Vehicle Used Four-Wheeler 154 38.5
Total 400 100.0
Source: Primary Data
The above table shows the demographic data of the respondents. It is observed that,
about 94% of the respondents are in the age group of Below 25, while 53.5% of the respondents
are male gender and 56% of the respondents are post graduates, about 57 % of the respondents
are employed and self-employed. 59% of the respondents are from rural area and about 62%
of the respondents are using two-wheeler and 38% of the respondents use four-wheeler.
Correlation Analysis among factors of user satisfaction
EU EOU TC DR IR EA US
R Square 1
EU
P Value
R Square .285** 1
EOU
P Value .000
R Square .185** .270** 1
TC
P Value .000 .000
**
R Square .147 .250** .358** 1
DR
P Value .003 .000 .000
R Square .183** .271** .260** .432** 1
IR
P Value .000 .000 .000 .000
** ** **
R Square .132 .221 .265 .405** .366** 1 .409**
EA
P Value .008 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
** ** ** ** ** **
R Square .168 .223 .246 .323 .265 .409 1
US
P Value .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Note: EU: Experienced Usefulness EOU: EaseofUse TC: Total CostDR: Driving RangeIR:
Infrastructure Readiness EA: EnvironmentalAwareness US: User
Satisfaction
Correlation analysis examines the relationships between user satisfaction and various factors
viz. Experienced Usefulness, Ease of Use, Total Cost, Driving Range, Infrastructure Readiness,
and Environmental Awareness.
Experienced Usefulness, Ease of Use, Total Cost, Driving Range, Infrastructure Readiness,
and Environmental Awarenessfactors shows a significant positive correlation with user
satisfaction.
The R² values indicate the proportion of variance in user satisfaction explained by each factor.
Higher R² values suggest stronger [Link] correlations have a p-value less than 0.01,
indicating strong statistical significance.
Environmental Awarenessexhibits the strongest correlation with user satisfaction among the
factors examined, with an R² value of [Link] suggests that environmental awareness has a
particularly strong impact on user satisfaction.
Driving Rangealso demonstrates a strong correlation with user satisfaction, with an R² value
of [Link] indicates that the driving range of a product or service significantly influences
user satisfaction.
Total Cost, Infrastructure Readiness, Experienced Usefulness, and Ease of Usefactors also
show significant positive correlations with user satisfaction, although to a slightly lesser extent
compared to environmental awareness and driving [Link] respective R² values range from
0.168 to 0.265, indicating moderate to strong correlations with user satisfaction.
Overall, these results suggest that factors such as environmental awareness, driving range, total
cost, infrastructure readiness, experienced usefulness, and ease of use play important roles in
determining user satisfaction. Improving these factors may lead to higher levels of satisfaction
among users of the product or service under consideration.
ANOVA – FACTORS OF USER SATISFACTION AND AGE GROUP
Age Std. F P
Factors N Mean
Group Deviation Value Value
<25 377 12.0318 1.34838
25 - 35 13 12.3077 .94733
ExperiencedUsefulness .341 .711
> 35 10 12.2000 .78881
Total 400 12.0450 1.32566
<25 377 14.1326 2.06630
25 - 35 13 13.2308 3.19254
EaseofUse 1.561 .211
> 35 10 14.7000 1.25167
Total 400 14.1175 2.09754
<25 377 10.4615 1.78476
25 - 35 13 10.5385 1.39137
Total Cost .345 .708
> 35 10 10.0000 1.82574
Total 400 10.4525 1.77217
<25 377 10.2387 2.15522
Driving Range 25 - 35 13 10.6154 1.80455 1.584 .206
> 35 10 9.1000 2.51440
Age Std. F P
Factors N Mean
Group Deviation Value Value
Total 400 10.2225 2.15746
<25 377 10.4828 2.04350
25 - 35 13 10.3077 2.01596
Infrastructure Readiness .134 .875
> 35 10 10.2000 2.61619
Total 400 10.4700 2.05296
<25 377 10.5332 1.93363
25 - 35 13 10.0769 1.65638
EnvironmentalAwareness 1.718 .181
> 35 10 9.5000 1.84089
Total 400 10.4925 1.92723
<25 377 10.7798 1.74332
25 - 35 13 11.1538 1.28103
UserSatisfaction .306 .737
> 35 10 10.9000 2.37814
Total 400 10.7950 1.74516
Null Hypothesis:
Thefactors of user satisfaction are not different across different age group.
Level of Significance: 5%
Interpretation:
The P value obtained for various factors of user satisfaction is above 0.05, where we
accept the null hypothesis and conclude that the factors of user satisfaction does not differ
across different age group.
