IRENA Transport ReMap Priorities and Recommendations

The transport sector makes up 30% of global final energy consumption and has the lowest renewable energy share of any sector. In view of the transport sector’s importance for a global transition to a sustainable energy system, the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) put together a team of more than two hundred experts from the private sector, academia, government and relevant international organisations to explore pathways for transforming the sector’s energy use.  Their working paper is part of IRENA’s ReMAP or Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Future, 2016 Edition (IRENA, 2016a), that explores the possibility of significantly increasing the share of renewables in the global energy system by 2030. The paper also proposes an action agenda that can contribute to increasing renewable energy use and the sustainability of the transport sector.  To catalyse action, IRENA has identified three priority areas for both policy makers and industrial stakeholders:

1) Electric mobility and the role of systems thinking

Electric vehicle sales are expected to grow in the coming decade. REmap’s very conservative estimates suggests at least 10% of all passenger cars on the road could be electric by 2030.  IRENA goes on:

Along with the growing demand for public transport and modal shifts, railway use will more than double between now and 2030 worldwide. Increasingly, future energy systems will not view sectors independently; the interplay between and coupling of sectors will start to emerge. As power systems become cleaner with higher shares of renewable electricity, the potential to store and convert this power into heat or mechanical energy will be important in a world that relies more and more on electric mobility.

Electric mobility sourced with renewable power is an efficient way to increase the share of renewables in the transport sector. As energy-consuming technologies, electric vehicles create new demand for electricity that can be supplied with renewable power. This will
increase the share of renewables in both the power and transport sectors. In addition to the benefits of this shift, like reducing CO2 emissions and air pollution, electric mobility also creates significant efficiency gains.

The energy demand to deliver the same amount of transport service is at least 2-3 times more efficient for an electric vehicle than for a vehicle with an internal combustion engine. Furthermore, losses in conversion from putting energy into the vehicle to the start of motion are about zero. Assuming solar and wind deliver electricity with no conversion losses, then system efficiency is very high. Such efficiency benefits are especially important for urban freight and logistic transport modes. These systems often operate below their optimal efficiency because they require frequent stopping and starting. Other benefits of electric mobility are less local air pollution and, depending on the power generation mix, lower CO2 emissions.

By the end of 2015, the number of electric vehicles on the road was estimated to reach 1.25 million (IEA, 2016).  REmap shows that this number can increase to 158 million four-wheel BEV and PHEV passenger vehicles and about 2 million freight vehicles and public buses
by 2030. This is almost three times more EVs than in the Reference Case, which projects 60 million. REmap shows the additions would be largely split between BEV and PHEV, each with roughly half of the market, indicating the importance of both types of vehicles for more consumer choice.  The 160 million four-wheel EVs on the road would make up around 10% of the total vehicle stock. This estimate is close to what industry leaders have pledged to reach – a share of 15% by 2030 (UN, 2014).  A twentyfold increase is needed.

Additionally, over 900 million electric two- to threewheelers are expected to be on the roads. Roughly half of these would be in China. Today, there are around 200 million such vehicles worldwide, meaning sales of electric two- to three-wheelers would have to average 45 million per year to meet the REmap totals. To put this effort in perspective, around 50 million two- to threewheelers (mostly internal combustion engines) are sold worldwide every year. In 2015, expected sales of electric mid-size and large two-wheelers were about 4.3 million (Weiss et al., 2015). Hence, 10 times more would have to be sold annually by 2030.

Assuming all these new vehicles were to consume 100% renewable electricity, then 480 TWh per year of additional renewable power would be required in 2030 (approximately 1.5% of the total global electricity generation). The share of electricity in transport’s total energy demand would increase from 1% to 4% in 2013- 2030. This would not only come from EVs, but other forms of electric mobility (e.g. trains, trams) would also growth significantly. These would represent about 60% of total electricity use in the sector compared to 40% consumed by electric vehicles. Today, around 3 100 billion passenger-km are used in railways worldwide. In REmap, this would more than double to approximately 7 500 billion passenger-km in 2030. This growth in demand is split between the increase that would occur anyway due to higher rates of urbanisation or population growth, but also from structural changes that increase demand at the expense of flights or long distance buses.

Electric vehicles have been successful where governments have provided tax incentives (Norway), given free access to restricted city centres (London), or otherwise mandated low emissions (California). A number of cities are also discussing banning internal combustion engines (e.g. a diesel ban is being considered for Paris by 2020, and Oslo is considering banning all cars by 2019 in the downtown area), or creating low emission zones (e.g. London) through banning heavy-duty vehicles or emission-intensive modes of transport in certain areas. The main driver of electric vehicle sales in India is city air pollution; today, thirteen of the twenty most polluted cities in the world are in India (see also the
section on modal shift).

Despite the uncertainty in the policy environment, the Asian two- to three-wheeler market increased by 9% in 2014 from the previous year. Of global annual sales of medium- and large-sized two-wheelers (scooters) and three-wheelers of between 20 and 30 million units, more than 90% were in China.  The small two-wheeler market is also growing quickly.  In 2012 around 30 million electric bicycles were sold worldwide. This market is expected to grow to about 50 million vehicles per year in 2018 (Aia, 2014).  By 2018, cumulative sales of electric two- and threewheelers in China alone will amount to 355 million (IRENA, 2014b). China is followed by India. There are more than 80 million vehicles in India, and the overall vehicle market is growing by around 10% per year.
Unlike China, however, the Indian electric vehicle market
shrank in 2015. The number of producers has fallen
from 28 to 7 and total annual sales decreased between
2014 and 2015 (Pandit, 2015). However, a newly formed
National Electric Mobility Mission aims to reverse this
by increasing EVs to 6-7 million by 2020. The mission
covers all vehicle segments, including passenger, freight
and public vehicles. It will promote adoption of EVs
through support for expanding charging infrastructure,
and policy efforts focused on reducing regulatory
China also offers subsidies and tax incentives to promote
deployment of four-wheelers. China has set a target
of 5 million alternative energy vehicles by 2020, and
annual sales of four-wheel electric vehicles increased
markedly between 2014 and 2015. In 2014 only 36 000
vehicles were sold, but in 2015 this rose to 128 000.
However, China is still not realising its targets.
China has a large range of incentives for both passenger
and public electric vehicles. By 2020, it is expected to
have 12 000 charging stations. The country is investing
heavily in vehicle-to-grid (V2X) technology, and a recent
study by the China National Renewable Energy Centre
(CNREC/ERI, 2015) emphasised the storage benefits
of significant electric vehicle deployment alongside
China’s plans to expand solar PV and wind power
capacity. As Figure 21 shows, this electrification scenario
has considerable potential to curb fossil fuel use in the
transport sector.
The European Union (EU) has aggressive CO2 emission
reduction goals of 60% in the transport sector by 2050,
which will greatly increase the appeal of zero-carbon

vehicles. When these standards become sufficiently
strict, it will probably be more cost-efficient for an
original equipment manufacturer (OEM) to partly sell
zero-emission vehicles than to further reduce emissions
from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle sales
(ECN, 2015). CO2 emission standards could provide an
incentive for EV sales by the mid-2020s. Additionally,
some cities are considering banning certain types of
ICEs (EC, 2015), and this trend could accelerate.
France, Germany, Norway and the Netherlands
(continental) have electric vehicle and charging point
targets for 2020 and 2030 (as does the US). France
aims to have seven million charging points by 2030,
Germany 1 million EVs on the road by 2020, the
Netherlands 200 000 by 2020. However, recent sales
point to difficulty in reaching these goals and growth
in the vehicle stock is slow. In Europe, BEV vehicle sales
dominate the market, with vehicles on the road largely
concentrated in Italy, Norway, Germany and France.
PHEV vehicles have yet to take hold, making up just
around one-quarter of registered electric vehicles. In
2014 in Europe, sales of all EVs were 96 000, and by 2015
that number increased to 182 000.
Norway is the EV leader in Europe. Almost onefourth
of its new cars registered in 2014 were electric.
This high share is the result of subsidies that are
scheduled to be phased out between 2018 and 2020
(Telegraph, 2015). Norway and the Netherlands, among
others, have announced plans to allow sales of only
electric passenger road vehicles as of the middle of
the next decade, effectively banning sales of diesel and
petrol vehicles (India also recently announced a similar
goal, and is aiming to do the same by 2030). However, in
all cases the plans are still under discussion and not yet
enshrined in law (Renew Economy, 2016).
Germany has also stepped in to accelerate the adoption
of electric vehicles. In April 2016, the country announced
plans to provide subsidies to buyers of both BEV and
PHEVs, as well as providing support for charging
stations. The aim is to help reach the goal of one million
EVs by 2020, which Germany is far from meeting, with only about 150 000 electric and hybrid electric vehicles
on the road as of the beginning of 2016 (Spiegel, 2016).
Besides government-set targets, there are various
private-sector initiatives in the EU to increase electric
Latin America is also starting to focus on electric
vehicles. Colombia is a leader in its efforts to promote
a switch to electric vehicles. The country has a national
development plan to 2018 with aggressive goals for
promoting electric vehicles. The goals are not just
focused on passenger vehicles, but include promoting
electric urban freight, bus and rail transport. Colombia
planned to have over 300 hybrid-electric buses on the
road by the end of 2015 (Figure 22). Colombia also has
one of the highest shares of renewable electricity in its
power mix in the world, at around 75% in 2015.
In the US, electric vehicle sales are centred in a few
states and are driven by state and local financial
incentives, with further financial support from a Federal
Tax Credit. And studies show there is a strong direct
correlation between the number of promotion actions
and adoption of EVs (Figure 23). As of 2015, 27 US
states have local or state incentives to assist buyers
in purchasing electric vehicles. This makes the total
cost of ownership much more favourable than internal
combustion engines, in the order of 25% cheaper. It
also cuts operation and maintenance costs (including
energy), which are about a third lower (all compared
to mid-sized vehicle markets). Consumers are starting
to take notice, as the recent success of the new Tesla
Model 3 shows. The new, mass-market-oriented BEV
has booked over 400 000 pre-orders (valued at around
USD 14 billion in sales) as of April 2016. However, while
BEV sales are on the rise, the biggest current and
anticipated future market is for hybrid electric vehicles.
Their sales are expected to rise significantly. According
to estimates by the University of California, Davis,
hybrid electric vehicles could make up 5% of the market
by 2020, rising to as much as 15% by 2025. Plug-in
electric vehicle sales are also rising, with cumulative
sales reaching more than 300 000 at the end of the
second half of 2015. Sales have been dominated by a
small number of vehicles, with about six models (out of
21 sold) accounting for 80% of the total.
This growing electric vehicle stock is supported by a
growing charging infrastructure. There are over 32 000
individual outlets (14 000 public charging stations) in
the US. More than 2 000 of these are in California
(Energyfuse). This infrastructure growth is partly due to
state policies. As of 2015, nine US states have adopted
zero emission vehicle mandates. These states make
up 30% of the US car market, and over 80% of electric
vehicle sales.

Systems thinking and
interlinking transport and other
The shift to increase electric mobility, especially in cities,
will require that regions and cities start to consider
the coupling of energy sectors, and think in terms
of entire systems. Systems thinking is the process of
understanding and identifying synergies between
systems and their influence on one another within a
complete or larger energy system.
Role of cities
Cities will be the largest source of both rapidly rising
energy demand and transport needs over the coming
decades. One of the main drivers of electric mobility
will be efforts to make cities more liveable. Therefore,
climate change targets alone are unlikely to catalyse
a transformation of the transport sector. Sustainable
development concerns, such as reducing pollution in
urban areas, will also drive this change.
As society becomes increasingly more urban, EVs offer
the potential to alleviate some of the issues that have
plagued cities in the past, such as air pollution, noise
and congestion. It is likely that EVs will be some of the
first vehicles to be part of smart transport networks.
Given that a large share of transportation takes place
in urban areas, especially with passenger cars using
internal combustion engines, modal shift will gain more
Road transport is responsible for a growing portion
of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and contributes
substantially to urban fine particulate air pollution,
thought to cause about 1.3 million deaths per year,
and the accumulation of tropospheric ozone and its
subsequent health effects (Haines et al., 2012). The EU
estimated in 2012 that cars used within its member
states have external costs of USD 341 billion-493 billion
per year. These include environmental costs of car traffic
such as air pollution, noise and climate change (Becker,
Becker and Gerlach, 2012). Additionally, a recent study
shows that an astonishing 87% of the world’s population
lives in areas that exceed World Health Organization
guidelines for levels of PM2.5, with 35% living in areas
that significantly exceed safe guidelines (Brauer et al.,
Electric mobility offers an opportunity to reduce
some of these external effects compared to
passenger cars with internal combustion engines.
But it is important to consider the power generation
mix of a country or city for vehicle charging. What
is the share of renewables or the share of coal-fired
electricity used to produce electricity? Generally,
the power system is expected to be less emissionintensive
by 2030 than today. REmap shows that
nearly half of all power generation could be sourced
with renewables. A study by Michalek et al. (2011)
presents a hypothetical optimistic case, where
zero-emission electricity is used for charging, and
a pessimistic case, where coal-fired power is used.
In the pessimistic case, the battery electric vehicle
would be responsible for USD 5 000 more in life-cycle
externality damages and oil premium costs than the
hybrid electric vehicle (difference mainly driven by
GHGs and SO2 emissions). In the optimistic case,
the battery electric vehicle could reduce lifetime air
emissions damages. Although the cost of damages
from vehicle-associated emissions are significant,
the damage reductions that can be gained through
electrification are small compared to the total cost of
owning and operating a vehicle.
Beyond emission reductions and the related benefits to
our environment, electric mobility has other benefits.
Electrified transport reduces the dependency on
passenger cars in cities, which can reduce emissions
through both more efficient energy use (by a factor
of approximately 5 depending on the transport mode)
(Figueroa et al. 2014) and the addition of renewables
to the electricity supply. Modal shift can also take
other forms. Put simply, a citizen choosing to bike
to work instead of taking the bus uses an emissionfree
and clean mode of transport. Beyond the urban
setting, high-speed, long-distance trains can substitute
airplanes as well as truck-based, long-range freight
Electric vehicles can also reduce noise pollution in cities.
In many cities, noise pollution from transport systems
can surpass 55 decibels (dB) in certain areas, which,
according to the World Health Organization can pose
health risks. Electric vehicles can be much quieter than
ICE automobiles, with many operating at just 21 dB.
However, further study should examine the direct health
benefits of lower noise pollution in cities resulting from
higher deployment of EVs.
34 The Renewable Route to Sustainable Transpor t – A Working Paper based on REmap
Additionally, cities will need to evolve their transportation
networks to electrified mass transit, moving people from
modes such as individual passenger vehicles to electric
buses and trams. Electrified rail systems and high-speed
passenger trains should serve longer distances. Today,
more and more countries are investing in high-speed
railways as an alternative to air travel. High-speed trains
take passengers directly to the city centre, not to an
airport in the suburbs. Many cities are also investing in
bike paths, typically starting with recreation in mind,
but citizens gradually embrace these for all sorts of
daily use. Modal shift can also have adverse effects. In
Germany, deregulation of the long-distance bus system
has resulted in a cheap alternative to its railways, which
are sourced with 100% renewables.
In the urban context, EVs are also likely to be some of the
first cars to incorporate automated driving capabilities,
and possibly the first to be completely self-driving or
autonomous. EVs also serve as an enabling technology
for decentralised variable renewable power, which will
increasingly be built in cities as solar PV deployment
Developments expected in India over the coming
decades provide a good case study on how changes
in cities and urbanisation will require the interlinking of
energy sectors. The country is experiencing very rapid
urbanisation, with 68 cities expecting more than 1 million
inhabitants by 2030. Generally, population density and
the share of public transport increase together (see
Figure 25). But the ratio of public transport use to
population density is generally much lower in Indian
cities. Because the infrastructure in these cities was
built before their population boom, efforts to increase
public transit will have to focus in part on using existing
infrastructure. The types of systems that can be built will
be differentiated by volume. Typical high-volume routes
will use metros and light rail. But the medium volume
routes can be serviced by electric buses using real-time
power supply (overhead electricity lines), or battery
electric buses with en-route or end-point charging (end
of line). The last mile can then be serviced with electricbased
small commercial vehicles. These electric buses
and commercial vehicles result in less local pollution, but
will also need to interlink with the power sector. While
electric passenger vehicles can provide complementary
services to the grid in the form of midday storage, public
and commercial vehicles will be less able to provide
these services, so their effect on power demand should
be considered.

