Electric vehicles (EVs) are growing rapidly in market presence, and cities can take action to support EV uptake among their residents.

Note that we do not suggest increasing the use and uptake of single occupancy vehicles (SOVs). Traditionally, municipal transportation has focused on moving as many vehicles as possible; in order to truly address transportation challenges and opportunities, and to advance equity goals, we need to focus on moving people - safely and efficiently. The transportation hierarchy pictured below (from Toronto's EV Strategy) must be advanced to promote alternative transportation methods over single occupancy vehicles.

1. What are you trying to achieve with this action?

• Reductions in traffic-related air pollution and noise
• Resulting benefits to mental and physical health (however, this only works when the EV strategy recognizes and acts on the transportation hierarchy of moving people and causing a modal shift)
• Fuel and maintenance cost savings to vehicle owners, one of the primary economic benefits from increased EV uptake
• Reduced reliance on fossil fuels
• Job creation from manufacturing, operations and maintenance, and infrastructure (charger) deployment

2. Who has traditionally participated in/benefitted from this action?

• Increasing EV readiness and uptake has focused on chargers for SOVs and incentives for new EVs
• EV uptake tends to be higher in higher-income areas; the initial cost of EVs remains higher than conventional vehicles, which has historically been a barrier for lower-income purchasers
  • Fortunately, the price differential between EVs and conventional vehicles is diminishing, and used EVs are becoming more widely available (however, incentives are still being directed at vehicle owners)

3. What groups are most in need of this action?

• Owners of personal ICE vehicles and those who can't afford new vehicles (increasing the second-hand EV market)
• Increasing Active Transportation and e-bike incentives would further increase the equity of EV uptake efforts, adding transportation options for diverse residents
• Underserved communities, including those in high-density urban areas (ex. rental tower communities) and rural, remote, and First Nations communities

4. What has prevented these groups from participating in the past?

• Economic costs, lack of supply, lack of incentives, changes in incentive programs, upfront capital required to access incentives

5. What design can address barriers from those most in need of action or to increase wider participation? Barriers can be physical or perceived (perceptual/psychological)

• Since many cities' actions focus largely on EV infrastructure, from an equity perspective it is also important to consider the geographic distribution of chargers, in public space and residences (unfortunately, retrofitting existing apartment and condominium buildings for EV chargers is particularly challenging)
• It's important to ask what opportunities exist to allow EV strategies to benefit a wider group of people
• Public charging services will be critical to supporting those without access to private parking spots for EV charging; charging infrastructure must be accessible for people with disabilities (access should be barrier-free from the outset)
  • Accessible design should also apply to the parking space, the charging equipment, and the payment processing technology
• Charging fees must remain affordable for those who rely on public charging infrastructure
• Equitably allocating funding might look like dedicating a certain percentage of government funds to underserved areas

6. Can you identify any negative impacts that this action may cause? Are there measures that can help to proactively prevent that harm?

• Quantifying the socio-economic benefits of EVs can be done by measuring the number of vehicles and chargers deployed according to neighbourhood and census tract and comparing socio-economically disadvantaged areas to the whole and/or in social and affordable housing
  • Where is EV uptake occurring, where is it not? Why?
• Focusing on EV uptake alone without advancing options for Active Transportation and E-mobility strategies and shifting the SOV culture will not in itself be sufficient for creating deep emission reductions - additional focus on ride-sharing initiatives, e-mobility hubs, and electrified community service vehicles will be critical

7. Who hasn't yet been engaged that would be good to engage? Why would they be good to engage? What may limit their engagement interest/ability?

• LMI communities who cannot afford new EVs, and those with specific mobility needs
• Communities with limited or no personal charging infrastructure (e.g., affordable housing areas, lower income neighbourhoods, high-rises)
• EV training and maintenance education must include and be accessible to low-income neighbourhoods, communities of colour, and under-served communities
  

Additional Strategies:

• Commit to providing EV charging across the community
• Advance EV car sharing attractiveness - density is key
• Assess the accessibility of proposed or existing EV infrastructure in LMI FSAs/neighbourhoods - prioritize investment over the long term
• Ensure low-income communities, communities of color, and those with limited mobility are at the decision-making table - how would the EV strategy help them address their priority needs?
• Plan for rideshare EV charging hubs to support the gig economy and its workers
• Install chargers in public parking lots and high-use municipal facilities (e.g., parks, administration buildings)
• Mandate EV charging infrastructure in future commercial & multi-family developments
• Support the cost of charger installation in affordable housing developments

Do you have additional suggestions for climate and equity synergies related to electric vehicle strategies? Add them here.