Smart electric meters play a pivotal role in making energy systems decarbonized and automating the energy system. Smart electric meters denote huge business opportunities for both public and private companies. Utility players can manage the electricity demand more efficiently whereas customers can monitor and control the electricity bill through the adoption of smart electric meters. The study examines the factors affecting the adoption intention of smart electric meters in Indian households. This study draws a roadmap that how utility providers and customers can improve the smart electric meters adoption. The study has five independent variables (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, environmentalism, and hedonic motivation) and one dependent variable (adoption intention). The sample size for the study is four hundred and sixty-two respondents from Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR). The data was analysed using structural equation modelling (SEM). The results of this study have confirmed that performance expectancy, environmentalism, and social influence have a significant impact on the intention of adopting smart electric meters. Therefore, utility providers can improve their strategies to attract more customers to adopt smart electric meters by focusing more on the performance of smart electric meters and by making them environmentally friendly. This research offers meaningful insights to both customers and utility providers to make energy systems decarbonized and control energy consumption.

Ahn, M., Kang, J., & Hustvedt, G. (2016). A model of sustainable household technology acceptance. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 40(1), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12217

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Balta-Ozkan, N., Amerighi, O., & Boteler, B. (2014). A comparison of consumer perceptions towards smart homes in the UK, Germany and Italy: Reflections for policy and future research. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(10), 1176–1195. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2014.975788

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986(23–28), 2.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.

Chawla, Y., Kowalska-Pyzalska, A., & Widayat, W. (2019). Consumer willingness and acceptance of smart meters in Indonesia. Resources, 8(4), 177.

Chen, C., Xu, X., & Arpan, L. (2017). Between the technology acceptance model and sustainable energy technology acceptance model: Investigating smart meter acceptance in the United States. Energy Research & Social Science, 100(25), 93–104.

Chou, J. S., & Yutami, I. G. A. N. (2014). Smart meter adoption and deployment strategy for residential buildings in Indonesia. Applied Energy, 128, 336–349.

Cioc, M. M., Popa, Ș. C., Olariu, A. A., et al. (2023). Behavioral Intentions to Use Energy Efficiency Smart Solutions under the Impact of Social Influence: An Extended TAM Approach. Applied Sciences, 13(18), 10241.

Darby, S. (2006). The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption: A review for DEFRA of the literature on metering, billing and direct displays. Available online: http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/Research/Energy/Downloads/Smart-Metering-Report (accessed on 12 August 2011).

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.

Fleiß, E., Hatzl, S., & Rauscher, J. (2024). Smart energy technology: A survey of adoption by individuals and the enabling potential of the technologies. Technology in Society, 76, 102409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102409

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

Freitas, J., Dias, R., Diniz, C., et al. (2021). Smart electricity metering systems for smart grids: technologies, choices, and deployment experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference—Latin America (ISGT Latin America). https://doi.org/10.1109/isgtlatinamerica52371.2021.9543020

Furszyfer Del Rio, D. D., Sovacool, B. K., & Griffiths, S. (2021). Culture, energy and climate sustainability, and smart home technologies: A mixed methods comparison of four countries. Energy and Climate Change, 2, 100035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2021.100035

Gimpel, H., Graf, V., & Graf-Drasch, V. (2020). A comprehensive model for individuals’ acceptance of smart energy technology—A meta-analysis. Energy Policy, 138, 111196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111196

Girod, B., Mayer, S., & Nägele, F. (2017). Economic versus belief-based models: Shedding light on the adoption of novel green technologies. Energy Policy, 101, 415–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.09.065

Große-Kreul, F. (2022). What will drive household adoption of smart energy? Insights from a consumer acceptance study in Germany. Utilities Policy, 75, 101333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2021.101333

Gumz, J., & Fettermann, D. C. (2021). What improves smart meters’ implementation? A statistical meta-analysis on smart meters’ acceptance. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 11(4), 1116–1136. https://doi.org/10.1108/sasbe-05-2021-0080

Gumz, J., Fettermann, D. C., Sant’Anna, Â. M. O., & Tortorella, G. L. (2022). Social influence as a major factor in smart meters’ acceptance: Findings from Brazil. Results in Engineering, 15, 100510.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., et al. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE publications.

Hess, D. J. (2013). Transitions in energy systems: The mitigation–adaptation relationship. Science as Culture, 22(2), 197–203.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage publications.

Hofstede, G. (2016). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Collegiate Aviation Review, 34(2), 108.

Hori, S., Kondo, K., Nogata, D., & Ben, H. (2013). The determinants of household energy-saving behavior: Survey and comparison in five major Asian cities. Energy Policy, 52, 354–362.

Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195–204.

Idoko, E. C., Oraedu, C., Ugwuanyi, C. C., & Ukenna, S. I. (2021). Determinants of Smart Meter on Sustainable Energy Consumption Behavior: A Developing Country Perspective. Sage Open, 11(3), 21582440211032193. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211032193

Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1984). Analysis of linear structural relationships by maximum likelihood, instrumental variables, and least sqsuares methods. Mooresville: Scientific Software.

Kaufmann, S., Künzel, K., & Loock, M. (2013). Customer value of smart metering: Explorative evidence from a choice-based conjoint study in Switzerland. Energy Policy, 53, 229–239.

Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.

Kowalska-Pyzalska, A., Byrka, K., & Serek, J. (2020). How to foster the adoption of electricity smart meters? A longitudinal field study of residential consumers. Energies, 13(18), 4737.

Kranz, J., & Picot, A. (2012). Is it money or the environment? An Empirical Analysis of Factors Influencing Consumers’ Intention to Adopt the Smart Metering Technology. Available online: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2012/proceedings/GreenIS/3 (accessed on 9 March 2024).

Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., et al. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430.

Naushad, M. (2018). A study on the antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions among Saudi students. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 5(3), 600–617.

Naushad, M., & Sulphey, M. (2020). Prioritizing Technology Adoption Dynamics among SMEs. TEM Journal, 9(3), 983.

Perri, C., Giglio, C., & Corvello, V. (2020). Smart users for smart technologies: Investigating the intention to adopt smart energy consumption behaviors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 155, 119991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119991

Rajaguru, S., Johansson, B., & Granath, M. (2023). Exploring Smart Meters: What We Know and What We Need to Know. In: Perspectives in Business Informatics Research. Italy: Springer. pp. 105–120.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press.

Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J. H., et al. (2019). How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 27(3), 197–211.

Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.

Shiau, W. L., & Chau, P. Y. (2016). Understanding behavioral intention to use a cloud computing classroom: A multiple model comparison approach. Information & Management, 53(3), 355–365.

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T. D., et al. (1999). A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81.

Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. In: Using Multivariate Statistics, 4th ed. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view1. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.

von Loessl, V. (2023). Smart meter-related data privacy concerns and dynamic electricity tariffs: Evidence from a stated choice experiment. Energy Policy, 180, 113645.

Weston, R., & Gore, P. A. (2006). A Brief Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(5), 719–751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286345

Whittle, C., Jones, C. R., & While, A. (2020). Empowering householders: Identifying predictors of intentions to use a home energy management system in the United Kingdom. Energy Policy, 139, 111343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111343

Wilson, C., Hargreaves, T., & Hauxwell-Baldwin, R. (2017). Benefits and risks of smart home technologies. Energy Policy, 103, 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.047

Wunderlich, P., Veit, D., & Sarker, S. (2019). Adoption of Sustainable Technologies: A Mixed-Methods Study of German Households. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 43(2), 673–691.

Yang, H., Lee, H., & Zo, H. (2017). User acceptance of smart home services: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(1), 68–89.