Rather than taking the historical approach of increasing
mining to meet rapidly growing demand, the key will
be to improve material life-cycle efficiency through
increased recycling, recovery and reuse. Thinking
outside of the box, developing new technologies that
rely less on such rare earth metals will be another
strategy. Solutions will focus on developing new types of
battery storage. A recent REmap technology roadmap
for electricity storage identifies some of these new
technologies (IRENA, 2015c). However, battery storage
options for use in vehicles require certain defining
characteristics, such as high energy density, light weight,
and durability. Some emerging technologies look able
to fulfil this need. Supercapacitors, for example, can
store 10-100 times more energy per unit volume than
conventional batteries, and they also charge much
faster than lithium-ion batteries. Depending on how
they are made, they can use materials that are in
ample supply, such as graphene (form of carbon). They
may soon be used in limited applications in vehicles,
such as for start-stop functionality, or for brake energy
recovery. However, technology development in the
future will show whether such capacitors can work over
long distances and be manufactured in large quantities
Power system and battery storage from
electric mobility
As urbanisation accelerates, the systems in cities
that provide heat, power and transport will require
interlinking. A higher share of electric vehicles will create
an important sector linkage of heating and transport
with power generation. Transport is the key sector for
coupling end-use demand with power generation.
Decentralised power production will increasingly be the
norm, and cities will be an important source of demandside
management and storage through local heating
and transportation networks. Integrated urban energy
systems and planning will emerge as a key necessity
to meet this increased energy need and keep local
pollutants and adverse health effects to a minimum.
REmap shows that as many as 160 million electric
vehicles (excluding the two- to three-wheelers) will
be on the road by 2030. The energy storage capacity
combined in the transport sector therefore be significant.
Electric vehicles can offer further benefits to energy
systems after the end of their life. The battery packs
in these vehicles are usually warrantied for 8-10 years,
and after that period, most will have reduced energy
storage capacity. Battery manufacturers expect that
they will on average retain 80% of their original capacity.
Assuming a 25% recovery rate, by 2030 around 150 GW
of total energy storage capacity will be available.
Electricity stored in such systems can be released when
the user needs them. Electrification in transport can
be an effective way to increase the share of variable
renewable energy, reducing the need for other flexibility
measures and grid-integration costs associated with
higher shares of variable renewables. Hence there is an
important synergy between the transport and power
generation sectors that can help increase the share of
renewables in both.
3.4 Action areas for electric
Costs of electric vehicles
Battery prices for EVs have dropped by two-thirds in
the past five years, but electric vehicles remain more
expensive than conventional passenger cars, mainly
because of high vehicle costs. However, technological learning in battery technologies may reduce their price.
The important metric of cost per passenger or freight
kilometre is highly dependent on variables such as fuel
cost, electricity price and cost of capital. EV ownership
costs also depend on oil price developments, but parity
for mid-sized vehicles is expected sometime between
2020 and 2023, depending on how these variables
Figure 26 shows the decline in HEV prices since 1997.
Between 1997 and 2010, the price in Japan declined by
19% to EUR 194 per kilowatt (kW) (USD 214). The price
declines in the US and Europe were even higher. Some
difference in prices across countries exists, explained
by the cost of shipment and pricing strategies. Battery
costs play the main role today and this will remain so
in the years ahead, accounting for up to 40% of the
total price of a passenger car (Handelsblatt, 2015).
Prices of battery packs have fallen from EUR 1 000
per kWh (USD 1 100) in 2005 to around EUR 200-250
per kWh today (USD 220-280). According to some
studies, EVs can be cost-competitive at around EUR
120 per kWh (USD 130) (Gerssen-Gondelach and Faaij,
2012). A breakeven can be achieved with production
of 50-80 million battery electric vehicles, based on
technological learning studies (Weiss et al., 2012).
Global learning investment would amount to EUR 100-
150 billion worldwide (USD 110-165 billion). The low end
of this range can already be achieved with the Reference
Case totals. Recent announcements from General
Motors indicate the carmaker expects the battery in its
upcoming Bolt EV to cost EUR 130 per kWh (USD 145),
and that this cost will decline to around EUR 90 per kWh
(USD 100) in the next decade (SNE Research, 2015)
(see Figure 27). A recent study also shows that battery
manufacturing prices have fallen faster than forecasted,
with manufacturers now building batteries for prices
that were only expected by 2020 (VDMA/PEM/RWTH,
2015). So it is possible the trend of declining prices may
accelerate. The Tesla Gigafactory in Nevada, USA, and a
major plant under consideration by Volkswagen, among
others, could result in cost declines that are faster than
predicted (Spiegel, 2016c).
Emerging battery technologies also have the potential
to reduce costs further and could in the coming decades
become an alternative to lithium-ion batteries, as there are many potential technologies under development
(IRENA, 2015d). Some offer the advantage of
increasing the energy density of the battery, which
in turn can allow high levels of electricity storage
and increase driving distances. Carmaker Nissan, for
example, recently said that using sodium within the
battery instead of carbon could increase density by
up to 150%. Most batteries currently have a density
of around 400 watt-hours per litre, with advances in
storage density to 700 watt-hours expected by 2020,
rising to 1 000 by 2025 (FT, 2016).
Making EVs affordable for the average buyer and
shifting from the luxury market to the mid-market
segment, while providing ranges of over 200 miles
(320 kilometers), will require significant cost reductions.
Tesla’s upcoming Model 3, with a retail price of USD
35 000 without subsidies, still includes an expected
battery cost of around USD 15 000 (FT, 2015a). The
distance the automobile can travel between charges is
based on the amount of battery storage available. So
to drive down vehicle cost, battery costs will need to
continue to decline (see Figure 28). But this is not the
only important driver for improved range. Range can be
extended by increased efficiency of electric drive and
reductions in vehicle weight. In this respect, efforts by
conventional automobile producers will be important,
such as the recent decision by Ford Motor Company to
double its share of electric vehicles by the end of 2020
with an investment of USD 4.5 billion. This will increase
the share of Ford’s electric cars to 40%. The main driver
behind this choice is growing urbanisation and GHG
emission reduction targets (FT, 2015b).
The cost of recharging must also be addressed. In the
Netherlands, the total number of charging stations had
increased to 13 300 by mid-2015. Based on different
business models, providers offer a range of prices for
charging EVs, from as low as EUR 0.30 per kWh (USD
0.33) by ANWB and as much as EUR 0.83 per kWh
(USD 0.92) by Fastned. Fastned says a charging station
costs up to EUR 200 000 and it can only achieve profits
if at least 15 cars per day use the station. Part of its
business model is an unlimited charging package for
EUR 121 per month (USD 133). At its gas stations, Total
offers a 10 minutes of charging for EUR 4 (USD 4.4),
which is equivalent to approximately EUR 0.50 per
kWh (USD 55 cents) (FT, 2015b). And some automobile
manufactures, such as Tesla, offer free charging for
owners at select charging stations.

Infrastructure needs
Electric mobility requires a dual policy focus, one to
accelerate uptake and another for infrastructure. The
benefits are significant efficiency gains, and lower
CO2 and air pollution emissions. However, the main
challenge of this shift to electric mobility is the need
for new infrastructure to reliably provide services to
the public. This requires investment and integration
into the existing network. The time needed to build
new infrastructure and the volume of investment needs
require consideration in planning for electric mobility.
For example, India will need around USD 3 billion in
investment between today and 2020 to meet its target
of 5-7 million electric vehicles by that time (NIUA,
2015). Infrastructure costs also differ based on transport
mode – railway infrastructure is about 10 times more
expensive than that of road vehicles.
Electric vehicles also come with additional costs for
infrastructure. According to a German White Paper
(BMWi, 2015), increasing electric mobility depends on
the development of charging infrastructure (Germany
still lags behind other European countries in this
respect). Whereas hybrid electric vehicles are charged by
regenerative braking, EVs require enabling infrastructure
(charging stations) that must be developed in parallel to
capacity growth. To some extent, this is a chicken-andegg
problem: car companies need charging stations so
that cars will sell, but power providers will make a loss
on such stations until a sufficient number of electric
cars are on the road. Policy makers can solve this
dilemma by providing incentives to spur these actors.
Additionally, power utilities may welcome EVs as a
source of new demand, so they may assist in expanding
infrastructure to enable more widespread and faster
charging. Finally, international standards are needed
for charging stations, so policy makers should work
with industry and other countries to prevent competing
Early infrastructure development is important to
increase early adopter acceptance and the effective
use of electric vehicles through the availability of home,
public, and workplace charging options (NREL, 2014).
Recharging infrastructure must be planned and tailored
to the individual circumstances of cities and surrounding
areas. Each city has different existing road infrastructure,
parking facilities and transport options (Crolius, 2010).
For example, less than half of the vehicles in the US have
reliable access to a dedicated off-street parking space at
an owned residence where charging infrastructure could
be installed. While approximately 79% of households
have off-street parking for at least some of their vehicles,
only an estimated 56% of vehicles have a dedicated
off-street parking space – and only 47% at an owned
residence. Approximately 22% of vehicles currently have
access to a dedicated home parking space within reach
of an outlet sufficient to recharge a small plug-in vehicle
battery pack overnight (Traut, 2013).
Access to faster charging will be a key driver of electric
vehicle use for longer range travel. Charging stations
will usually require infrastructure investment ranging
from several hundred to several thousand dollars,
depending on construction requirements (Traut, 2013).
Fast charging, also known as supercharging, can charge
a vehicle up to 80% in 15-30 minutes, and is also
a key driver for consumers (Important Media, 2015).
The largest current network is the Tesla supercharger network, which had 617 stations in the US, Europe and
China as of April 2016.
In addition to passenger cars, alternative electric vehicle
initiatives are also focused on heavy duty vehicles,
bus systems and fleet vehicles. Some companies are
discussing electric highways as a solution for some
modes, such as freight, where vehicles can draw on
electricity while on the road, usually through overhead
lines. In addition to charging equipment, such systems
require additional infrastructure (similar to railways) on
major highways, including in neighbouring countries, and
sometimes, for access to distribution centres of goods
that require transport. Other options for electrification
include battery switch or swapping stations, where, for
instance, electric buses can quickly replace a depleted
battery with a fully charged one (Zou, 2014). This raises
capacity utilisation for vehicles that don’t have to spend
time parked at a charging station.
Finally, electric mobility increases demand for electricity.
This requires investment in generation and power
infrastructure. REmap assumes the additional demand
for new electric vehicles will be mainly met by variable
renewable power capacity, amounting to 120 GW of
solar PV and 120 GW of wind. Depending on a country’s
power system, this could bring additional costs for
implementing flexibility measures and grid integration.
Synergies between transport and other
Energy supply can no longer be regarded as a set of
discrete, individual parts. Action taken in one sector has
an impact on another. Some consequences are positive,
while others require planning and effort in related
sectors. Countries will need to make better use of the
storage role of EVs to accommodate higher shares of
variable renewables.
Once EVs reach end of their lives, the choice is either
to recycle the battery (back into another EV, or broken
down into its component materials), or to find another
business opportunity, such as stationary energy storage.
These batteries will be ideally suited for stationary
storage applications in which lower energy density
is not much of a problem, but cost is. Some of these
second-life batteries would need to compete with
cheaper new batteries in the market. Policies should
aim to find a balance between the two.
Furthermore, implementing all REmap Options, including
various types of electric mobility, would reduce total
energy demand by about 5%, as electric mobility is twoto-
three times more efficient than internal combustion
engines. The essential role of electric mobility as a
contributor to improving the energy efficiency of the
economy should be part of future energy and climate
policy making.
At a national and state level, policy makers have started to
consider the role and extent to which electricity storage is
needed for a transition towards renewables. In a country
like Germany, this debate continues, while California has
already set targets to ensure that storage will be part
of the solution. The answers to these questions depend
on a number of factors. They include the characteristics
of present and future energy demand, present and
future grid infrastructure, renewables ambitions, and
autonomous developments in electricity storage in
industries such as home appliances and electronics.
Furthermore, clear trade-offs exist between the need for
electricity storage systems in the power sector and other
solutions for variable renewable energy integration.
They include transport electrification, electricity/heat
demand developments in residential and commercial
buildings, and the potential to convert electricity into
gas or hydrogen (see Figure 28). For instance, transport
electrification will result in growing electricity demand.
3.5 Suggestions to increase electric
To overcome the barriers related to the upfront cost
of electric vehicles, innovation and R&D is needed in
both technology and infrastructure. Additionally, to
create economies of scale, national governments need
to focus on supporting infrastructure and electric
vehicle deployment. The latter can be accelerated
by target-setting and offering incentives for electric
vehicles. This will help create planning certainty
for manufacturers to invest in these technologies.
Public-private partnerships and academic partnerships
will be key in the development of new technologies,
specifically battery storage, and in lowering costs. The
synergies that can be gained from systems thinking
need a better understanding and require integration
and streamlining of policy efforts across the power and
transport sectors.

Electric mobility in the urban context and
infrastructure needs: Since most passenger
transport takes place in urban settings, REmap
shows that up to 95% of all vehicles will be for
the passenger segment as opposed to freight.
Local governments and municipalities will play
an essential role. They will need to focus on
providing sufficient charging infrastructure,
taking city planning into account, and enabling
benefits for electric vehicle owners who drive,
park and charge vehicles in urban areas. To rapidly
increase the attractiveness of electric vehicles for
passenger and freight uses, governments should
focus on expanding infrastructure for charging,
particularly in public spaces, by incentivising
publicly accessible, shared stations in cities,
shopping centre parking lots, etc., but also in
suburban and rural areas.
There are a few areas where more specific action
can be taken. The main requirements for a
sustainable, reliable and affordable transition to
electric vehicles are batteries that can last long
enough to ensure transport over distances of
500 km, development of fast charging systems of
around 10 minutes, and smart charging systems
that create opportunities for consumers to
charge at different times of the day and reduce
peaks in demand. Recharging stations can be set
up with meters, and people can pay with their
cell phones, credit cards, etc. Central parking
garages offer an early opportunity for such
system implementation, as opposed to streets
where infrastructure can be under the threat
of vandalism. Such options can complement
overnight charging at home. Cities should also
enable car sharing among urban residents.
Governments should also consider electric buses
as a way of reducing pollution and noise in
populated regions where point-to-point charging
is possible.
As cities and regions move to support the
deployment of EVs, they will also need to continue
to take into account city planning that promotes
the public transit system. Cities will always have
a need for individual transit, but as they grow
in population and sprawl, it will be important
to get people out of cars and into public transit
networks. Long-term development and planning
strategies will need to be considered with larger
transit master plans.
Figure 28: Different system options available for storing electricity produced from variable renewables
Source: IRENA (2015c) (Renewables and electricity storage roadmap for REmap)
Working Paper 41
●● Synergies between transport and other
sectors: Modern energy systems and higher
shares of renewables will require an integrated
approach to energy systems. The coupling of
supply and demand with power and transport
energy needs is prominent and enabling this will
become increasingly important. The solutions
will require cooperation between governments,
industry and research to develop technologies
and market frameworks that can enable high
levels of integration.
How the power sector couples with the transport
sector will be important. As variable renewables
increase, technological solutions that include
the electrification of transport will expand.
Electricity storage provided by a growing fleet
of electric vehicles offers an attractive solution,
and supporting market and pricing frameworks
that regulate charging and vehicle-to-grid supply
will be key. Increasingly, cities will be at the
centre of the discussion. And integrated urban
systems that combine electric buses and trams
will emerge. System compatibility and charging
infrastructure will need to be developed.
There are, however, uncertainties around the
implications of transport on the power sector.
It is not entirely clear how the storage capacity
offered by electric vehicles can be utilised
to accommodate higher shares of variable
renewables. This will depend on the time of the
day and location where cars will be charged,
which is a challenge to predict. Likewise, storage
capacity from two- to three-wheelers can be
significant, but again, driving and charging
behaviours will determine their actual role.
While the potential of second-life battery
storage is significant, the extent to which
this can be used is not clear. This is an area
that has yet to be tested, and the quality of
second-hand batteries could be significantly
worse than expected. From a renewable
energy perspective, policy makers need to
have a close look at these areas of new policy
Relevant IRENA work in this field:
Renewables and Electricity Storage – A technology roadmap for REmap
The Age of Renewable Power: Designing national roadmaps for a successful transformation
Synergies between renewable energy and energy efficiency
Technology Brief: Electric vehicles (forthcoming)
REmap – Renewable Energy Prospects for Germany

Policy suggestions for each action area to increase electric mobility:
1. Accelerate electric vehicle uptake by incentivising car sales. A cities and urban-area approach
should promote car-sharing schemes and electric two- and three-wheelers, and support for nonpassenger
modes such as fleet vehicles, buses and light-duty trucks.
2. Accelerate investment in charging infrastructure
and plan for infrastructure needs by taking into
account the specific needs of cities and long distance transport.
3. Capture the synergies between transport and the power sector by meeting the new electricity
demand from transport with renewables and by using electric mobility as a key flexibility measure
to accommodate more wind and solar PV.

2) Advanced liquid biofuels: Advanced biofuels
will be key if the share of renewables in transport

is to increase. Additionally, they have potential to
be used in modes such as freight, shipping and
aviation, and in drop-in applications with existing
infrastructure. However, production volumes and
costs remain a challenge, and investments are
needed to drive down costs.
3) Emerging sectors and technologies:
Technologies such as biomethane, hydrogen
fuel cells, and sail power for shipping all have
tremendous potential. The key drivers for these
technologies may not be cost, but important
local environmental and security benefits.

Innovative applications and
Aviation, shipping and military sectors today
and perspective to 2030
Today, the shipping and aviation sectors each contribute
10% to the total energy demand of the transport sector.
The aviation sector alone represents 2-3% of total
global CO2 emissions worldwide. These two segments
are characterised by long-distance transportation.
Moreover, fuel costs represent a large share of their
total costs. For example, approximately one-third of
the aviation sector’s total operational costs are related
to fuel.
The energy demand of these segments will grow 3-5%
per year over the coming decades with increasing
population and growing economic activity. For example,
India’s aviation sector is expected to be the third largest
worldwide by 2020 and the largest by 2030. The shipping
industry is the backbone of global trade and a lifeline for
island communities, transporting approximately 90% of
the tonnage of all traded goods. Annual global shipping
tonnage increased from 2.6 billion to 9.5 billion tonnes
between 1970 and 2013 (UNCTAD, 2014). The demand
for shipping is predicted to grow significantly, owing to the changing configuration of global production and
the increasing importance of global supply chains and
international trade.
Both of these segments have so far received limited
attention from renewables. Even with the 2015 Paris
Agreement, which has a much wider sector coverage, the
transport sector, and in particular aviation and shipping
emissions are still overlooked. Following the COP21, the
Nordic ministers for climate and the environment issued
a statement calling for an increased focus on emissions
from the transport sector, and especially for aviation
and shipping applications.
The military sector is also overlooked. It relies on energyintensive
equipment, for which efficiency has far lower
priority than other functions. The US military, the largest
in the world, accounts for about 2% of total US energy
demand and about 5% of the US transport sector’s
total energy demand. Air forces account for about half
of this, while navies and armies make up 28% and 18%,
respectively. Oil is the main source of energy for military
applications, and the military and its combat security
depend on secure energy supplies. The US Navy has
perhaps the world’s most aggressive programme of any
military to increase the use of biofuels in its operation.
The programme is known as the “Great Green Fleet” and
it seeks to decrease petroleum use by 50%, and source
at least 50% of energy used from non-fossil sources by
Biofuels represent the main alternative in aviation,
shipping and military applications. So far, 23 airlines
have conducted 2 500 commercial flights using biofuels.
Today less than 0.05% of the total jet fuel demand is met
with biofuels (IATA, 2015b). As of early 2016 targets for
biokerosene (or biojet, as it is often called) production
are more aspirational than legislative, with the US FAA
suggesting that 3.8 billion litres of biojet could be
produced by 2018, and the US Air Force hoping to have
50% of its fuel replaced by alternative fuels by 2016
(another 3.8 billion litres) (FAA, 2014). Similarly, the
EU has suggested a target of 2 million tonnes of biojet

Relevant IRENA work in this field:
Renewable energy options for shipping – Technology brief
Biomethane for transportation – Technology brief (forthcoming)
Aviation biofuels – Technology brief (forthcoming)
REmap – Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Future

Explore emerging technology solutions and innovation for emerging transport modes such as aviation,
shipping and military applications
9. Tap the potential of niche markets in the more difficult sectors of shipping and aviation, such as electric
ferries, hybrid drives for short sea shipping, and drop-in biofuels in aviation.
10. Recognise emerging and potential breakthrough technologies for which mass production would
reduce costs and boost market prospects, and provide related manufacturing support and R&D

The IRENA’s Work Programme for 2016-2017 has
identified a number of tasks to close the knowledge
gap on how to increase renewables in transport. IRENA
and the REmap Transport Action Team will focus efforts
on the following initiatives.
●● For the REmap programme, deepen the analysis
of technology and policy options in end-use
sectors by expanding the multi-stakeholder
action teams on renewables and transport,
paying particular attention to the external
benefits of renewables in transport;
●● Develop the REmap Transport Action Team
to further enable it to better share data, bestpractice
and information. The team should
develop an action agenda focused on advancing
renewable energy and the overall sustainability
of the transport sector.
●● Focus on energy solutions for cities, helping
empower cities to deploy renewable energy by
taking a city systems approach that combines
end-use analysis with technology-specific
●● As part of IRENA’s work on renewable energy
benefits, aim to standardise information from
IRENA Members and develop a set of country
policy briefs and synthesis reports for regions,
highlighting the status and trends of renewable
energy policy in electricity, heating and cooling,
and transport;
●● Conduct a regional market analysis for Southeast
Asia to cover important themes intrinsic to the
region’s energy landscape, involving electricity,
heating/cooling and transport sectors;
●● Develop an updated costing report on biofuels
for transport;
●● Develop a REmap information system to make
transport sector data from REmap countries
more accessible online;
●● Continue to work on technology briefs and
technology outlooks for end-use sectors,
including transport.
More information about IRENA’s transport-related work
can be found online at To find out more
about the REmap Transport Action Team please visit or email

Demand for energy in the transport sector is growing rapidly. According to business as usual of the
government plans (known in this paper as the Reference Case), energy use in transport will grow from
106 exajoules (EJ) in 2013 to 128 EJ globally by 2030 – an annual growth rate of about 1%. While the
transport sector today accounts for around a quarter of all energy-related global carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions, the results show that emissions growth in the transport sector is the highest of all sectors,
and is expected to increase by over one-third by 2030.
●● In addition to climate change, the need to reduce air pollution in cities will remain a major driver for
renewables in the sector. Cities and their surroundings consume approximately 75% of global primary
energy supply. Transport’s share of all energy used is 30% globally, but it differs in countries and regions
depending on factors such as population density, income level, and weather. In many middle-income
and fast-growing cities the transport sector makes up 50% or more of the energy demand for the city,
with road transport the largest component. Therefore, the largest contributor to local air pollution in
many cities is the transport sector.
●● Energy security is another driver of the shift to renewables in the sector, as oil products make up a
significant share of transport’s total energy demand, and many countries rely on imports of crude oil
or oil products.
●● The road and rail segment will account for 70% of the transport sector’s total final energy consumption
(TFEC) by 2030. The remainder is fossil fuels used largely in shipping and aviation. Liquid biofuel
use will more than double in the Reference Case and the share of electricity in the sector’s TFEC will
increase from 1.2% to 2.4%. Therefore, in the Reference Case, the share of renewables in the sector will
increase from 3% in 2010 to 5% by 2030, but it will remain overwhelmingly fossil-fuel based.
●● REmap explores the potential of accelerating renewable energy uptake in all energy sectors, including
transport, and shows that the sector could increase its share in 2030 from 5% in the Reference Case to
as much as 11% with the REmap Options and 15% with the Doubling Options.
●● The renewable energy share in the sector in REmap would differ by transport mode. It would make
up just 1% of the aviation sector, while comprising 3% of railway and road freight. Passenger transport
would have 18% –
the largest share of all transport modes.
●● The growth of liquid biofuel use in the Reference Case is significant, according to government plans.
The Reference Case anticipates a rise in biofuel use of 2.5 times today’s level of 129 billion litres,
reaching 320 billion litres by 2030. In REmap, this would increase by even more, to around 500 billion
litres, but the majority of this additional gain would come from advanced liquid biofuels. Total growth
in both cases is ambitious, given recent market trends and oil price developments, but it is technically

Total electricity demand would reach approximately 860 terawatt-hours (TWh) in the sector by 2030
in the Reference Case, just short of tripling today’s level. The sector could significantly increase its share
of electricity use to about 4.3% of total demand, or around 1 500 TWh in REmap – almost a doubling
over the Reference Case. This would require electrifying various transport modes.
●● However, describing the share of renewables used by electric vehicles (EVs) in terms of passenger
kilometres would boost the share of service EVs provide to as high as 14% of total passenger road
activity in REmap. For electric two- to three-wheelers, which will number 900 million worldwide by
2030, the share would be much higher. The share of renewables represented by activity is higher than
the share described in energy terms because electric automobiles are much more efficient than those
using internal combustion engines. Therefore, they require less energy to run.
●● In REmap, the total number of EVs would reach 160 million, around 10% of the passenger car fleet,
amounting to average annual sales of 10 million vehicles to 2030.
●● Total investment needed to realise the renewable energy potential for transport in REmap on average
USD 339 billion per year between today and 2030. This would be an additional total annual investment
in renewable energy technology and related infrastructure of USD 212 billion per year compared to the
Reference Case. The incremental investment required for the REmap Options would be lower, at only
USD 40 billion per year, meaning a significant portion of investment would be redirected from fossil
fuel technologies to renewables.
●● Investment in technology in REmap would include USD 23 billion per year in biofuel plant production
capacity. Of this, USD 10 billion per year would be for advanced biofuels. Between 2010 and 2015, the
average annual investment for all types of liquid biofuels was USD 4.5 billion, so a fivefold increase
would be needed.
●● Based on the analysis of the REmap countries, the weighted average substitution cost of the REmap
Options for the transport sector is estimated at USD 7.4 per gigajoule (GJ) of final renewable energy
consumed. At a system level, these incremental costs would be equivalent to USD 63 billion per year in
2030 – a negligible fraction of the total transport sector expenditures on energy.
●● Fuel combustion emissions from transport result in significant external costs in terms of their impact
on human health and agricultural crops. Worldwide, the external costs of air pollution related to the
use of fuels in the transport sector were in the range of USD 460 billion-2 400 billion per year in 2010,
and this is expected to increase by 40% by 2030 to as high as USD 3 300 billion annually.
●● The REmap Options would reduce external costs by between USD 40 billion-210 billion per year, when
taking into account lower costs related to the reduced health impact from air pollution. Much of these
costs come from urban areas, where the cost of damage from air pollution is at least four times higher
than in rural areas.
●● Air pollution is not the only source of external costs from fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
also result in costs. In 2010, the transport sector’s energy-related CO2 emissions were around 7
gigatonnes (Gt). According to the Reference Case, these emissions could increase to 9.5 Gt by 2030 –
rising by one-third. Implementing renewable energy technologies identified in this study would reduce
these emissions by 1.1-1.6 Gt, or by 12%-17%, to 7.9-8.4 Gt per year in 2030. These savings would imply
a reduction in CO2 emissions-related external costs of USD 17-130 billion per year in 2030, depending
on the assumption of the social cost of carbon.
Working Paper 3
This paper identifies three areas that require action in order to realize the REmap findings and provides ten
suggestions for policy makers and other relevant stakeholders.
The three action areas are:
Increase electric mobility in combination with renewable electricity generation and apply a
system strategies approach that interlinks energy sectors.
Develop sustainable and affordable advanced biofuel pathways for all transport modes including
non-car modes such as freight, aviation and shipping.
Explore emerging technology solutions and innovation for emerging transport modes such as
aviation, shipping and military applications.
The ten policy recommendations to address the most prominent emerging issues in these areas are:
Accelerate EV uptake by incentivising EV sales. A city and urban-area approach should promote
car-sharing schemes and electric two- to three-wheelers, and support non-passenger modes
such as fleet vehicles, buses and light-duty trucks.
Accelerate investment in charging infrastructure and plan for infrastructure by taking into
account the specific needs of cities and long-distance transport.
Capture the synergies between transport and the power sector by using renewables to meet the
new electricity demand from transport and by using electric mobility as a key flexibility measure
to ease electricity system integration of wind and solar photovoltaic (PV).
Ensure the availability and supply of affordable and sustainable feedstocks for biofuels by
improving agricultural yields, increasing the use of degraded and marginal land, using feedstocks
that do not compete with food production, and reducing losses in the food supply chain.
Develop biofuel targets by considering life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) performance to support
advanced production pathways, to prioritise the use and development of low-carbon bioenergy
pathways, and to reduce non-sustainable bioenergy use.
Implement regulations and provide support to level the playing field of advanced liquid biofuels
and non-renewable energy sources, by considering their GHG-emission benefits.
Establish or expand registers of origin to ensure sustainable feedstocks and promote the
development of cross-border bioenergy trade.
Streamline bioenergy policy making by better integrating energy, infrastructure, agriculture,
resource, forestry, environment, food and innovation policies.
Tap the potential of niche markets in the more difficult sectors of shipping and aviation, such as
electric ferries, hybrid drives for short sea shipping, and drop-in biofuels in aviation.
Recognise emerging and potential breakthrough technologies for which mass production would
reduce costs and boost market prospects, and provide related manufacturing support and R&D


