MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413915964 · doi:10.1016/j.cstp.2025.101588

Addressing the electric vehicle adoption gap for small fleets: A case study of local energy transitions in British Columbia

2025· article· en· W4413915964 on OpenAlex
Bassam Javed, Amanda Giang, Milind Kandlikar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Studies on Transport Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsPacific Institute for Climate SolutionsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsElectric vehicleBusinessEnergy (signal processing)Transport engineeringEngineeringPhysicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• There is currently a gap in adoption of electric vehicles (EV) in small fleets. • This study surveys small fleet operators to understand barriers to adoption of EVs. • Barriers are related to cost, incompatibility (real or perceived) and availability of EVs. • Policymakers CAN use targeted programming, such as a bulk-buy, to increase adoption in small fleets. In the transition to replacing internal combustion engine vehicles with electric vehicles (EV), there remains a gap in adoption by small fleets. Researchers and practitioners have posited that this gap may exist for a range of reasons, including: that the fleet electrification is not economically rational, that the needs of fleet operators are too diverse for current market offerings, or that targeted government interventions for this segment are lacking. We conducted a survey (n = 68) of small fleet operators in British Columbia, Canada and categorized the responses into barriers related to cost, incompatibility (real or perceived) and availability. Current EVs are incompatible with the operational needs of some respondents but our results show that, in many cases, the incompatibility is perceived and EVs could meet the stated requirements of such small fleets. We also observed that common customizations to (or “upfitting” of) fleet vehicles can be readily applied to EVs, but specialized use cases must be produced by the manufacturer—which may be a supply-related barrier. We also used a total cost of ownership (TCO) to demonstrate that while economic rationality is generally stronger for lighter duty class vehicles, small fleets that drive longer distances have a greater advantage in electrification. Our findings suggest that government intervention targeted at small fleets, such as bulk purchasing programs, could increase the adoption of EVs in this segment when coupled with purchase incentives. This gap could potentially be filled by local agencies, which can play a critical role in brokering trust between parties involved by being the middle actor at the boundary of government, suppliers, and customers. Lastly, we observe that small fleet operators display some understanding of the TCO of EVs. Incorporating an educational component into a bulk purchase program, as observed in other successful procurement arrangements that we review, could enhance the confidence of fleet operators and ultimately, lead to further adoption.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it