The Politics of EVs

The global transition to electric vehicles – agenda setting for a political prognosis

The transition to electric vehicles over the 21^st century will be intertwined with the domestic and global politics in mutually influencing ways. The speed and pathways to transition for each country will be shaped by, and in turn to varying degrees influence, their domestic politics and political economy as well as geopolitical and trade relationships. 

Domestic politics, reflected in the appetite within governments for climate or environmental action, will influence the creation or lack thereof, effectiveness, and durability of various policies aimed at supporting the EV transition. Within 25 democratic countries with substantive motorization levels that had national elections in 2024, at least 11 countries elected a government led by a party or coalition that signaled a firm commitment to supporting the EV transition. More broadly, the ruling party or coalition in at least 16 countries indicated a strong commitment to climate action, even if their stated position on EV transition was unclear. Importantly, for multiple countries, EV transition was (also) viewed as an industrial strategy within the political discourse, which links with the political economy of the transition. 

The influence of domestic political economy will manifest in countries which either have an established automotive industry or have ambitions to develop or revive it. For these countries, policy and political decisions related to the EV transition will be wound up with complex choices concerning economic benefits and consequences. A purely climate-driven pathway might entail opening up the domestic market to cheap and available EVs made anywhere in the world to ensure a swift transition. However, this could adversely impact the domestic auto industry that makes a significant contribution to the national GDP in many countries. To avoid this, the preferred transition pathway for many countries would be one driven by a domestic industrial transition that creates a win-win green economic growth scenario.

However, what happens if the pace at which the domestic auto industry prefers to transition is at odds with the speed of transition demanded by alignment to climate targets? Industrial inertia can be addressed through regulation and incentives coercing vehicle manufacturers to accelerate their transition. However, the economic significance of auto industry and consequently their political clout poses questions on the durability and stringency of coercive regulations where they have been introduced, and replication in other jurisdictions where they might be considered desirable.

Preferences aside, the automotive industry in any country also needs access to a domestic or regional battery supply chain to enable production of EVs at scale and prices that induce mass adoption. In part, this is a matter of having a wholesome and effective industrial strategy that creates a well-connected value chain from upstream (access to battery minerals) to midstream (mineral processing and battery component manufacturing) and downstream (battery and EV manufacturing). This brings the EV transition into contact with its geopolitical dimension whereby countries would want to avoid dependence on foreign battery supply chain due to national security concerns and ensure access to battery minerals and components in ways that align with their geopolitical and trade relationships. 

For vehicle-importing countries, domestic political economy concerns will not be significant, but their geopolitical alignments and trade relationships with countries housing the EV and battery value chain will enable or constrain their capability and willingness to import either fully-built EVs or the components needed to assemble EVs domestically.

In short, the domestic and international political economy of EV transition will manifest in the tradeoffs between climate targets, the economic and political costs (and benefits) of a coerced industrial transition, and national security concerns associated with foreign dependence for EVs and the battery supply chain. These tradeoffs will vary across countries depending on their contexts and be conducted within the sphere of domestic politics.

In turn, the EV transition might help shape the geopolitical order of this century in two principal ways. The transition will engender a global scale reconfiguration of the geography of vehicle manufacturing and their supply chains which could impact the geoeconomic capabilities of nation states. Perhaps more importantly, as the world makes a substantive shift in dependency from oil to minerals and batteries, resource power will putatively move from oil-rich to mineral-rich countries and engender ramifications for the geopolitics of 21^st century.  

About the project

This is an independent project that aims to shed light on the evolving politics of EV transition and help address a gap in the information landscape of EVs. Using the lens of domestic and international political economy and geoeconomics, the project will broadly focus on three themes as below.

The project has been launched with a News Watch feature that curates news articles related to different aspects of the politics of EV transition. Research outputs will be shared through this website as they are developed. 

Founder

This project has been created by Gaurav Dubey. He has over 10 years of experience working in the urban transportation sector and a PhD from the University of Oxford. His doctoral thesis looked at the politics of transition to electric mobility in India. He currently works with a transportation non-profit (unaffiliated with this project) and is based in Washington D.C.