These more abstract concepts of
place and place attachment (Beilin and Reid, 2015; Kruger and Beilin, 2014; Reid and Beilin,
2014) are based on an individual and community’s intimate connection to and relationship with a
landscape. Kruger and Beilin (2014) identify an emergent theme of “responsibility for place” and
the emotional power that attachment to place can create, particularly in a natural disaster event
such as bushfire. Beilin and Reid (2015) examine the social construction of landscape and
bushfire as a comparison to the asset-based management of fire agencies, arguing that a
landscape cannot be simply catalogued into a list of things to protect. Local community
understanding of bushfire and landscape is dependent on relationships with the landscape,
between people, and social memory (Reid and Beilin, 2014). Schroeder (2013) links place
attachment to felt value; the subtle, implicit-level felt value can help identify what is important to
an individual based on a relationship to an environment or place. These studies provide justification for the relationships that people have with their home landscapes and what
comprises these landscapes.
The scholarship bodies identified above have different conceptualizations of what is important to
people, leading to an often disparate understanding of what is important to protect through
disaster policy and planning. Some concepts are very abstract, such as deeply held beliefs and
sense of place (Reid and Beilin, 2014; Schwartz 2012), while others could be considered being
mid-level abstraction, such as characteristics of a landscape (Brown and Reed, 2000; Graham et
al., 2013; Kendal et al., 2015) or ecosystem services (Seymour et al., 2010), and some mappable
things such as homes, which were included in lived values (Graham et al., 2013). However, none
included a concept for concrete things that were important to people and potentially affected by a

The conceptualization of assets as including not only built assets, such
as buildings and infrastructure, is useful in the identification of what things in a landscape
promote quality of life. These assets are defined at the community scale, rather than the
individual scale (Freitag et al., 2014). These conceptualizations of entities and assets that include
personal relationships are useful for understanding what is important to people that can be
affected by natural disaster and are very tangible.
Building on all of the research outlined above, we developed a conceptual framework for how to
identify and link values at different levels of abstraction, from very abstract to concrete conceptual framework is based on an adapted cognitive hierarchy of values (Vaske and
Donnelly, 1999; Whittaker et al., 2006) from abstract to concrete (Figure 1).

Valued entities differ
from assets, as they are discussed in NRM, in that they incorporate a subjective relationship with
the object, and thus can be expressed as “my house”, “my children” etc. The valued entity
construct assumes that individuals find value in something because of their subjective experience
and relationship to it (Chan et al., 2016; Schroeder, 2013). This construct is salient to the current
focus of much policy and planning for disasters (Freitag et al., 2014).
At the mid-level of abstraction, we use the term “valued attribute” to describe a general
characteristic of a landscape. Our conceptualization of valued attributes is based on the Valued
Attributes of Landscape Scale (VALS) (Kendal et al., 2015). As discussed earlier, the concept of
valued attribute has so far largely been considered in relation to the natural environment. Valued
attributes of landscape categories have included, for example, natural attributes, such as “large
old trees” and “having many kinds of plants and animals”, and experiential attributes, such as a
“sense of peace, tranquility and awe” and “rest and recovery from the stresses of everyday life”
(Kendal et al., 2015, p. 230). To complete the breadth for the mid-level abstract values in the
social dimensions of landscape, we consider the concepts of lived values (Graham et al., 2013)
and cultural values (Stephenson, 2010), both discussed in section 1.1.
We draw on core values as the most abstract conceptualization of values. Core values encompass
four main, holistic categories (Schwartz, 2012), described in Table 3. The first category is selftranscendence
with the values benevolence and universalism. To a person with benevolence as a
core value, family and close friends and that which the person is responsible for are of key
importance. To a person with universalism as a core value, everything (human and non-human)
has intrinsic value. These two individuals would subsequently have very different perceptions of
a situation, and the same is true for all of the following core values. The second category is selfenhancement,
which is subdivided into the values achievement, hedonism, and power. The third
category is openness to change with the values self-direction, stimulation. The final category is
conservation, which is divided into the values conformity, security, and tradition.

Interview participants emphasized how important their day-to-day rhythm was in order to
prevent depression and anxiety. Simple things such as being able to go to the grocery store and
visit friends were highly valued. We labeled this valued attribute “sense of normality” (Table 2)
because it was how participants described this attribute that was important to them. For example,
one participant stated: “You want to promote normality as soon as you can… to have that sense
of normality does bring things back a lot quicker and it can avoid lingering trauma.”
Through the analysis, we identified that there were two distinct valued attribute concepts. A new
concept of “function” valued attributes (Table 2) emerged in our findings, which differed from
the pre-existing VALS categories (Ford et al., submitted; Kendal et al., 2015) and is brought to
light in the natural disaster context. Values identified in the new concept involved the ability for
people to access, connect to, and utilize the aspects of the landscape that they would normally
use during a non-disaster period. These processes included: being able to access and use general
infrastructure in the landscape, such as highways and roads, power, water, and
telecommunications; the communities and social networks that people participated in, such as
community activities and schools; government support, such as financial support services; and
sense of normality, such as the aspects of everyday life that enable people to recover from acute
trauma associated with surviving a natural disaster. This concept of values is similar to the
functions of the biophysical and social setting that have value to humans described in Slootweg
et al. (2001). The values of these functions provided by the setting may not be fully recognized
until they are disturbed. This concept in part echoes the interpretation of values by Graham et al.
(2013) that they are a verb (lived values), which include, for example, social interactions, social
harmony, place attachment, access to decision-making, and identity. However, the function
valued attributes are somewhat different in that; these are what people value about what the
landscape provides for them to be able to do. These valued attributes could resemble the concept
of affordances in environmental psychology (Stoffregen 2003; Turvey 1992), which is that the environment provides certain survival or experiential opportunities, however, the function valued
attributes focus on what individuals can do in their landscape, such as daily actions or social
connection. For example, the landscape provides a sense of normality, is something that they
value because it promotes an emotional and mental state of wellbeing. When people cannot enact
their day-to-day lives as usual after an event, this disrupts the sense of normality created by the
social and environmental features of the landscape, which can be very distressing for people.
Thus, loss of people or objects directly and primarily affected by fire (both entities and general
things in the landscape), leads to a secondary loss experienced of these Function valued
attributes. This is similar to a distinction between indirect social impacts felt by humans and the
direct biophysical or social change processes that may have caused them (Slootweg et al., 2001;
Vanclay, 2002), except that participants in these studies also identified direct impacts for human
life and welfare. The valuing of these Function attributes suggests that people live in and value a
landscape not just for the aesthetic or natural features provided, but also the ability to engage
with it routinely, which could also be particularly important for social recovery after a disaster

