arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2609.19034

Power Up Consumption: Impact of Electric Vehicle Infrastructure on Household Finance

Abstract

To achieve carbon neutrality, electrifying vehicles in a cleaner electricity grid has become a key pathway for global cities. While extensive research has examined the environmental benefits of electric vehicles (EVs), their financial impacts remain underexplored. Using Singapore-a smart city-state - as a social laboratory, we combine high-resolution data on the geographic distribution of EV chargers with nearly 1 million individual-level monthly expenditure records from a major commercial bank and about 65,000 housing transaction records, spanning January 2019 to March 2021. Our results show that proximity to charging stations during the initial phase of EV infrastructure rollout significantly increases household consumption by 1-3%. This effect is driven primarily by public housing residents, who are generally more financially constrained than their private housing counterparts. We identify three channels underlying this increase in consumption: appreciation in housing wealth, catalysts for commercial activity and discretionary spending around EV infrastructure, and budget reallocation from fuel expenses to other consumption categories. Notably, hybrid car owners exhibit the strongest trade-offs-reducing fuel spending while increasing expenditure on entertainment or necessity goods among public housing residents. Overall, our findings demonstrate that green infrastructure can shape economic behavior and enhance consumer welfare, extending its impact beyond environmental objectives.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sumit Agarwal, Yi Fan, Qiuxia Gao. 2026-08-27. Power Up Consumption: Impact of Electric Vehicle Infrastructure on Household Finance. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.19034

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN