An Innovation Management Approach for Electric Vertical Take-Off and Landing

Abstract

With more companies entering the realm of electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) and governments enacting policies to support the development of low-altitude economies, the commercial potential of eVTOL is being recognized by the public. However, true commercialization is still a long way off. This article analyzes the technologies, product features, potential markets, and government policies related to eVTOL and constructs a four-stage, four-layer Policy–Technology Roadmap (P-TRM) model to guide the R&D process of eVTOL. Then, it is transformed into a system structural model, and the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method is used to identify several key nodes in the R&D process. Utilizing the Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC) theory for interpretation and analysis, the article concludes by proposing strategies in product, technology, and policy support for how eVTOL can successfully cross the chasm. This preliminary analysis of the development path, key nodes, and necessary measures for crossing the chasm provides insights for the R&D and commercialization of eVTOL.

1. Introduction

The rise of electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) technology has generated significant excitement, envisioning a future of “flying cars” that could transform transportation. With numerous companies entering the field and governments backing low-altitude economies, the commercial potential of eVTOL is becoming increasingly apparent. However, despite this enthusiasm, challenges persist on the road to full commercialization.

To address the complexities of eVTOL development, this article proposes an innovative approach to managing innovation in this emerging sector. By analyzing the interplay of technologies, product features, markets, and government policies, a comprehensive Policy–Technology Roadmap (P-TRM) model is constructed, offering strategic guidance for R&D efforts.

Moreover, practical methodologies, including the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method, are utilized to identify key areas of focus within the R&D process. Drawing on the Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC), actionable strategies are developed to support product, technology, and policy initiatives.

This article serves as a practical guide for stakeholders involved in eVTOL R&D and commercialization. By providing insights into development trajectories, identifying critical areas, and proposing essential measures for navigating the path to commercialization, it aims to empower individuals and organizations in the complex landscape of eVTOL innovation.

2. Status of Electric Vertical Take-Off and Landing

2.1. Introduction to the eVTOL

The low-altitude economy integrates manned and unmanned aerial activities, boosting domestic demand and fostering new development models. This drives high-quality economic, social, and national defense growth. Urban air mobility (UAM) emerges as a clean and sustainable solution for growing urban transportation needs, enabling safe and efficient passenger and cargo operations [1].

The electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) are crucial for developing both the low-altitude economy and UAM, which can be described as a vehicle that fits somewhere between a drone and a conventional airplane. The eVTOL features vertical take-off and landing capability, electrification of lift and thrust, and automation of controls. Envisioned applications for passenger transportation include usage as air taxis, for emergency response (first-aid, police), and for leisure activities (sightseeing). As for the transportation of goods, eVTOL would offer a larger capacity for freight transport than ordinary drones. More newcomers have entered the field of eVTOL aircraft development, including Volocopter (Germany), EHang (China), Airbus (US), Kitty Hawk (US), Lilium (Germany), Opener (US), and Cartivator (Japan) [2,3].

2.2. Classification of eVTOL

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), via its Special Condition for small-category VTOL aircraft, published in 2018 [4], has outlined two distinct characteristics common to eVTOL aircraft. These are vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) capability and a distributed electric propulsion system.

It is worth noting that, due to the distributed electric propulsion (DEP) systems design adopted by eVTOL, it exhibits power relative scale independence, resulting in a diversity of eVTOL configurations. Their classification relationships, propulsion systems, and comparison are shown in Figure 1 [5,6,7].

3. Technology Roadmapping

3.1. Introduction to Technology Roadmapping

Technology roadmapping is a versatile tool widely used in the industry for strategic planning. It visually maps the connections between evolving markets, products, and technologies over time [8]. It offers a structured approach to explore and communicate linkages between technology resources, organizational goals, and changing environments [9]. Researchers define technology roadmaps as consensus visions of future technology landscapes, guiding the identification, evaluation, and selection of strategic alternatives to achieve specific objectives [9,10]. They address key questions like: “Where are we going?” “Where are we now?” and “How can we get there?” [11].

Technology roadmaps are versatile tools that can be adapted to fit a variety of contexts. They provide a structured approach for aligning different viewpoints and conveying strategic goals. These roadmaps are often tailored to specific systems or subjects, making them suitable for technology, product, project, industry, and scientific applications [12]. The structure of the TRM is usually composed of three layers: technology, product, and market (typically the vertical axis) with a time frame (typically the horizontal axis). According to the firm’s objective and vision, future needs are mapped and visualized on the TRM in the form of pathways by connecting each node based on causal relationships.

Technology-driven business development is the core driver of innovation in products, businesses, and markets. Advances in technology at the foundational level cascade upwards, influencing products, business operations, and markets. The technology roadmap emphasizes the coordinated development of technology, products, business, and markets, with interrelated activities at different levels driving the growth of the enterprise. Through the technology roadmap (Figure 2), companies can allocate resources more effectively to ensure that work proceeds as planned. In terms of further analysis and application, the roadmap allows for the assessment of the alignment between technological development and business needs, facilitating timely adjustments to technology strategies; identification of potential risks, such as technological bottlenecks and market competition, enabling proactive measures; providing a basis for decision-making to support technology investment and product development; and serving as a communication tool to help employees across departments understand the company’s development direction, thereby improving team collaboration efficiency.

3.2. Policy–Technology Roadmap

Many technological roadmap studies analyze market, product, and technology dimensions, yet few integrate policy into the framework. In regions where policy holds significant sway, understanding how policy interventions impact technology evolution via market and product strategies is crucial. Hence, the emergence of a Policy–Technology Roadmap (P-TRM), which incorporates policy tools, constructing a new framework to analyze policy effects on different stages of industrial development [13].

By integrating policy dimensions into the technology roadmap framework, we can more accurately illuminate the “indirect and implicit” mechanisms and pathways through which policies influence industrial development and innovation. High-tech industries with long value chains and strategic significance, characterized by rapid technological innovation, complex supply chains, and significant impacts on national or regional development, often receive substantial government attention and policy interventions. For instance, in China, these industries are frequently subject to government guidance, regardless of whether the outcomes are positive or negative. The Policy–Technology Roadmap (P-TRM) model offers a more comprehensive means of revealing the impact pathways and mechanisms of policies on the development of these industries. The initial application of the P-TRM model was in the analysis of China’s wind power and photovoltaic industries [13], where empirical analyses demonstrated its explanatory power regarding the laws governing industrial technological innovation and evolution.

In applications, the P-TRM model can be employed to quantitatively or qualitatively assess policy effectiveness, optimize policy combinations, mitigate policy risks, and provide decision support for industrial development planning, technology roadmap development, supply chain optimization, and industrial upgrading. Enterprises can leverage this model to make technology investment decisions, formulate market expansion strategies, and manage risks, thereby enhancing their core competitiveness.

For example, the P-TRM has been applied to study the wind power and photovoltaic industries in China, where policy–technology roadmaps were constructed to empirically analyze the explanatory power of P-TRMs in understanding industrial technological innovation and evolution patterns [13]. Taking China’s new energy vehicle industry as another case, this study constructs a policy–technology roadmap from a socio-technical systems perspective to elucidate the interactive evolution between policy instruments, disruptive technologies, and the development of emerging industries in each stage [14]. It suggests that in the early stage, shielding policy instruments should be prioritized, focusing on providing space for niche diversification and promoting the formation of emerging markets. In the growth stage, nurturing instruments should be the main focus, emphasizing the establishment of a sound niche function, and in the transformation stage, empowerment instruments should be prioritized to facilitate a smooth transition between old and new paradigms through adaptive and transformative measures.

Policy tools can be categorized into three types: supply-side, environmental, and demand-side(

Table 1. Types of policy tools.

Type of Policy Tools	Example	Effect
Demand-side policy	Public procurement, price subsidies	Stabilize the market environment for innovation, fostering confidence and stimulating technology research and development
Environmental policy	Standard design, goal planning	Environmental policy tools shape product design by imposing standardized requirements, fostering a competitive landscape that rewards innovation, and ultimately driving technological advancement and the emergence of new products
Supply-side policy	Technology infrastructure, technology input	Support enterprise research and development, encouraging investment and effective resource allocation

). Each type influences the market, product, and technology differently throughout technological and industrial evolution.

Demand-side policy tools include public procurement, price subsidies, outsourcing, etc. They primarily directly impact the market dimension by providing a clear and stable market through large-scale government procurement or price subsidies for new technology products, reducing the uncertainty faced by innovation in the early market entry stage, inspiring the confidence and determination of innovation subjects, and thus promoting technology research and development.

Environmental policy tools include standard design, goal planning, financial support, tax incentives, intellectual property rights, etc. The commonality of such policy tools is first reflected in their influence on product design by establishing standardized product standards and requirements, thereby having a normative impact on product performance. Environmental policy tools also create a favorable environment for enterprise innovation and growth, promote healthy competition among enterprises, tolerate the “creative destruction” of new technologies and industries to old technologies and industries, and thus stimulate the birth of more new products.

