Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Electric vehicles (EVs) are a potential solution in the transition to more sustainable transport. However, this transition requires not only new vehicles but also expanded electric vehicle charging infrastructure (EVCI). This study aims to investigate the main barriers to implementing shared EVCI and potential solutions. A qualitative approach was adopted, collecting data from expert focus groups. The study identifies barriers including insufficient knowledge about technologies and business models, a lack of viable business models, infrastructure limitations, regulatory obstacles, and the need for multi-actor collaboration, which requires building trust. Business models need to be tested before being scaled up, and tools for booking EVCI should be integrated into transport planning. Policymakers should support demonstration projects, revise regulations that hinder EVCI sharing, and extend discussions beyond passenger cars to include heavy vehicles. Given the nascent nature of EVCI sharing, developing and disseminating knowledge is critical to overcoming a variety of barriers. We find that solutions enabling booking, integration with energy storage, and scalability would help address technology and infrastructure barriers. Creating a collaborative network for sharing would reduce barriers related to business models, culture, and values. To overcome policy and regulatory barriers, additional incentives are needed to promote sharing, offering potential economic, environmental, and social sustainability benefits. • The study identifies key barriers to large-scale sharing of electric vehicle charging infrastructure (EVCI). • Sharing EVCI can generate economic, environmental, and social benefits. • There is a need for planning tools that facilitate EVCI sharing among actors. • Trust must be developed on multiple levels to enable effective EVCI sharing. • Actors currently lack sufficient knowledge of EVCI and its sharing potential.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Govik et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: