Comprehensive Analysis of Stakeholder Dynamics for Strategic Electric Bus Adoption in Public Transit Networks

Abstract

Cities are increasingly using electric buses as a viable alternative to diesel buses. This is a crucial undertaking to achieve sustainability in the transport sector. However, integrating them in transport systems in developing countries such as Sri Lanka, which is characterized by environmental and economic challenges, is complex. This work examines the factors that influence the shift from diesel to electric buses with particular attention to the stakeholders, their motivations, and how they seek to achieve their objectives regarding each other, both conflicting and cooperative angles. This study adopts a comprehensive stakeholder-centric methodology to analyze electric bus adoption in the public transit system in Sri Lanka. The research employs a mixed-methods approach that combines qualitative stakeholder analysis with quantitative barrier prioritization, following established project management principles. Based on the case study of Sri Lanka, the research investigates how the electric bus transition can be expedited by leveraging such alliances while considering local challenges like infrastructural deficits, policy gaps, and funding limitations. Lessons learned and best practices from international case studies are considered to provide strategic recommendations to policymakers and other stakeholders to promote the electric bus. By mapping out the interactions between various stakeholders and outlining where key leverage exists, the research provides a roadmap for introducing electric buses. This will be aligned with the sustainability targets and the vision to deliver sustainability goals for the long term.

1. Introduction

The global drive towards sustainable transportation transforms public transit systems, with electric buses, with the aim of fulfilling a pivotal role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving urban air quality. As cities around the world seek to phase out conventional diesel buses, the transition to electric buses has become a priority for reducing dependence on fossil fuels and creating cleaner, more efficient urban mobility networks. In response to global concerns about greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, Sri Lanka has initiated efforts to reduce its carbon footprint.

The Ministry of Environment and the Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority have been actively promoting the adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles as a key strategy to curb emissions and promote energy efficiency [1]. This shift, however, is highly complex and requires the coordinated involvement of various stakeholders, including government agencies, public transport operators, private sector investors, environmental organizations, and local communities. Each stakeholder group brings unique perspectives, interests, and priorities to the adoption process, making effective stakeholder management essential to success.

Sustainable development is defined as development that meets current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own [2]. In line with this principle, Sri Lanka joined 192 other United Nations member states in 2015 in committing to the 2030 Agenda and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). As part of this commitment, Sri Lanka has prioritized the electrification of public transit to promote energy efficiency, reduce emissions, and support sustainable urban development [2].

An e-bus is a public transport vehicle powered by electricity, utilizing electric motors and batteries to produce zero tailpipe emissions. As part of the electrification of public transportation, e-buses help reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Governments worldwide offer financial incentives, subsidies, and tax credits to promote the adoption and development of charging infrastructure to drive market growth.

Transitions such as switching to electric buses will naturally face challenges that lie in navigating these obstacles effectively to implement solutions to elevate human experiences in public transit. Successfully bringing about change in the transportation sector requires understanding the perspectives of all stakeholders involved, addressing potential barriers, and fostering collaboration to create systems that not only benefit the environment but also improve the quality of urban mobility. The following subsections give a clear idea of the need and the way forward for the study by identifying the research gaps, the research aim, and the objectives.

1.1. Research Gaps

The study identifies several critical research and implementation gaps concerning electric bus adoption in Sri Lanka, which have historically impeded progress:

• Absence of an In-Depth National Study: There has been a lack of an in-depth study focused on the unique requirements and challenges of introducing electric buses in Sri Lanka. As the existing electric bus (e-bus) ecosystem requires a tailored framework specific to the national context, this gap needs to be addressed in research.
• Knowledge Deficit Among Decision-Makers: A significant lack of knowledge about electric mobility among decision-makers is noted, which significantly slows down progress in developing effective policies, infrastructure, and financial models for e-bus integration. This gap hinders informed decision-making regarding technical aspects, such as charging station needs, grid capacity, and battery management.
• Lack of Comprehensive and Reliable Data: The absence of transparent, validated, and reliable data on e-Bus Operation and Maintenance hinders effective decision-making processes for adoption and implementation.
• Need for Context-Specific Insights: There is an explicit demand for context-specific, localized insights rather than relying on generalized or universal assessments for e-bus adoption, emphasizing that solutions from one scenario may not be suitable for another.

1.2. Research Aim

This research aims to investigate the factors that influence the shift from diesel to e-buses, particularly focusing on the stakeholders, their motivations, and how they seek to achieve their objectives regarding each other, covering conflicting and cooperative angles. Furthermore, the study aims to explore and evaluate how this transition can be expedited by leveraging stakeholder alliances, while considering local challenges such as infrastructural deficits, policy gaps, and funding limitations. This ultimately seeks to provide a roadmap for introducing e-buses that align with sustainable mobility visions for the long term.

1.3. Research Objectives

To achieve its aim, the key objectives are set in line with the research study:

• To adopt a comprehensive stakeholder-centric methodology that employs a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative stakeholder analysis with quantitative barrier prioritization, to systematically analyze e-bus adoption in Sri Lanka’s public transit system.
• To systematically identify and map key actors across various sectors (e.g., government agencies, private sector entities, international organizations) and carefully categorize these stakeholders based on the methodological approach designed for the study.
• To collect qualitative data through in-depth semi-structured interviews with identified stakeholders, including transport authorities, energy providers, and environmental organizations, exploring critical themes such as policy gaps, technological challenges, and operational constraints in e-bus implementation.
• To quantitatively assess and rank the implementation barriers to e-bus adoption through structured surveys distributed to industry practitioners.

Even though the case study is related to the Sri Lankan context, this research is designed to be applicable globally, providing insights and strategies relevant to sustainable transportation efforts worldwide in e-bus inclusion within the public transport system. Drawing on concepts from stakeholder management and standard project management frameworks, this study emphasizes the importance of identifying key stakeholders, understanding their perspectives, assessing their influence, and systematically addressing the barriers they perceive as critical for e-bus adoption. The findings aim to serve as a strategic framework for decision-makers, demonstrating how effective stakeholder management, guided by project management principles, can facilitate the successful adoption of e-buses globally.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the literature review, highlighting global insights and contextual gaps related to e-bus integration. Section 3 outlines the research methodology, including stakeholder mapping and barrier prioritization procedures. Section 4 provides a contextual overview of Sri Lanka’s public transportation landscape. Section 5 summarizes stakeholder evaluation and engagement outcomes. Section 6 presents detailed findings from stakeholder consultations and their implications. Section 7 ranks and analyzes the key barriers to e-bus adoption based on stakeholder perspectives. Finally, Section 8 outlines the pathway to adopting e-buses in Sri Lanka, followed by limitations and future research directions, while Section 9 concludes the study.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Overall Electric Bus Review

Recent global research underscores the growing emphasis on electrifying public transport systems as a key pathway toward achieving sustainable urban mobility. Scholars have explored the environmental, economic, operational, and technological dimensions of electric bus (e-bus) adoption, highlighting both the opportunities and challenges associated with large-scale implementation across diverse regional contexts.

A study in São Paulo applied an AHP-based triple-bottom-line model to compare diesel and battery buses, revealing that despite high upfront costs, e-buses offer long-term environmental and operational benefits. However, successful adoption depends on government subsidies and supportive policy frameworks [3].

Autonomous vehicles are increasingly recognized as the future of sustainable mobility, and when integrated with electrified fleets, they can significantly enhance operational efficiency and environmental performance. Sistig et al. [4] demonstrate that autonomous electric buses, supported by optimized timetables and smart scheduling, can reduce costs, improve flexibility, and contribute to more sustainable transit networks.

In the Mediterranean region, research indicates that electrifying public transport can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and advance SDG 13, yet it also leads to increased electricity demand and financial costs. Due to high capital expenses, diesel buses remain economically favorable in some cities, creating barriers to achieving SDG 11 in developing contexts [5].

Furthermore, terrain orography has been identified as a critical factor influencing e-bus feasibility. Using mobile laser scanning, Sanchez-Aparicio et al. [6] found that 1 point/m² aerial data is adequate for slope estimation and route design, noting that electrifying routes with slopes up to 7% can reduce GHG emissions by 32.6% and operational costs by 18.1% compared to diesel counterparts.

Complementing these findings, a simulation-based study in central Italy revealed that electric buses markedly reduce local exhaust and CO₂ emissions compared to diesel vehicles. Nonetheless, full life-cycle emissions depend heavily on the electricity generation mix, and since non-exhaust emissions remain comparable, the study underscores the need for cleaner energy sources to fully realize the environmental advantages of e-bus adoption [7].

2.2. Public Transit and the Rationale for Electrification

Public transit reduces private vehicle dependence when it ensures accessibility, affordability, safety, and security, aligning with global sustainability goals [2]. In Sri Lanka, the adoption of electrified transport remains limited, despite the significant share of emissions from public bus fleets [8]. Long-term strategic planning is crucial, as highlighted by Morichi [9], particularly in rapidly growing Asian cities. Kruchina [10] further emphasizes the environmental and economic benefits of e-bus adoption, including lifecycle cost savings, reduced noise, and integration with energy systems through Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) services. Together, these works underscore the role of electrification in strengthening bus transit systems.

2.3. Decision-Making Frameworks

Scholars have applied multicriteria decision-making approaches to guide e-bus technology selection. Barragán-Escandón et al. [11] and Eliyan [12] used PROMETHEE, entropy weighting, and TOPSIS to compare models based on technical, social, economic, and environmental factors. Their findings highlight passenger capacity, autonomy, and engine power as key criteria. At the same time, comparisons between battery-electric and fuel-cell buses reveal trade-offs in economic viability, energy demand, and environmental outcomes. These studies stress the importance of robust evaluation frameworks tailored to local contexts.

2.4. Operational and Planning Innovations

Efficient scheduling and planning are central to the integration of e-buses. Zhou et al. [13] developed an intelligent route planning method using reinforcement learning to reduce waiting times, demonstrating high accuracy and satisfaction in real-world applications. Janovec et al. [14] proposed a two-phase heuristic aggregation framework to address challenges of battery capacity, charging, and infrastructure, achieving significant reductions in computation time without compromising quality. Similarly, Pandey [15] introduced a planning model for intra-city EBRTS that integrates charging infrastructure and financial considerations, balancing the interests of utilities and investors.

2.5. Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder participation is consistently recognized as vital for successful transport planning. Haial et al. [16] note that effective strategies require active engagement from the outset. Cascetta and Pagliara [17] found that multi-channel engagement enhances forecasting accuracy and infrastructure design, while Cascetta et al. [18] linked stakeholder involvement to broader economic growth. At the same time, Sherman and Ford [19] highlight risks posed by weak organizational capacity, which can undermine communication and trust. Emerson and Nabatchi [20], however, caution that stakeholder engagement does not always guarantee improved outcomes.

2.6. Challenges and Best Practices in Engagement

The literature identifies pitfalls in poorly designed engagement processes. The USDOT [21] recommends refining best practices by distinguishing between theoretical and practical components, enabling more targeted institutional capacity-building. Fung [22] critiques traditional public engagement formats as exclusive, while Rowe and Gammack [23] identify both benefits and limitations of electronic engagement, particularly issues of equity and communication quality. Reed [24] outlines conditions for successful engagement, including trust, flexibility, inclusivity, and institutionalization. Wolfe [25] also highlights that inadequate design can hinder decision-making and weaken outcomes.

2.7. Policy, Regulation, and Global Commitments

National policies and regulatory frameworks play a crucial role in scaling the adoption of e-buses. Xie et al. [26] argue that ambitious targets, incentives, and infrastructure are essential to align with climate goals, projecting that zero-emission trucks and buses must reach 45% penetration by 2030. The Toronto Transit Commission [27] illustrates a phased and evaluative approach, committing to full zero-emission adoption by 2040, while India’s Pune demonstrates the importance of interagency coordination, business models, and tendering processes [28]. Reports from CSTEP [29] and UNEP [30] emphasize the need for robust charging infrastructure, financial models, and international cooperation, especially for developing regions.

2.8. Environmental and Climate Benefits

Electrified buses are widely acknowledged as essential for decarbonizing urban transport. Hodges [31] shows that GHG reductions depend on strategies such as compact land use, efficient vehicles, and low-carbon fuels, with transit central to achieving these outcomes. RMI [28] highlights projections for rapid e-bus penetration in India, while UNEP [30] documents global initiatives across Africa, Asia, and Latin America supporting technical assistance, financing, and pilot projects. Collectively, these findings position e-buses as a cornerstone for achieving both national and international sustainability objectives.

A thorough stakeholder assessment requires a clear understanding of the context, the stakeholders involved, the project’s unique characteristics, and potential barriers. This assessment should then feed into a comprehensive stakeholder management plan, which includes specific mitigation strategies for anticipated challenges and a well-defined roadmap for implementation.

3. Methodology

This study employs a comprehensive stakeholder-centric methodology to analyze the adoption of e-buses in Sri Lanka’s public transit system. The research employs a mixed-methods approach that combines qualitative stakeholder analysis with quantitative barrier prioritization, following established project management principles. The methodology begins with the systematic identification of stakeholders through a literature review and policy analysis, mapping 38 key actors across government agencies, private sector entities, and international organizations. Stakeholders are rigorously categorized using a six-criterion evaluation system that assesses their influence, resource control, policy alignment, impact potential, interest level, and regulatory authority. The classification process utilizes Mendelow’s Power-Interest Matrix [32] to distinguish between Key Players (high influence/interest), stakeholders requiring close management (medium influence/high interest), and those needing basic information sharing (low influence/interest).

The methodological flow of this study followed six key steps:

• Stakeholder Identification—Relevant institutions and actors were identified through a literature review and expert consultations.
• Stakeholder Mapping—The identified stakeholders were organized based on their roles and sectoral relevance.
• Stakeholder Prioritization—Stakeholders were classified into Key Players, Manage Closely, and Keep Informed groups based on their level of influence and interest.
• Survey and Interviews—Qualitative interviews and structured surveys were conducted with the prioritized stakeholders.
• Analysis of Findings—Stakeholder inputs were analyzed to identify key insights, challenges, and opportunities.
• Stakeholder Engagement—The findings were used to refine engagement strategies and inform practical recommendations for e-bus adoption.

The analytical framework is organized into three implementation phases: pre-implementation assessment, focusing on feasibility studies and route analysis; active implementation, examining procurement and infrastructure development; and post-implementation evaluation of system performance and optimization. Throughout this process, the methodology maintains rigorous ethical standards, ensuring informed consent, respondent anonymity, and inclusive representation of diverse stakeholder groups. The study acknowledges certain limitations, particularly the dynamic policy environment in Sri Lanka and potential urban bias in stakeholder representation, while providing a robust foundation for understanding the challenges of e-bus adoption in developing economies. This methodological approach offers a replicable model for analyzing sustainable transport transitions through systematic stakeholder engagement and evidence-based assessment of barriers.

The sample size of 38 experts, though modest, aligns with established norms in expert-based stakeholder and policy research. Studies adopting similar methodologies often engage between 20 and 50 participants, emphasizing expertise, sectoral representation, and diversity of perspectives over statistical generalization. Such sample sizes are considered methodologically sound for exploratory and policy-oriented studies where depth of insight is prioritized (Zhou et al. [33]; Liu et al. [34]).

A qualitative approach is necessary to capture the policy, governance, and stakeholder dynamics that shape the transition. Stakeholder management frameworks, including Mendelow’s Power-Interest Matrix, guide the systematic identification and prioritization of stakeholders based on their influence and interest. This ensures structured engagement and provides a deeper understanding of the socio-political and operational landscape. A quantitative component, utilizing the Weighted Average Method, complements this by enabling the prioritization of barriers based on stakeholder input. The research area does not warrant advanced mathematical modeling as the focus is on policy, infrastructure, and stakeholder perspectives. However, incorporating a measurable method strengthens the analysis by offering evidence-based insights, which will be considered in the study extensions. This combination of methods ensures that the study is both contextually relevant and structured to support policy and practical applications.

4. The Sri Lankan Contextual Overview

Sri Lanka’s public transport is primarily dominated by bus services offered by both private and public operators, followed by train services managed by Sri Lanka Railways. Public bus services are overseen by the National Transport Commission (NTC) for inter-provincial operations and by the nine Provincial Transport Authorities for intra-provincial operations. The government-run Sri Lanka Transport Board (SLTB) manages around 7135 buses, while the private sector operates 20,062 buses, with a combined 19,371 buses in daily operation. It is important that there are functions within the operational bodies that have led to the deterioration of public bus services, which has led to a national-level crisis scenario needing immediate sustainable intervention. Together, they move millions of passengers each day, making buses the backbone of national mobility. According to government policy, service provision is divided between private operators and the SLTB in a 60:40 ratio [35].

As per its statutory mandate, the SLTB has the right to operate island-wide, though it also prioritizes coverage of village and underserved routes as part of its responsibility to ensure access for all communities. The fragmented nature of governance of NTC at the national level and Provincial Transport Authorities at the sub-national level creates scheduling challenges and prevents the establishment of a fully integrated timetable. High operational and maintenance costs further hinder efficient delivery service.

As of September 2025, gasoline in Sri Lanka costs about USD 1.13 per liter and diesel about USD 1.04 per liter. Such fuel prices place upward pressure on transportation and production costs, contributing to inflationary trends that can slow economic growth, reduce household purchasing power, and widen the fiscal burden of fuel subsidies that collectively weigh on Sri Lanka’s GDP recovery efforts.

Currently, the national landscape regarding e-buses remains in the preliminary discussion phase, with various stakeholders showing interest and pledging support for their implementation. However, significant barriers have stalled progress, primarily due to the lack of an in-depth study focused on the unique requirements and challenges of introducing e-buses. The e-bus ecosystem, distinct from traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) buses, demands a tailored framework suited to the national context [8].

Through these early discussions, stakeholders provided valuable input that reflects a broad range of interests and priorities, enhancing the understanding of potential challenges and opportunities in this transition. The United Nations Development Programme’s report, Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA): Sustainable Transport in Sri Lanka Through an E-Bus Rapid Transit System, highlights the transport sector as Sri Lanka’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, contributing to nearly 50% of emissions and requiring immediate green solutions [36]. The report proposes e-Bus Rapid Transit Systems, covering costs for charging stations and offering concessions to bolster operations. The NAMA initiative is split into two phases: Phase 1 involves launching 10 government-managed e-buses with climate-related grants and private-sector partnerships. In contrast, Phase 2 expands to a 100-bus fleet, funded by private operators and international climate finance.

The research emphasizes the need for a well-defined framework that aligns with Sri Lanka’s specific needs, which includes involving key stakeholders, as this is essential for the successful implementation of e-buses. To move beyond initial discussions, it is crucial to incorporate systematic stakeholder analysis and management strategies. Preliminary consultations with key stakeholders were conducted, guided by insights gained from a thorough stakeholder mapping exercise. These consultations aimed to gather diverse perspectives, address concerns, and collect additional data relevant to adopting and implementing e-buses in Sri Lanka’s public transit. The initial dialogs were met with positive responses, laying a strong foundation for future collaboration and consensus-building.

5. Stakeholder Evaluation

5.1. Stakeholder Management—Theoretical View

This study applies the PMI stakeholder engagement framework to map and evaluate the influence and interest of actors involved in Sri Lanka’s electric bus transition. The process ensured early identification, continuous engagement, and monitoring of relationships across implementation phases. Achieving this vision may involve difficult negotiations, particularly with stakeholders who may not fully support the project or its intended outcomes [36].

The PMI Stakeholder Performance Domain outlines five essential steps for managing stakeholders effectively in the e-bus adoption framework (Figure 1): Identify stakeholders early, recognizing that new actors may emerge over time; Understand and Analyze their power, interest, and attitudes to determine their potential influence on project outcomes; Prioritize stakeholders by focusing first on those with the highest power and interest; Engage them through clear communication, expectation management, and collaborative problem-solving; and continuously Monitor stakeholder dynamics to adapt strategies as conditions evolve. This iterative process ensures sustained alignment, support, and successful progression of the project.

Figure 1. Navigating Effective Stakeholder Engagement (PMI [37]).

This framework ensures that stakeholder engagement is proactive, responsive, and aligned with project goals, enabling project teams to adapt and maintain stakeholder support throughout the project lifecycle.

5.2. Stakeholder Assessment—Identification of Stakeholders

The identification of stakeholders is a crucial initial step in the e-bus adoption process, as it lays the groundwork for effective engagement and collaboration. In this study, the process began with a thorough review of existing literature and best practices related to electric vehicle (EV) adoption, particularly focusing on public transportation systems.

Following this, a series of stakeholder mapping exercises was conducted, which involved discussions and interviews with industry experts and representatives from various sectors. Stakeholders were categorized based on their potential impact on the project, as well as their interest in the successful implementation of e-buses. Thilakshan et al. [8] reported that the initial stakeholder consultations were carried out using the outcome of the stakeholder mapping to obtain views, concerns, and further information about the e-bus study scenario. The outcome of the initial step is depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Initial Stakeholder Mapping for Implementation of E-Buses in the Sri Lankan Context [8].

5.3. Comprehensive Stakeholder Assessment—Analyze and Prioritize

5.3.1. Definition and Characteristics for Low and High Priority Stakeholders: Stage 01

To justify the categorization of stakeholders as High (H) or Low (L) priority in stakeholder assessment, the following definitions and characteristics are outlined. The study was conducted with a detailed approach, carefully evaluating various factors to determine whether stakeholders should be categorized as high or low priority. Each stakeholder’s role, engagement, and potential contribution were thoroughly analyzed to ensure an accurate prioritization process. The study has thoroughly recognized the importance of carefully considering or omitting potential stakeholders, as their inclusion or exclusion can significantly impact the e-bus implementation process, potentially leading to negative consequences.

High Priority (H) Stakeholders

High-priority stakeholders are those whose roles, decisions, or actions directly influence the success of the project or initiative. They hold significant authority, resources, or expertise relevant to the project objectives, making their active engagement and support critical.

Low Priority (L) Stakeholders

Low-priority stakeholders are those whose roles, decisions, or actions indirectly or minimally impact the project’s success. They may not possess significant authority, resources, or direct involvement, but their engagement is important for inclusivity and broader awareness. Their role cannot be entirely denied or neglected, as they may become a high priority in the future. The following aspects were considered in categorizing stakeholders as of Low Priority.

By defining and distinguishing these characteristics, the categorization of stakeholders into high and low priority is transparent, justified, and methodologically sound for the context of the adoption and operation of e-buses within the existing public transit network. Table 1 is an overall summary of the considerations in the categorization of stakeholders.

Table 1. Summary Table: Characteristics of High vs. Low Priority Stakeholders.

Criterion	High Priority (H)	Low Priority (L)
Influence	Direct and significant influence on project decisions	Minimal or indirect influence
Alignment with Objectives	Closely aligned with core project goals	Peripheral or tangential alignment
Resource Control	Holds or allocates critical resources	Limited or no resource allocation
Impact on Outcomes	Critical to project success	Indirect or minimal impact
Level of Interest	High, with a vested interest in project outcomes	Low, with limited engagement or focus
Role in Policy/Regulation	Central to creating or enforcing relevant policies	Indirect or no role in policy-making

Stakeholder Prioritization Scorecard: Methodology

Prioritizing stakeholders is a critical component of decision-making processes in sustainable transportation planning. This study employs a quantitative assessment framework based on six predefined criteria to systematically evaluate stakeholder relevance. The objective is to ensure a consistent and repeatable methodology for classifying stakeholders into High or Low Priority categories.

Detailed Rubrics for Stakeholder Prioritization Scorecard

The following rubrics, as compiled in Table 2, define the scoring for each of the six criteria, expanding on the “High Priority” and “Low Priority” characteristics.

Table 2. Summary Table: Detailed Rubrics for Stakeholder Prioritization Scorecard.

Criterion	5—Very High Relevance	4—High Relevance	3—Moderate Relevance	2—Low Relevance	1—Very Low Relevance
Influence	High level of control or decision-making power. Can significantly accelerate or halt project.	Significant influence. Shapes key decisions though lacks absolute control.	Some influence via advisory or indirect means. Input valued, not decisive.	Minimal or indirect control. Influence limited to specific aspects.	Negligible or no influence on decisions or implementation.
Policy Alignment	Mandates closely aligned with e-bus goals. Project is core to their mission.	Strong alignment; project supports several primary objectives.	Partial alignment; supports general organizational aims.	Tangentially related to project objectives.	No direct alignment with project goals.
Resource Control	Controls key resources (funding, technology, human capital) indispensable for success.	Possesses or can mobilize significant resources beneficial to project.	Contributes moderate capital, technical support, or personnel.	Minor or supplementary resource contributions.	No control or ability to allocate critical resources.
Impact on Outcomes	Decisions or inactions critically enable or obstruct project objectives.	Actions have a substantial effect on key deliverables or milestones.	Influences project in limited, non-critical ways.	Involvement does not significantly influence trajectory or outcomes.	Negligible impact on project success or failure.
Regulatory Authority	Influences or enforces legislation/standards. Central to relevant policy.	Significant influence over aspects of the legal/operational framework.	Advisory/supporting role; relevant but not decisive.	Indirect or minimal policy/regulatory role.	No role in relevant policy or regulation.
Interest Level	Highly invested; the project directly benefits or aligns with institutional goals.	Strong interest and clear organizational benefit; actively supports success.	General interest due to broader mandate or indirect benefit.	Limited interest; engagement is passive or sporadic.	No discernible interest in project progress or outcomes.

Classification of Stakeholders

To differentiate stakeholder priority levels, a threshold-based approach is applied:

• High Priority: Total score ≥ 20
• Low Priority: Total score < 20

This classification ensures that stakeholders with greater influence and alignment with the study’s objectives are identified for focused engagement.

5.3.2. Justification of Stakeholder Categorization: Importance and Relevance in Qualitative Research

To ensure the effective design and implementation of any research, particularly in complex systems such as sustainable transportation or public infrastructure development, stakeholder categorization is a foundational step. The statement underscores the importance of systematically identifying and assessing stakeholders as High (H) or Low (L) priority to align project outcomes with practical needs and theoretical frameworks. Below is an elaboration on its significance and why this process is critical from a qualitative research perspective:

• Ensuring Research Relevance and Contextual Depth

Categorizing stakeholders enables researchers to focus on the most relevant actors who have significant influence and interest in the project. This ensures that the study remains contextually grounded by involving institutions and individuals who directly affect or are affected by the project. It is essential to consider whether the findings are relevant to real-world applications and directly address the needs of key stakeholders.

2.

Identifying Power Dynamics and Influence

The success of any initiative often depends on understanding who holds the power and how their decisions shape the outcomes. High-priority stakeholders typically have a higher level of authority, which means that their collaboration can significantly accelerate progress and their opposition can pose barriers to implementation. The study highlights identifying nuanced relationships, such as how stakeholders interact, negotiate, and influence each other.

3.

Efficient Resource Allocation

Stakeholder categorization helps allocate time, effort, and resources effectively by focusing on stakeholders who matter most to the research or project objectives. High-priority stakeholders require continuous engagement, consultations, and collaboration to align their interests with the project goals. Low-priority stakeholders may need less intensive interaction, focusing instead on keeping them informed.

4.

Informing Stakeholder Engagement Strategies

Understanding stakeholder priorities allows researchers to design tailored engagement strategies. High-priority stakeholders need strategies that emphasize active involvement, co-creation, and collaboration. Low-priority stakeholders may only require periodic updates or consultation. The engagement process itself often generates rich qualitative data, such as insights into stakeholder perceptions, values, and resistance points.

5.

Validating Research Findings

High-priority stakeholders often provide critical insights or feedback that enhance the validity and credibility of research findings. Their active role can refine research methodologies by identifying gaps or misalignments while ensuring that conclusions and recommendations are practical and actionable. Engaging key stakeholders ensures that the research reflects diverse viewpoints and is grounded in the lived realities of those most affected by the issue.

6.

Addressing Ethical Considerations

Stakeholder prioritization is not only about influence but also about fairness and inclusivity. While high-priority stakeholders require more direct involvement, categorization ensures that Low-priority stakeholders are not entirely overlooked, maintaining ethical responsibility in inclusivity. Marginalized groups or indirect stakeholders must still have a voice, even if their influence is minimal.

7.

Supporting Iterative and Adaptive Research Processes

In qualitative research, categorization is not a static process. Stakeholder priorities can shift based on evolving project phases or external factors (e.g., political changes, funding availability). By categorizing stakeholders, researchers can establish a baseline understanding of influence and interest. It is important to adapt stakeholder engagement strategies as new dynamics emerge. The iterative nature of qualitative research aligns with stakeholder re-categorization over time, ensuring the research remains responsive and dynamic in addressing real-world complexities.

5.3.3. Factors Considered for Stakeholder Categorization—Stage 02

Identifying and evaluating stakeholders based on influence and interest in stakeholder categorization ensures a structured and systematic approach to effective stakeholder engagement. The categorization process considers specific factors that measure stakeholders’ ability to impact the project and their level of concern or involvement. These factors were defined to ensure transparency, consistency, and adaptability.

• Influence Factors

Influence factors evaluate stakeholders’ power to shape project decisions, resources, or outcomes.

• Decision-Making Power:

Stakeholders who have the authority to approve or reject key project decisions directly impact the success of the project.

• Resource Control:

The stakeholder’s ability to allocate or restrict financial, technical, or human resources is critical for project implementation.

• Political Influence:

The role of the stakeholder in shaping public policy or mobilizing public and political support. This can accelerate or hinder project progress.

• Sectoral Reach:

The degree to which the stakeholder is involved in sectors directly related to the project’s focus, such as transport, energy, or the environment.

2.

Interest Factors

Interest factors assess the level of concern or benefit that stakeholders derive from the project.

• Stakeholder Mandate:

The alignment between the stakeholders’ organizational objectives and the project goals.

• Project Benefits:

The tangible or intangible gains expected by the stakeholder, such as economic, environmental, or reputational advantages.

• Responsiveness to the Project:

The willingness of stakeholders to collaborate or align their resources with the project’s objectives.

• Public Accountability:

The degree of accountability the stakeholder has to the public or specific user groups impacted by the project.

3.

Relationship and Engagement Factors

These factors assess the history and potential for collaboration with stakeholders.

• Collaborative History:

Previous collaboration with the project team or involvement in similar initiatives can influence the ease of engagement.

• Potential Conflicts:

Identifying potential disagreements or resistance from stakeholders helps manage risks and align goals where possible.

• Advocacy Role:

The stakeholder’s ability to act as a champion for the project, influencing public perception or mobilizing support.

4.

Ensuring Validity and Reliability

• Transparency:

Each factor was clearly defined and applied consistently to all stakeholders to ensure a fair assessment process.

• Expert Input:

Criteria were validated through consultations with industry experts and stakeholder representatives, ensuring alignment with practical realities.

• Adaptability:

The factors are revisited periodically to accommodate changes in stakeholder influence, interest, and project dynamics.

By employing these factors, stakeholders are systematically categorized into groups such as Key Player, Manage Closely, and Keep Informed, ensuring that engagement strategies are tailored to their specific roles and contributions to the project.

Stakeholders were classified into three categories based on their influence and interest. Key Players hold high influence and high (or medium) interest, making their active engagement critical to project success. Manage Closely stakeholders have medium influence but high interest, and therefore require regular communication and relationship management. Keep Informed stakeholders possess medium or low influence and interest; while they may not directly affect outcomes, keeping them updated helps maintain alignment and avoid future misunderstandings. Input from subject matter experts enriched this process by providing context-specific insights, ensuring that all relevant stakeholders were accurately identified and appropriately engaged.

Identifying stakeholders is crucial for understanding the dynamics of transportation and energy initiatives in Sri Lanka. The next step of the identification process is filtering the high-priority stakeholders identified in Appendix A (comprehensive overview of sectors and stakeholders) and categorizing the high-priority stakeholders by their influence and interest in these sectors as depicted in Table 3 (It is important to note that the process of stakeholder management is not a one-time process and needs to be repeated in given periods which can change the stakeholders of their level of priority/interest/influence).

Table 3. Classification and Assessment of Stakeholders: Stage 02.

Pre-Implementation, Implementation, and Post-Implementation Phases Have Been Analyzed in Detail for the Further Classification of Stage 01 Outcomes into Three
Stakeholder	Influence	Interest	Classification
Ministry of Transport	High	High	Key Player
State Ministry of Vehicle Regulation, Bus Transport Services and Train Compartments, and Motor Car Industry	High	High	Key Player
Department of Motor Traffic (DMT)	High	High	Key Player
National Transport Commission (NTC)	High	High	Key Player
Sri Lanka Transport Board (SLTB)	High	High	Key Player
Provincial Road Passenger Transport Authorities	High	Medium	Key Player
Ministry of Power	Medium	High	Manage Closely
State Ministry of Solar Power, Wind, and Hydro Power Generation Projects Development	High	Medium	Key Player
Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority (SLSEA)	High	High	Key Player
Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB)	High	Medium	Key Player
Lanka Electric Company Ltd. (LECO)	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL)	High	High	Key Player
Ministry of Environment	High	High	Key Player
Central Environmental Authority (CEA)	High	Medium	Key Player
Urban Development Authority (UDA)	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Department of Fiscal Policy	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Central Bank of Sri Lanka	High	High	Key Player
Sustainable Development Council (SDC)	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Government Banks/Insurance Corporations	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Ceylon Motor Traders Association	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Heavy Vehicle and Spare Parts Importers	Medium	Medium	Keep Informed
Battery Importers	Medium	Medium	Keep Informed
Lanka Private Bus Owners Association/s	High	High	Key Player
Charging Infrastructure	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Banks/Financial Institutions	Medium	High	Manage Closely
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)—SL	High	High	Key Player
Asian Development Bank (ADB)	High	High	Key Player
World Bank	High	High	Key Player
Sri Lanka Energy Managers Association (SLEMA)	Medium	High	Manage Closely
Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport (CILT)	Medium	Medium	Keep Informed

It is important to note that Appendix A reveals several differences compared to the initial stakeholder map. The stakeholder identification, prioritization, and engagement activities should be regularly reviewed and updated, especially when the project enters new phases, when stakeholders change, or when significant shifts occur in the organization or stakeholder community. Stakeholders with high influence and interest are essential for the success of e-bus adoption. In contrast, those with low influence and low interest require less engagement but should still be informed.

From an academic perspective, the stakeholder classification effectively applies a strategic management approach to stakeholder analysis, aligning with frameworks such as Mendelow’s Matrix, which considers power and interest as key dimensions. The categorization into Key Players, Manage Closely, and Keep Informed demonstrates a structured method for prioritizing stakeholder engagement. However, a critical evaluation of certain classifications could enhance the rigor of the analysis. For instance, the classification of the Provincial Road Passenger Transport Authorities as Key Players can be debated, as their influence may be context-dependent across different provinces. Similarly, stakeholders such as Heavy Vehicle and Spare Parts Importers and Battery Importers, currently categorized under Keep Informed, may significantly impact policy implementation and supply chain logistics, suggesting they might require closer management. Therefore, this outcome is not definitive but concrete and can be revised through periodic reviews of the stakeholder analysis.

This classification can guide stakeholder engagement strategies and ensure effective communication throughout the project lifecycle. It is vital to identify the key organizational stakeholders and their types and plan accordingly with appropriate strategies for working with them. A study by Savage et al. [38] categorizes stakeholders based on their levels of potential threat and cooperation and provides strategies for managing each type. The framework emphasizes the importance of tailoring engagement strategies based on the specific behavior and influence of each stakeholder group, helping project managers allocate resources effectively and foster positive stakeholder relationships.

5.4. Engagement with Identified Stakeholders

Good communication is key to successful stakeholder management. Clear, consistent updates keep stakeholders informed, engaged, and aligned with project goals. The success of communications relies on four key elements: identifying and analyzing stakeholders to target messages effectively, ensuring message clarity and consistency to build trust, using an efficient delivery system to reach stakeholders promptly, and gathering feedback to assess communication effectiveness [37].

Each stakeholder was carefully evaluated using expert opinion and lessons learned to identify the most effective communication method, ensuring that their concerns and inputs could be captured in detail and with clarity. Tailoring the communication approach to each individual or group enables a more productive exchange, facilitating a deeper understanding of their perspectives. Using the learnings from PMI [37] and the outcomes of the stakeholder analysis, surveys and questionnaires can provide a structured way to gather input on specific issues, making analyzing and comparing responses easier.

The authors prioritized arranging physical meetings with as many stakeholders as possible to facilitate clear discussions and capture their views and concerns effectively. In cases where scheduling a physical meeting was not feasible due to time constraints, they opted for alternative methods, such as phone calls or online video meetings, to ensure open communication and gather valuable input.

5.5. Concerns on Stakeholder Analysis Outcomes

It is important to note that, beyond the identified outcomes of this study, certain stakeholders require recognition and consideration in the e-bus incorporation framework. Although the stakeholder analysis has categorized some of them as lower priority, expert opinions were sought to reassess whether any of these stakeholders should be reconsidered for inclusion in the primary assessment. Overlooking key stakeholders, especially those initially categorized as lower priority, can lead to gaps in decision-making and implementation. If relevant stakeholders are excluded, their concerns, insights, and potential contributions may go unrecognized, which could negatively impact the long-term success and sustainability of e-bus integration. Inclusive stakeholder engagement ensures that diverse perspectives are considered, reducing the risk of future challenges, resistance, or inefficiencies in implementation.

Considering the outcomes of Stage 01, the following observations and recommendations have been noted. Although the Ministry of Energy, the Road Development Authority (RDA), and the Ministry of Finance have been categorized as lower-priority stakeholders in the initial assessment, their roles are important in the successful implementation of e-buses.

• The Ministry of Energy plays a critical role in developing national energy policies that ensure sustainability, efficiency, and security. Given that e-buses rely on a stable and renewable energy supply, the ministry’s policies directly influence the feasibility and long-term viability of electrified public transport. Ensuring equitable energy access and infrastructure development is essential for widespread adoption.
• The Road Development Authority (RDA) is responsible for the planning, maintenance, and expansion of the national highway network. The integration of e-buses requires well-developed road infrastructure, charging stations, and dedicated lanes where necessary. The RDA’s involvement is crucial in ensuring that roads are designed and maintained to support e-bus operations efficiently and safely.
• The Ministry of Finance oversees macroeconomic policies and budget allocations, which are fundamental to the financial sustainability of e-bus projects. Funding for procurement, infrastructure development, and operational subsidies often depends on national budget priorities. Without adequate financial planning and support, large-scale e-bus deployment may face significant financial constraints.

Despite being categorized as a lower priority in the stakeholder analysis, these institutions play a fundamental role in shaping the policies, infrastructure, and financial frameworks necessary for the successful integration of e-buses. Their engagement ensures a holistic approach that addresses technical, economic, and operational challenges, thereby contributing to a more sustainable and efficient public transportation system.

In the classification and assessment of stakeholders during the pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation phases, certain entities such as the Urban Development Authority (UDA), the Department of Fiscal Policy, charging infrastructure providers, and banks or financial institutions have been identified as requiring close management due to their significant influence on the successful deployment of e-buses.

• The Urban Development Authority (UDA) plays a crucial role in urban planning, land use regulation, and infrastructure development. The successful integration of e-buses depends on well-planned urban spaces that accommodate charging stations, bus depots, and dedicated transit lanes where necessary. The UDA’s involvement ensures that e-bus infrastructure aligns with broader urban development goals, improving accessibility and reducing congestion.
• The Department of Fiscal Policy is responsible for developing taxation, subsidies, and financial incentives that influence investment in sustainable transport. The implementation of e-buses requires supportive fiscal policies such as tax incentives for electric vehicle imports, subsidies for charging infrastructure, and financial mechanisms that encourage both public and private sector investment.
• Charging infrastructure providers, including ChargeNET and CodeGen, are fundamental to the operational efficiency of e-buses. The availability, accessibility, and reliability of charging stations directly impact the feasibility of e-bus adoption. Their role extends beyond infrastructure deployment to include advancements in charging technology, smart grid integration, and energy management, all of which are critical.
• Banks and financial institutions are key enablers of large-scale e-bus projects by providing financing options, investment mechanisms, and risk mitigation strategies. Access to capital is crucial for fleet procurement, infrastructure development, and operational sustainability. Financial institutions facilitate the transition by offering green financing, low-interest loans, and investment models that support public–private partnerships.

These stakeholders must be actively engaged and closely managed to ensure the seamless implementation of e-buses. Their roles in policy formulation, infrastructure development, and financial sustainability are indispensable in creating a resilient and effective electric public transportation system.

6. Detailed Outcomes from Stakeholder Engagement

With detailed background analysis and findings, it is important to understand the current situation and outcomes, which are clearly explained in the study. The transition to e-buses in Sri Lanka faces several interconnected challenges and opportunities, requiring coordinated efforts from various government entities. The Ministry of Environment highlights the limitations in charging infrastructure for heavy electric vehicles and the difficulty of implementing e-buses under the current fare structure. This leads to a need for better collaboration between the Ministry of Transport and the SLTB, particularly since the latter has the potential to pilot e-buses within a well-structured framework. Meanwhile, the National Transport Commission (NTC) has been tasked with defining specifications for e-buses, yet no significant studies have been conducted to explore their feasibility, which remains a critical gap. The NTC also raises concerns about the cost of transitioning from used internal combustion engine (ICE) buses to expensive e-buses, especially for private operators, suggesting that SLTB, as a state entity, may need to lead by example to mitigate this challenge. The primary consideration revolves around the impact of fare structure and the necessity for change, as the existing fare policy is influenced by several factors, including fuel prices. This underscores the need to establish a new fare structure for e-buses, particularly given the disparities in fares among different services, which raise concerns about equity and accessibility.

Furthermore, the Ministry of Transport emphasizes the importance of introducing e-buses, with a focus on conducting a readiness assessment of the SLTB to evaluate its capability to manage this shift. The regulatory framework for e-mobility, which the ministry is working on, will be a key driver in ensuring a smooth transition. SLTB’s current efforts to upgrade its fleet to meet Euro-4 standards and explore battery swapping for e-buses also reflect the practical steps being taken toward modernization. However, financial constraints and existing supply-demand imbalances in the bus sector pose hurdles, highlighting the importance of careful planning. With input from other entities like the Ministry of Finance, which could provide financial incentives, and the Ministry of Power and Energy, ensuring grid capacity for EV infrastructure, Sri Lanka could navigate these complexities to build a sustainable public transport system. The stakeholder engagement process for the E-Bus project revealed important insights from various groups.

The Sri Lankan case highlights political economy factors, institutional fragmentation, and socio-cultural resistance that uniquely shape the e-bus transition. These dynamics illustrate that technological readiness alone is insufficient; policy coherence, fiscal stability, and stakeholder trust are equally critical. While context-specific, such insights are highly relevant to other developing countries facing similar governance and behavioral challenges.

The growing focus on electric mobility in Sri Lanka is supported by key stakeholders like UNDP Sri Lanka and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), with a strong emphasis on transforming public transport. UNDP Sri Lanka is particularly concerned about Colombo’s air quality and is working on initiatives to provide cleaner public transportation through e-buses. They are collaborating with the Central Bank of Sri Lanka to propose green financing models that will enable financial institutions to support the transition to electric vehicles and related infrastructure. The ADB, which has been in discussions with the Sri Lankan government since 2022, is also interested in financing projects from 2022 to 2027, with a particular focus on supporting the Ministry of Transport’s initiative to introduce e-buses into the national fleet.

Local bodies like the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT) Sri Lanka and the Institution of Engineers Sri Lanka (IESL) are pivotal in the successful integration of e-buses. CILT can provide valuable insights into the logistics and operational frameworks necessary to manage the transition, ensuring that e-buses are effectively deployed and maintained across various routes. Meanwhile, IESL’s engineering expertise will be crucial in addressing the technical challenges related to charging infrastructure, vehicle maintenance, and long-term sustainability. Together with manufacturers and green financing models, these organizations will help shape a coordinated and practical approach to electric mobility in Sri Lanka.

To better understand and address the diverse needs and concerns, the outcomes have been categorized as follows:

• Policy and Regulatory Considerations

It is vital to align the e-bus adoption with the existing development projects in transportation and otherwise. This must be facilitated via international examples like tax incentives and procurement support to facilitate e-bus adoption. There is an immediate need to establish clear regulations and standards for electric vehicles, which will facilitate the operational and technical aspects to be met with fewer disruptions.

A major obstacle to the adoption of e-buses in Sri Lanka is the lack of knowledge about electric mobility among decision-makers, which significantly slows down progress. This knowledge gap affects the ability to develop effective policies, implement the fittest infrastructure, and create financial models to facilitate e-bus integration. Without a solid understanding of technical aspects like charging station needs, grid capacity, and battery management, policymakers struggle to make informed decisions, leading to delays and inefficiencies. Bridging this gap through education, capacity-building, and collaboration with industry experts is essential to ensure a smooth and successful transition.

2.

Operational and Logistical Needs

Key logistical challenges in integrating e-buses into existing fleets include the availability of essential parts and supporting infrastructure. A primary concern is establishing a reliable charging network capable of sustaining fleet operations, particularly during peak hours, to prevent service interruptions.

Ensuring battery durability is critical, as it directly affects the ability to maintain bus schedules and reduce downtime for repairs or replacements. Moreover, there needs to be a level of trust amongst all stakeholders, and the main concern revolves around the functionality and usability of the batteries, which will be the heart of e-bus operations. To manage these complexities, there is a growing interest in introducing e-buses gradually, allowing operators to monitor performance, address potential issues, and adjust operations for a smoother and more sustainable transition.

3.

Environmental and Sustainability Considerations

The project was backed by all stakeholders for its potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance urban air quality. One of the major initiatives was to integrate renewable energy sources, such as solar power, into the charging infrastructure to maximize environmental benefits, addressing concerns about the grid’s capacity, especially during peak times. There were open concerns regarding the source of electricity production. It was suggested to assess, forecast, and present data-driven projections of the project’s real-world impact, offering concrete evidence of the importance of adopting e-buses. It is important to monitor certain quantitative measurements, such as air quality and emissions, to assess the impact of sustainable transport initiatives.

4.

Community Engagement and Social Impact

The importance of public awareness and community support is crucial for a successful transition to e-buses. Educational programs and knowledge sharing should be developed to inform the public about the benefits of e-buses and address concerns about doubts and misconceptions. In line with stakeholder recommendations, the authors are conducting a user perception study among potential e-bus riders to gather insights and gauge public sentiment. Additionally, proposing small-scale pilot projects on selected routes can demonstrate the advantages of e-buses before a full-scale rollout, especially as there are lingering doubts about the project’s success. Moreover, concerns regarding fare structures have been raised, highlighting the need for affordable pricing to ensure that e-buses remain accessible to all segments of the community. Thus, there will be an assessment of emission calculations and fare methodology development to cater to stakeholder requests for help and direction on the path to e-bus adoption.

5.

Technical and Commercial Perspectives

Insights were provided into the technical aspects and market dynamics of e-buses, covering several key areas. Ongoing advancements in battery technology, such as improved battery life and faster charging capabilities, were discussed, with the private sector demonstrating a strong understanding of global developments and suggesting ways for Sri Lanka to progress in this arena. There was a clear interest in establishing local maintenance facilities and supply chains to enhance service reliability and reduce costs, while also incorporating Sri Lankan value addition wherever possible. The importance of continued research and development was emphasized to further enhance electric vehicle performance and lower production costs, ensuring that e-buses become a viable long-term solution tailored to the country’s specific needs.

By addressing these categorized outcomes, the E-Bus project can ensure a comprehensive approach that aligns with regulatory needs, logistical requirements, environmental goals, community interests, and technological advancements, ultimately contributing to a smoother and more sustainable transition to electric transportation.

7. Electric Bus Adoption Barriers Ranking from Stakeholder Perspectives

The global shift towards electrification in the transport industry, aimed at reducing emissions and promoting sustainability, is reflected in the growing adoption of electric vehicles, supported by policies and incentives. However, while Electric vehicles help reduce emissions, they do not fully solve broader transport challenges such as road congestion and the continued use of private vehicles. Despite their benefits, the transition to e-buses faces several challenges that are influenced by stakeholder involvement.

The study examines the impact of stakeholders on the integration of e-buses into public transit systems, identifying and prioritizing key barriers and the role different groups play in overcoming them. Based on stakeholder input, the study highlights challenges such as high procurement costs, inadequate charging infrastructure, limited range and battery capacity, technological unfamiliarity, and a shortage of skilled labor. Additionally, the lack of comprehensive data on e-bus performance hinders effective decision-making. By engaging stakeholders, including government agencies, transit operators, manufacturers, and community groups, the research presents strategies to address these challenges and ensure a smooth transition to e-buses.

Studies carried out by the authors outline several key barriers to the integration of e-buses (e-buses) into existing bus fleets, including high initial procurement costs, challenges in identifying and executing suitable charging infrastructure, a shortage of skilled labor and user training, limited warranty periods, unreliable data on e-bus performance, technical issues, grid limitations during peak hours, and supply chain disruptions. Despite these obstacles, e-buses are considered a viable option for achieving a sustainable public transport network. Their benefits include zero tailpipe emissions, reduced fuel and maintenance costs, improved occupational health, and alignment with global electrification trends. Engaging experts in e-bus technology is critical for overcoming barriers and ensuring a smooth transition. This study highlights the importance of further research, particularly on cost–benefit analyses and lessons learned from existing e-bus implementations, to develop an optimized framework for e-bus adoption and inform future policy decisions.

The stakeholders in Table 2 were categorized under two main groups: ‘Administrative and Policy-related’ and ‘Industry Practitioners and Professional Bodies’ as in Figure 3. However, expert advice and the recognition of the importance of incorporating individuals with deeper subject knowledge led to the introduction of a third group: ‘Academics/Researchers.’ This new category ensures that the project benefits from the expertise of individuals who specialize in the relevant field.

Figure 3. The recommended framework for the adoption of E-buses.

The Weighted Average Method (WAM) is a useful tool for calculating an average where each component or data point is assigned a different level of importance based on its significance, allowing for more nuanced results compared to a simple average, which treats all values equally. At this preliminary stage, the weights for all stakeholders are considered equal (1), ensuring a balanced approach to gathering initial insights [39].

However, as the research progresses, it is anticipated that the weight assigned to each stakeholder category will be adjusted based on their specific level of influence and impact on the outcomes. This approach will allow for more precise analysis, ensuring that stakeholders with a higher degree of relevance contribute proportionately to the final recommendations, making the results more reflective of real-world dynamics and stakeholder influence.

The initial outcomes of the Barrier Analysis for the e-Bus Implementation study present the following 12 factors for stakeholder assessment purposes, with no particular order of importance assigned.

1.

High initial procurement costs;

2.

Lack of funding and financial incentives;

3.

Overall operation-related costs, including maintenance and repair;

4.

