Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Lightweight electric vehicles are increasingly proposed for low-emission logistics, municipal services and decentralised transport tasks. However, their suitability in resource- and technology-constrained development contexts cannot be assessed through vehicle specifications alone. Payload, motor power, range and acquisition cost do not indicate whether a system can be inspected, repaired, charged, documented, supplied, adapted and sustained under local conditions. This article develops an AHP-based socio-technical framework for early-stage selection of modular lightweight electric mobility architectures. The framework evaluates vehicle architecture before propulsion, wheel configuration and project-specific implementation details, linking engineering boundary calculations with criteria for modular maintainability, repairability, supplier independence, documentation and local technical capability. The O-Waste pilot with the Mbolo Association in The Gambia provides the field-informed implementation context for the study, while the proposed framework remains transferable beyond one route, container arrangement or waste quantity. Vehicle selection is treated as a socio-technical engineering decision in which mechanical adequacy and local technical continuity must be considered together. The contribution is a structured decision pathway and circular capability system for identifying lightweight electric mobility configurations that can remain technically appropriate, locally understandable, repairable, supplied and supportable over time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaulicke et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: