Plugging in with neighbours

Defining the social dimension of electric vehicle charging in the Netherlands

Journal Article (2024)
Author(s)

Milan Tamis (Hogeschool van Amsterdam)

G. de Vries (TU Delft - Organisation & Governance)

Reint Jan Renes (Hogeschool van Amsterdam)

Floor Alkemade (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Research Group
Organisation & Governance
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103791
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2024
Language
English
Research Group
Organisation & Governance
Volume number
118
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Residential public charging points are shared by multiple electric vehicle drivers, often neighbours. Therefore, charging behaviour is embedded in a social context. Behaviours that affect, or are influenced by, other public charging point users have been sparsely studied and lack an overarching and comprehensive definition. Consequently, very few measures are applied in practice to influence charging behaviour. We aim to classify and define the social dimension of charging behaviour from a social-psychological perspective and, using a behaviour change framework, identify and analyse the measures to influence this behaviour. We interviewed 15 experts on residential public charging infrastructure in the Netherlands. We identified 17 charging behaviours rooted in interpersonal interactions between individuals and interactions between individuals and technology. These behaviours can be categorised into prosocial and antisocial charging behaviours. Prosocial charging behaviour provides or enhances the opportunity for other users to charge their vehicle at the public charging point, for instance by charging only when necessary. Antisocial charging behaviour prevents or diminishes this opportunity, for instance by occupying the charging point after charging, intentionally or unintentionally. We then identified 23 measures to influence antisocial and prosocial charging behaviours. These measures can influence behaviour through human–technology interaction, such as providing charging etiquettes to new electric vehicle drivers or charging idle fees, and interpersonal interaction, such as social pressure from other charging point users or facilitating social interactions to exchange requests. Our approach advocates for more attention to the social dimension of charging behaviour.