FACTORS OF USER SATISFACTION BASED ON GENDER
Std. Sig. (2-
Factors Gender N Mean t
Deviation tailed)
Male 214 11.9813 1.33906
Experienced Usefulness -1.031 0.303
Female 186 12.1183 1.30983
Male 214 14.0234 2.12174
EaseofUse -0.963 0.336
Female 186 14.2258 2.06975
Male 214 10.2991 1.81395
Total Cost -1.863 0.063
Female 186 10.6290 1.71070
Male 214 10.0000 2.25384
Driving Range -2.223 0.027
Female 186 10.4785 2.01671
Male 214 10.5748 2.00972
Infrastructure Readiness 1.095 0.274
Female 186 10.3495 2.10056
Std. Sig. (2-
Factors Gender N Mean t
Deviation tailed)
Male 214 10.5607 1.87735
EnvironmentalAwareness 0.759 0.448
Female 186 10.4140 1.98525
Male 214 10.6729 1.76707
User Satisfaction -1.503 0.134
Female 186 10.9355 1.71358
Null Hypothesis:
Thefactors of user satisfaction are not different across different gender.
Level of Significance: 5%
Interpretation:
The P value obtained for various factors of user satisfaction is above 0.05, where we
accept the null hypothesis and conclude that the factors of user satisfaction does not differ
across different gender group except the factor driving range (0.027<0.05). It is inferred that,
driving range is identified to an influencing factor on user satisfaction.
FACTORS OF USER SATISFACTION BASED ON EDUCATION LEVEL
Sig.
Education Std.
Factors N Mean t (2-
level Deviation
tailed)
UG 176 12.3352 .95983
Experienced Usefulness 3.952 0.000
PG 224 11.8170 1.51746
UG 176 14.2102 1.89619
EaseofUse 0.783 0.434
PG 224 14.0446 2.24463
UG 176 10.3807 1.69283
Total Cost -0.718 0.473
PG 224 10.5089 1.83389
UG 176 10.0852 2.17744
Driving Range -1.128 0.260
PG 224 10.3304 2.14032
UG 176 10.5909 1.98932
Infrastructure Readiness 1.044 0.297
PG 224 10.3750 2.10114
UG 176 10.3636 1.81537
EnvironmentalAwareness -1.186 0.236
PG 224 10.5938 2.00898
UG 176 10.7784 1.76045
User Satisfaction -0.168 0.866
PG 224 10.8080 1.73689
Null Hypothesis:
Thefactors of user satisfaction are not different across different Education level.
Level of Significance: 5%
Interpretation:
The P value obtained for various factors of user satisfaction is above 0.05, where we
accept the null hypothesis and conclude that the factors of user satisfaction does not differ
across different level of education.
FACTORS OF USER SATISFACTION BASED ON AREA OF RESIDENCE
Sig.
Area Of Std.
Factors N Mean t (2-
Residence Deviation
tailed)
Rural 235 12.0979 1.36305
Experienced Usefulness 0.952 0.342
Urban 165 11.9697 1.27080
Rural 235 14.1106 2.06634
EaseofUse -0.078 0.938
Urban 165 14.1273 2.14750
Rural 235 10.4979 1.72556
Total Cost 0.611 0.542
Urban 165 10.3879 1.83990
Rural 235 10.3660 2.13090
Driving Range 1.590 0.113
Urban 165 10.0182 2.18496
Rural 235 10.6298 1.98584
Infrastructure Readiness 1.863 0.063
Urban 165 10.2424 2.13036
Rural 235 10.5319 1.97907
EnvironmentalAwareness 0.488 0.626
Urban 165 10.4364 1.85542
Rural 235 10.8340 1.73763
User Satisfaction 0.534 0.594
Urban 165 10.7394 1.75963
Null Hypothesis:
Thefactors of user satisfaction are not different across different area of residence.
Level of Significance: 5%
Interpretation:
The P value obtained for various factors of user satisfaction is above 0.05, where we accept the
null hypothesis and conclude that the factors of user satisfaction does not differ across area of
residence.