Limited warranty period and doubtfulness on the commercial viability of the vehicle;

5.

Absence of properly skilled labor for operational assistance and user training;

6.

Resistance to change—reluctance to embrace new technology—stakeholders’ friction;

7.

Limitations of the grid, peak power loads, and power outages;

8.

Bus depot-related concerns (adequate space, safety, costs, power supply, etc.);

9.

Absence of transparent, validated, and reliable data on ‘E-Bus Operation and Maintenance’ to make informed decisions regarding the adoption of e-buses;

10.

Impacts from climate-related and geographical parameters;

11.

Charging infrastructure-related concerns, including the absence of national standards and stringent policies;

12.

Absence of effective supply chain management.

The ranking of barriers has been developed by considering both the individual categorizations of stakeholders and the overall outcome. This approach ensures that the perspectives and priorities of each stakeholder group, such as policymakers, industry professionals, and academics, are independently assessed while also contributing to a comprehensive understanding of the challenges as a whole. By incorporating specific and broad viewpoints, the ranking provides a detailed framework highlighting the most critical barriers from multiple perspectives.

This ranking can serve as a vital tool in the next stages of the project, especially in the strategic planning and decision-making phases of e-bus implementation. By aligning stakeholder priorities with the overall goals, it becomes easier to identify the most significant challenges and focus resources on overcoming them. Additionally, this structured ranking system will guide efforts to address the barriers in a targeted and efficient manner, ensuring a smoother adoption of e-buses and promoting sustainability in public transportation. It offers a clear path for tackling technical, financial, and infrastructural obstacles while maintaining strong stakeholder engagement.

7.1. Administrative and Policy-Related

The stakeholder analysis for the Administrative and Policy-related category revealed several key barriers to e-bus implementation. High procurement costs, lack of financial incentives, and inadequate data for informed decision-making emerged as major concerns. Challenges related to charging infrastructure, grid limitations, and the absence of skilled labor for operations were also highlighted. Resistance to adopting new technologies and depot-related issues further complicate implementation, along with the impact of geographical and climate factors.

7.2. Industry Practitioners and Professional Bodies

The stakeholder analysis for the Industry Practitioners and Professional Bodies category identified several critical barriers to e-bus implementation. High procurement costs, insufficient funding, and charging infrastructure concerns, including the lack of national standards, were highlighted as key obstacles. Additionally, grid limitations, unreliable data on bus operations, and high operational costs, particularly for maintenance and repair, pose significant challenges. Stakeholders also noted the impacts of climate and geography, bus depot-related issues, and resistance to adopting new technologies. Supply chain inefficiencies, limited warranty periods, and a lack of skilled labor for operations and training further complicated the transition.

7.3. Academic Scholars/Researchers

The stakeholder analysis for the Academic Scholars/Researchers category highlighted several key barriers to e-bus implementation. These include lack of funding, high initial procurement costs, grid limitations like peak power loads, and concerns about charging infrastructure due to the absence of national standards. Additionally, issues such as insufficient reliable data on e-bus operations, ineffective supply chain management, limited warranty periods, and doubts about commercial viability were noted.

7.4. Overall Ranking—Barriers Prioritization for E-Bus Implementation

The overall ranking of barriers (culmination of the categorical study) to E-Bus Implementation prioritizes key challenges that need to be addressed for successful adoption. Table 4 provides a clear insight into an individual and overall scenario with respect to barriers and their rankings. High initial procurement costs, lack of funding, and the absence of reliable data on e-bus operation and maintenance are the top concerns. Charging infrastructure issues, such as the absence of national standards, and grid limitations like peak power loads and outages, also pose significant challenges. Other important barriers include high operational costs, ineffective supply chain management, limited warranty periods, and doubts about vehicle viability. Additionally, concerns about bus depots, a shortage of skilled labor, resistance to adopting new technology, and the impacts of climate and geographical factors round out the list. Tackling these barriers is essential for the smooth integration of e-buses into public transit systems.

Table 4. Barriers Ranking—E-Bus Implementation (Individual and Overall Ranking).

Barriers for Electric Bus Implementation	Administrative and Policy-Related	Industry Practitioners and Professional Bodies	Academic Scholars/Researchers	Overall Ranking
High Initial procurement costs	1	1	2	1
Lack of funding and financial incentives	2	2	1	2
Absence of transparent, validated, and reliable data on ‘E-Bus Operation and Maintenance’ to make informed decisions	3	5	5	3
Charging Infrastructure related concerns, including absence of national standards and stringent policies	7	3	4	4
Limitations of the grid, peak power loads, and power outages	9	4	3	5
Overall operation-related costs including maintenance and repair	6	6	9	6
Absence of an effective supply chain management	4	10	6	7
Limited warranty period and doubtfulness on the commercial viability of the vehicle	5	11	7	8
Bus Depot-related concerns	11	8	8	9
Absence of proper skilled labor for operational assistance and user training	8	12	10	10
Resistance to change—reluctance to embrace new technology—stakeholders’ friction	10	9	11	11
Impacts from climate-related and geographical parameters	12	7	12	12

This individual and overall outcome will offer valuable insights into the prioritization and development of mitigation strategies for addressing stakeholder concerns and ensuring the smooth and successful integration of e-buses into the existing public transit network. The study recommends and anticipates carrying out a detailed analysis to develop a barrier mitigation model for smooth adoption support to facilitate policymakers and authorities to mitigate barriers most sustainably.

8. Pathway to Adopting E-Buses: A Focus on the Sri Lankan Context

Depending on the outcomes of the study through assessments, it is important to forecast a path forward to facilitate e-buses within the existing public transit system. Sri Lanka relies heavily on vehicle imports, with over 95% of its vehicles imported and only about 5% assembled locally. The government imposes high taxes on motor vehicles at import or first registration, making these taxes a significant revenue source. These rates are frequently adjusted, depending on the election environment and external reasons, to either increase revenue or offer economic relief. In terms of fuel prices, Sri Lanka’s petrol and diesel costs are well below global averages. A comparison of 168 countries shows Sri Lanka’s petrol price is 6% lower and diesel 22% lower than the global average. Among non-oil-producing nations, these prices are even more competitive, with petrol 43% and diesel 69% below the average, ranking Sri Lanka second in having the lowest pump prices among 47 non-oil-producing countries [1].

The world and Sri Lanka are at a critical juncture where adopting sustainable solutions and interventions in the transportation sector is essential for creating outcomes that can secure the planet’s future. Implementing sustainable strategies requires careful consideration, as these initiatives often demand significant financial investments that must be both sustainable and strategically calculated. By prioritizing sustainable transportation solutions, Sri Lanka can play a pivotal role in addressing global environmental challenges while ensuring that its economic and social needs are met.

Figure 3 outlines a structured framework for the adoption of e-buses in Sri Lanka, beginning with policy enablers like tax cuts and grants to incentivize transition. The process starts with a pilot phase focused on Colombo, testing feasibility and performance, followed by a scale-up phase to expand e-buses nationwide. Key steps include developing charging infrastructure and maintenance training to support operational readiness, alongside stakeholder engagement through public–private partnerships (PPPs) and public awareness campaigns. The framework emphasizes continuous monitoring and adaptation, using data to refine policies and ensure long-term success. This approach aligns with Sri Lanka’s goals for sustainable transport, balancing local challenges with scalable solutions.

Sri Lanka is currently facing significant economic challenges, a situation that resonates with many developing countries grappling with similar issues. Financial constraints limit the ability to invest in necessary infrastructure and technologies, making the adoption of e-buses feel more like a distant dream than an attainable goal. Transitioning to electric mobility requires substantial financial intervention for the development of charging networks, procurement of vehicles, and maintenance facilities. These investments are critical not only for enhancing public transport but also for achieving long-term sustainability goals.

Given the current economic climate, the high upfront costs associated with e-buses can be daunting. Many stakeholders are concerned about the return on investment, especially when immediate budgetary pressures compete with long-term environmental benefits. The fear of insufficient funding, coupled with uncertainty regarding the financial viability of such projects, can stifle progress and discourage decision-makers from pursuing electric mobility initiatives.

8.1. Recommendations

To overcome these obstacles, Sri Lanka needs to seek innovative financing models, such as public–private partnerships, green bonds, and international grants, which can provide the necessary capital while minimizing risks. Additionally, focusing on phased implementation, starting with pilot projects, can help demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of e-buses, gradually building confidence among stakeholders. Ultimately, a collective commitment to prioritizing sustainable transportation solutions is vital for ensuring that Sri Lanka can navigate its economic challenges while moving toward a more sustainable future.

