# A Literature Review on the Charging Behaviour of Private Electric Vehicles
## 4 Discussion  
Transport contributes largely to noxious emissions, both greenhouse gases and local pollutants. The electrification of vehicles is leading to a significant reduction in these impacts. A reliable and available charging infrastructure is essential to facilitate the diffusion of electric vehicles. Consumers are becoming more environmentally conscious and are seeking sustainable transportation options. To ensure a smooth transition, it is important to understand the commuting and travel needs of users and how well these needs can be met by electric vehicles. To this end, many studies have been dedicated to analyzing the recharging of EVs, for public, commercial, or private vehicles. Examining what influences private charging behavior is possible through user surveys and the analysis of mobility and charge data. Due to the vastness of this topic and the difficulty of isolating the impacts of various variables on behavior, it is challenging to provide definitive results. Several factors influence charging decisions, including gender, risk aversion, type of travel, availability of charging stations, travel distance, and SOC perception. Destination, parking duration, charging time, price, subsequent travel distance, and travel chain type all impact EV charging [11; 26; 60; 97]. The study of private users' charging behavior is far from being exhaustive, which can be ascribed to various reasons, among which are the following:  
1. At present, most studies investigating charging habits include only few social and demographic groups, excluding many potential users who may have different charging needs and attitudes. Further exploration is needed on the issue of different charging preferences based on gender [71; 144]. Despite charging infrastructure manufacturers' efforts to make their systems compliant with the needs of disabled individuals, there has been no research (that the current authors are aware of) conducted on the charging needs and preferences of impaired people. This is a critical gap that needs to be addressed. Additionally, academic research often overlooks EV users in rural areas [145], whose charging habits may have a greater impact on the grid than their urban counterparts [146]. 2. Charging behaviors also depend on social and cultural frameworks and the topographical structure of the urban environment. According to research, personal safety, socio-demographic characteristics, and environment are relevant factors influencing the selection of charging infrastructure and the willingness to pay and walk [13; 53; 67; 71]. The topology of urban areas can influence charging preferences. In urban areas with limited access to home charging, parking availability can positively impact infrastructure choice despite charging costs [54; 62; 69; 70; 73; 98]. Therefore, it is critical to understand these factors and create effective strategies tailored to the specific needs of each community. As for the evaluation of the energy and power demand for EVs in future scenarios, the following aspects should be considered in the investigation:
3. Inferences regarding EVs obtained from ICE behavior should be treated carefully, as there may be a lack of understanding and familiarity with electric mobility. Conclusions should be carefully weighed against knowledge of EV owners' behavior. Charge behaviors also depend on the available infrastructure. Changes in the deployment, number, and technologies available for EVSE could significantly change charging behavior. An example is wireless charging, a technology that can simplify charge operations [147,148]. These topics can be further explored with the new and more comprehensive data available and via combining different information sources, such as mobile apps for charging management and reservation. A promising line of study concerns employing users' reviews to obtain information on charging preferences and user needs, as well as to determine the optimal design of charging infrastructures and services [54,61].