3.3 Core values
Core values were similar in both studies. Core values were not prevalent in the Study 1
submission data and the only core values identified in Study 1, were the most commonly
described ones in Study 2: benevolence and universalism (Table 3). One submission describing
universalism stated that its primary concern was with
“expressing and enacting through government our humanity, responsibility and
compassion for the whole of life – our selves as human life as part of and within the
whole of life” (Submission, Study 1).
Other submissions indicated the valuing of the environment first and foremost (biospheric
universalism), human life as primary importance (human altruistic univeralism), and one’s
immediate family, loved ones, and property (benevolence). The core values most commonly
described in interviews (Study 2) were: benevolence, universalism (holistic and biospheric),
hedonism, and security (Table 3). Quotations from participants expressing core values are
included in Table 3. The most prevalent core values among participants were benevolence,
biospheric universalism, and holistic universalism. Participants describing benevolence spoke of
the vital importance of their family and close friends. Participants with a biospheric universalism
core value spoke of how the environment needs to be respected and protected. Participants with a
holistic universalism core value spoke of how their lives were connected to society more broadly
and the environment. Participants with a security core value needed people, places, and things
that make them feel safe in their lives. Additionally, bushfire and planned burning could affect
the conservation value hedonism, where participants found happiness in being in places and
looking at things that evoked memories.
Schwartz’ (2012) core value structure appears to encompass what is important that can be
affected by a natural disaster event. In previous cases of natural resource management and
environmental psychology (Kendal et al., 2015), these core values have been used to examine
more stable contexts, as opposed to risk of natural disaster events. Further research is needed to

abstract core values might relate to the valued attributes and entities
affected by a natural disaster event.
4. Discussion
4.1 Contributions to theory
Our conceptual framework can provide an additional vocabulary in understanding individuals’
connection to what is important to them in their lives and landscapes at different scales. The
findings from this study further suggest that values have a relational component (Chan et al.,
2016, Schroeder, 2013), as expressed through valued entities and some valued attributes. Our
findings echo the argument that individuals are nested within their landscape (Reid and Beilin,
2014); valued entities are nested within general valued attributes of a broader landscape. While
sociological and geographical studies have extended our understanding of values, the
psychological theoretical framing has provided a strong conceptual basis.
Relationship to landscape is complex and our conceptual framework provides an organizational
framework for precisely identifying what is important that can be affected by natural disaster and
the scale of abstraction in which these important things exist. This complexity is highlighted in
how level of abstraction appears to shape what people value. For example, when considering
more concrete values, most participants were concerned with their immediate family members
and friends, home, pets, and special possessions and heirlooms. The focal point was a concern
for “me and mine” being immediately affected or destroyed in a natural disaster event. However,
when considering mid-level abstract values, many participants focused on natural attributes
(Ford et al., submitted; Kendal et al., 2015) as aspects of the landscape that influence why
individuals choose to live in bushfire risk landscapes. These natural attributes included general
aspects of the natural environment such as biological diversity, habitat, and flora and fauna. The
framework can provide clarity for deciphering the complexity of connection to place. Further
analysis is needed to develop the links between the concrete, mid-level, and abstract values
identified in our research. For example, do peoples’ core values shape the entities that they value
and vice versa? How do the valued entities and attributes in the conceptual framework change
with or relate to geographic scale?
Our findings suggest that time since bushfire event might influence the values that individuals
prioritize. The valued entities and attributes identified immediately after bushfire in Study 1
focused on human life and what in the landscape protects human life, such as infrastructure
services as well as the negative experience of the landscape after bushfire. Earlier, environmentfocused
research has discussed “experience of the landscape” as being a positive, therapeutic
experience in nature (Ford et al., submitted; Kendal et al., 2015) however our findings
highlighted the experience of the landscape can also be one of stress, anxiety, and loss. In Study
2, while valued entities focused similarly to Study 1 on people and things in individuals’ day-today
life such as their home and family, the valued attributes focused on the characteristics of the
broader social-ecological landscape that made people want to live where they did for the lifestyle
it provided. While Stephenson (2010) argues that cultural values change over time, a question
that arises from this study is how might values in the conceptual framework change through time
or in relation to time since a natural disaster?
Our main addition to theory is that valued entities are physical things in the landscape that
provide certain important functions to individuals, such as a space for their family to live or a
place to connect with one’s community. These findings align with Freitag et al. (2014), who
suggest that assets are not just identified things on maps, but instead relate to what the assets
provide for a community. Valued entities contribute to the quality of life and wellbeing of a
community. In our research, valued entities contribute to the quality of life of individuals and
their emotional wellbeing. Further, there were some valued entities that were commonly
identified (Table 1). Some Function attributes, such as sense of normality, appeared to be
dependent on other attributes and entities that were immediately destroyed by fire.
4.2 Contributions to practice
Contrary to much scholarly discussion, our findings suggest that valued entities (assets) can be
an important first step in understanding what is important to people for strategic planning. While
Beilin and Reid (2015) suggest that assets are an inappropriate way of understanding how people
interact with their local landscape and instead governance should consider place, our findings
suggest that strategic planning needs to consider an entire breadth of nested values, which
include concrete to abstract values. The concrete valued entities comprised mostly the
particularly precious and irreplaceable things in peoples’ lives, which were also in close
proximity to where people lived, and were often mobile (people, pets, and heirlooms).
Characteristics of valued entities that might be important to consider for planning include their
very local, individual scale, the mobility of some entities, and the fact that the importance of
some entities, such as infrastructure, may only become evident after a disaster.
A breadth of different governance strategies might be needed to address each scale of values and
greater attention given to understanding how the different values relate and connect. Valued
attributes were also very important to individuals, and often were described as why and how
people live in the area. Broader, landscape-scale planning would be needed to protect valued
attributes such as natural attributes (Table 2). Agencies need to understand that assets (valued
entities) are important to protect not only for the immediate physical asset, but also for the
valued attributes each provides (Freitag et al., 2014). The process of considering core values in
planning relates to the balancing of priorities such as, protection of human life and property and
maintaining the resilience of ecosystems.
5. Conclusions: Future questions and research
The conceptual framework presented in this paper acts as a boundary object for conceptualizing,
identifying, and organizing what it is that people value. This work is not intended to replace
other value concepts, but to introduce the new concept of valued entities and to act as a bridge
between the breadth of concepts. To date, no research had examined the full range of values that
could be affected by natural disaster management and planning, and in particular bushfire. As
good governance practices endeavor to reflect the needs and wishes of the public, this research
provides a step towards effectively, transparently, and accountably making decisions that reflect
the broad heterogeneity of values.