Adopting a non-monetary perspective is essential when evaluating the potential benefits of e-bus implementation, as it allows for a broader understanding of the societal advantages that can resonate with the public. Comprehensive studies should be conducted to assess the impact of e-bus adoption on pollution mitigation, providing a clear breakdown of both direct and indirect benefits for individuals and communities. For instance, reducing air pollution can lead to a decrease in health-related issues, such as respiratory diseases, which in turn can lower medical costs and contribute to a healthier workforce, ultimately enhancing economic productivity. These benefits must be articulated in an accessible language that can be easily understood by the general population.

Furthermore, it is critical to pursue grants and financial incentives from global agencies to support the transition to electric mobility. Such funding can alleviate initial capital expenditures and demonstrate a commitment to sustainability. Additionally, manufacturers should be encouraged to offer extended warranty periods for e-buses, thereby instilling trust and confidence in their reliability among operators and stakeholders. By emphasizing the comprehensive advantages of e-buses, addressing community concerns, and seeking supportive funding mechanisms, Sri Lanka can cultivate a well-informed and engaged public, thereby facilitating the successful adoption of sustainable transportation solutions.

To ensure the successful adoption and operation of e-buses in Sri Lanka, the development of a comprehensive National E-Bus Adoption and Operation Framework is essential. This framework should include a detailed Stakeholder Management Plan, involving all relevant ministries and authorities. The outcomes of this study can be utilized as the base for the plan development. A dedicated organization must be established to oversee the planning and implementation of e-buses and their associated infrastructure, incorporating representatives from key stakeholders.

Government support is crucial, including the provision of tax concessions and the streamlining of policies to eliminate barriers. Education and training programs on e-bus operation and maintenance should be integrated into universities, technical colleges, and vocational institutes to ensure continuous operation and skilled workforce development. Additionally, research and development should be prioritized, particularly focusing on e-bus technologies, battery advancements, and infrastructure development that align with national objectives. Encouraging private sector investment and partnerships through stable, long-term policies that remain consistent across political changes is vital to drive innovation and align with global trends while meeting the specific needs of Sri Lanka’s e-bus market.

8.2. Findings (Requirements)

Furthermore, the study’s most significant finding highlights the need for key stakeholders to be adequately informed about several critical aspects of e-buses. The study identified that stakeholders require clearer insights and evidence-based information in the following areas:

• Comparative Emissions Analysis between Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) Buses and e-Buses: There is a need for detailed comparative data on greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants generated by ICE buses versus those produced or avoided by e-buses. Such data is essential to assess the true environmental benefits of transitioning to electric public transport.
• User Perception of E-Buses: Understanding the public’s perception, acceptance, and satisfaction with e-buses is vital for successful implementation. Assessing the impact of factors such as ride quality, comfort, reliability, and awareness of environmental benefits, and the influence on user adoption and sustained use is important.
• Impact of E-Buses on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Stakeholders seek clarity on the actual contributions of e-bus integration toward achieving climate action targets under the NDCs and broader sustainable development outcomes. This includes evaluating goal-specific outcomes, such as improved air quality, reduced carbon footprint, and enhanced access to sustainable transport under the SDG framework.
• Identification and Assessment of Barriers to E-Bus Adoption: Stakeholders also require a comprehensive understanding of the challenges hindering the adoption and scale-up of e-bus systems, which were mostly discussed in this study in the prioritization process. Systematically assessing these constraints is critical to formulating targeted interventions and facilitating a smoother transition.

These informational needs underline the importance of robust data, continuous stakeholder engagement, and transparent communication in promoting the adoption and effective implementation of e-bus systems. The stakeholders’ requirements regarding the listed aspects emphasized the need for context-specific, localized insights rather than relying on generalized or universal assessments.

This study has made a comprehensive contribution to understanding stakeholder perspectives, interventions, and their requirements for sustainably adopting e-buses within the existing public transit ecosystem. It has provided valuable insights while offering recommendations that align with both the best global practices and local contexts. The study emphasizes the importance of a coordinated approach, addressing the concerns of various stakeholders to ensure that the transition to electric mobility is both feasible and environmentally beneficial, thus paving the way for a more sustainable public transportation system.

8.3. Limitations

Despite its comprehensive scope, this study has several limitations:

• Data Availability and Quality: Some data on e-bus performance, emissions, and cost structures specific to Sri Lanka were limited or unavailable, leading to reliance on global or regional benchmarks.
• Stakeholder Representation: Although a diverse range of stakeholders was consulted, there may still be gaps in representation, especially from rural operators or small-scale private transport providers.
• Dynamic Policy Environment: The findings are based on the current policy and economic conditions, which are subject to rapid change, particularly given Sri Lanka’s economic volatility and evolving import tax policies.
• Limited Operational Testing: The absence of large-scale local e-bus pilots restricts the ability to assess operational challenges such as battery degradation, grid impacts, and maintenance logistics under Sri Lankan climatic and urban conditions.
• Non-Monetary Benefit Quantification: While the study discusses the societal benefits of e-buses, including health and environmental outcomes, it does not provide detailed monetized impact assessments due to data constraints.

These limitations indicate areas where further research and real-world testing will be necessary to validate assumptions and fine-tune proposed frameworks.

8.4. Future Work

To build on the findings of this study and strengthen the adoption pathway for e-buses in Sri Lanka, the following future research and development efforts are recommended:

• Development of a National E-Bus Adoption and Operation Framework: This should incorporate stakeholder management plans, operational guidelines, infrastructure blueprints, and performance monitoring mechanisms, with phased implementation plans.
• Localized Emission Impact Studies: Conduct in-depth comparative analyses between ICE buses and e-buses under local conditions to accurately quantify environmental benefits and support evidence-based policy-making.
• Public Perception and Behavior Studies: Further qualitative and quantitative research should investigate user acceptance, willingness to pay, and travel behavior changes in response to e-bus deployment.
• Economic and Financial Feasibility Modeling: Detailed cost–benefit analysis under different financing models (PPP, green bonds, donor funding) should be explored to ensure sustainability.
• Pilot Demonstrations and Operational Trials: Implement and monitor pilot projects in urban and semi-urban contexts to gather operational data, identify challenges, and refine best practices.
• Capacity Building and Curriculum Integration: Establish educational and vocational training programs focused on electric mobility, battery management, and grid interaction, embedded within local institutions.
• Policy Harmonization Research: Examine ways to align vehicle import taxes, energy policy, urban planning, battery lifecycle and recycling strategies, and public health goals to create an enabling environment for e-buses.

By addressing these areas, Sri Lanka can continue building a robust, context-sensitive framework that supports the long-term integration of e-buses into its public transit system, in line with both national development priorities and global sustainability commitments.

9. Conclusions

This study focuses on stakeholder perspectives and concerns, emphasizing their critical inclusion in the process of adopting e-buses in Sri Lanka. It highlights the need to address various stakeholder issues, such as selecting appropriate technologies, identifying suitable routes and services, establishing charging infrastructure, and providing relevant training. By involving all stakeholders and addressing their concerns, this study aims to ensure a smooth transition to e-buses without major disruptions to the current public transit system. It stresses the importance of building long-term trust and developing solutions that align with the interests of all parties involved.

Unlike conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) buses, e-buses require a distinct ecosystem that calls for a tailored framework suited to the country’s specific needs. This study emphasizes the necessity of incorporating various stakeholders into this framework, ensuring a coordinated approach that addresses challenges without disrupting the existing transit system.

This study provides a comprehensive examination of the prospects for adopting e-buses within Sri Lanka’s public transit system, with a strong focus on stakeholder perspectives and requirements. It underscores the importance of addressing stakeholder concerns, including the selection of appropriate technologies, route identification, charging infrastructure, training, and ongoing maintenance. The research affirms that involving all relevant stakeholders and addressing their needs is essential to facilitate a smooth and effective transition to electric mobility without causing major disruptions to existing transport operations.

The analysis reveals that while there is growing interest and support for the adoption of e-buses, practical implementation has been hindered by a lack of comprehensive national-level studies that consider the local economic, institutional, and technical context. As e-buses differ significantly from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles in terms of their operational ecosystem, this study stresses the importance of a context-sensitive, coordinated framework tailored specifically to Sri Lanka’s requirements.

This study also highlights the need for national leadership in establishing a dedicated working committee to assess technical feasibility, identify pilot routes, and set clear objectives for fleet penetration. Ultimately, transitioning to e-buses in Sri Lanka requires not only robust planning but also policy stability, targeted financial incentives, and strong multi-stakeholder collaboration that aligns with both national priorities and global sustainability goals. In addition, the support and collaboration of international organizations, alongside national authorities, will be key to facilitating the transition through a carefully developed, well-evaluated framework that aligns with global best practices.