Regression analysis – Factors influencing user satisfaction
Model Summary
Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square
Estimate
1 .470a .221 .209 1.55238
a. Predictors: (Constant), Environmental_Awareness, Experienced Usefulness, Total Cost,
EaseofUse, Infrastructure Readiness, Driving Range
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 268.105 6 44.684 18.542 .000b
1 Residual 947.085 393 2.410
Total 1215.190 399
a. Dependent Variable: User Satisfaction
b. Predictors: (Constant), Environmental_Awareness, Experienced Usefulness, Total Cost,
EaseofUse, Infrastructure Readiness, Driving Range
Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 3.807 .863 4.409 .000
Experienced Usefulness .087 .062 .066 1.400 .162
EaseofUse .061 .041 .073 1.497 .135
1 Total Cost .076 .049 .078 1.573 .117
Driving Range .102 .043 .126 2.367 .018
Infrastructure Readiness .043 .044 .051 .982 .326
EnvironmentalAwareness .266 .046 .293 5.804 .000
a. Dependent Variable: UserSatisfaction
The coefficient of determination (R²) indicates that approximately 22.1% of the variance in
user satisfaction can be explained by the predictors included in the model.
Adjusted R Square: This adjusts the R² value for the number of predictors in the model,
suggesting that around 20.9% of the variance in user satisfaction is explained by the predictors
after considering the degrees of freedom.
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) table indicates that the regression model is statistically
significant (p < 0.05), as the F-statistic (18.542) is significant. This suggests that the predictors,
taken together, have a significant effect on user satisfaction.
Among the predictors, "Driving Range" and "EnvironmentalAwareness" have statistically
significant coefficients (p < 0.05), suggesting they have a significant impact on user
satisfaction.
The other predictors such as "Experienced Usefulness," "EaseofUse," "TotalCost," and
"InfrastructureReadiness" do not have statistically significant coefficients (p > 0.05), indicating
that they may not have a significant impact on user satisfaction in this model.
The model suggests that factors like "Driving Range" and "Environmental Awareness" are key
drivers of user satisfaction with the product or service under consideration.
Other factors like "Experienced Usefulness," "Ease of Use," "Total Cost," and "Infrastructure
Readiness" do not seem to significantly influence user satisfaction in this model.
Further investigation may be needed to understand additional factors influencing user
satisfaction or to refine the model for better predictive accuracy.
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY:
94% of the respondents are in the age group of Below 25, while 53.5% of the
respondents are male gender and 56% of the respondents are post graduates, about 57
% of the respondents are employed and self-employed. 59% of the respondents are from
rural area and about 62% of the respondents are using two-wheeler and 38% of the
respondents use four-wheeler.
Factors such as environmental awareness, driving range, total cost, infrastructure
readiness, experienced usefulness, and ease of use play important roles in determining
user satisfaction. Improving these factors may lead to higher levels of satisfaction
among users of the product or service under consideration.
Factors of user satisfaction does not differ across different gender group except the
factor driving range (0.027<0.05). It is inferred that, driving range is identified as an
influencing factor on user satisfaction.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, this study offers valuable insights into factors impacting user satisfaction with
electric vehicles in Pollachi. The findings highlight driving range and environmental
awareness as key determinants, emphasizing the need to enhance range capabilities and raise
environmental awareness. While factors like cost, infrastructure, usefulness, and ease of use
also correlated positively, their impact was relatively lower. Notably, user satisfaction did not
differ substantially across demographics, except for driving range preferences between
genders. The study provides actionable insights for stakeholders to prioritize efforts, develop
targeted interventions, and foster greater adoption and satisfaction among users in Pollachi and
similar regions by addressing the identified critical factors.
REFERENCE:
Su-Hau et al (2004) focused on the highly efficient energy usage of electric motor.
[Link]
m_design_of_electric_motorcycles
David and Sheng-Chung (2004) proposed new parallel-type hybrid-electric-power
system comprises an engine’s energy distribution and a torque-integrated
mechanism[Link]
Lukic et al (2007) tried to develop a driving cycle of the auto rickshaw in a typical large
Indian city, in their case, Delhi.
[Link]
ee-Wheel_Auto_Rickshaw_Taxis_in_India
McKinsey, 2014, three factors are driving the use of electric vehicles Government
stimulation, industrial advancements, and consumer demand. [Link]
(Sierzchula, Bakker, Maat, & Van Wee, 2014).
[Link]
ves_and_other_socio-economic_factors_on_electric_vehicle_adoption
Rezvani, Jonson, and Bodin (2015) In1999
[Link]
Asrari, A., Ansari, M., Khazaei, J., & Fajri, P. (2020). A Market Framework for
Decentralized Congestion Management in Smart Distribution Grids Considering
Collaboration among Electric Vehicle Aggregators. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
11(2). [Link]
Jaiswal, D., Kaushal, V., Kant, R., & Kumar Singh, P. (2021). Consumer adoption
intention for electric vehicles: Insights and evidence from Indian sustainable
transportation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173.
[Link]