Abstract:

A game-theoretic model was developed to compare electric vehicle (EV) policies, namely electric vehicle subsidies (EVS) and charging infrastructure subsidies (CIS), under different market structures. The model found that when a monopoly EV manufacturer builds and operates its own charging stations or two competing EV manufacturers jointly build and operate charging infrastructure, EVS leads to higher levels of charging infrastructure and social welfare. However, if the charging infrastructure contractor is a third-party company in a monopoly or duopoly EV market, CIS may result in higher social welfare under two conditions: a high benefit-cost ratio for charging infrastructure deployment and a low charging fee. The study also found that in the US and Germany, EVS appears to be a more effective EV incentive, while in China, CIS can be more socially beneficial. The model suggests that current subsidy levels in these markets should be increased to achieve higher social welfare.