Supply-side policy tools mainly include talent incentive cultivation, information support, construction of science and technology infrastructure, technology input, public services, etc., to provide support for enterprise technology research and development, thereby promoting enterprise research and development investment, research and development progress, and research and development path selection. Its impact on technological evolution is more manifested in policy-driven research and the development of generic technologies. Additionally, supply-side technology policy tools can also allocate scarce technology resources [13].

Each type of policy tool is not limited to influencing only one dimension; it may also affect other dimensions. In fact, the market, product, and technology dimensions are not entirely separate but have strong correlations and continuity.

In the early industrial stages, supply-side policies promote scientific research completion and technology application. Demand-side policies focus on transforming technology into marketable products. Environmental policies play a consistent role throughout the innovation cycle, impacting each stage of development [13].

In this paper, we will utilize the Policy–Technology Roadmap model to construct the technology roadmap for eVTOL.

4. Main Layers of the Technology Roadmap

This paper aims to create a tailored four-layer technology roadmap for eVTOL, comprising Technology, Product, Market, and Policy. Predictions on the future development trends of each layer will be made based on existing eVTOL information. The stages encompass research and validation, early commercialization, rapid commercialization, and mature commercialization. Each stage is divided into time periods of 5 years each. This delineation of years is tentative, based on the assumption that eVTOL can progress and commercialize at a reasonably ideal pace. The reality may be entirely different, and eVTOL could even prove to be a non-commercializable design by the originally set second stage in the future.

4.1. Technology

4.1.1. Status of Key eVTOL Technologies

Distributed Electric Propulsion Technology

Electric propulsion systems, like Distributed Electric Propulsion (DEP), are widely adopted in the emerging field of eVTOL aircraft. These systems utilize electric motors to drive ducted fans, converting electrical energy directly into mechanical power. Compared to conventional turbofan engines, they offer significant advantages, with electric systems utilizing over 70 percent of electricity compared to a turbofan engine’s 40 percent fuel energy utilization. This efficient energy conversion not only enhances overall system efficiency but also improves aircraft performance and significantly reduces fuel consumption.

Due to the unique working principle and compact and flexible architecture of the electric propulsion system, it has power relative scale independence. This leads to a diversity in the configuration of eVTOL, where different configurations have the potential to achieve design objectives. The overall design of eVTOL can break through the limitations of the traditional architecture, expand the freedom of aircraft design, and greatly improve the comprehensive performance of the aircraft.

The fundamental architecture of an electric propulsion system comprises three primary components: the propulsion system, power supply, and auxiliary system. This architecture allows for greater design flexibility compared to conventional powerplants, facilitating a diverse range of eVTOL configurations and performance capabilities [6].

Lithium-ion batteries, due to their high energy density, long cycle life, and relatively lightweight characteristics, have become the most promising energy storage devices in the field of electric aircraft. With the acceleration of the commercialization trend of electric vertical take-off and landing aircraft and the growth of demand in the background of extreme environments, the performance and safety of lithium-ion batteries have been put forward with unprecedentedly high requirements.

In the face of the technical challenges of lithium-ion battery upgrading, the industry is actively exploring a number of solutions: (1) Improve the key materials and structure of the battery to enhance the stability of the lithium-ion battery. By optimizing material composition and microstructure, the energy density, cycle life, and safety performance of the battery can be effectively improved. (2) The research and development of battery and fuselage integration technology aims to further improve the efficiency of battery structure and group efficiency so as to improve the energy density of the entire system. This integrated design can not only reduce the weight and volume but also help improve the overall performance of the aircraft. (3) The setup of the battery management system is the key for the battery to operate under a safe working window. By accurately monitoring the status of the battery, predicting potential risks, and taking appropriate protective measures, it can effectively prevent the battery from overheating, overcharging, over-discharging, and other safety problems. (4) The research and development of battery thermal management systems is an indispensable part of improving the performance and safety of lithium-ion batteries. By optimizing the heat dissipation design and controlling the temperature distribution of the battery, it can ensure that the battery can maintain stable performance in high- or low-temperature environments [6].

eVTOL’s motor and electronic control technology is undoubtedly the top priority for its efficient, stable, and safe operation. The motor system, as the core power unit of the electric propulsion system, is directly related to the energy utilization and propulsion efficiency of the electric propulsion system. In the eVTOL operation process, the motor needs to show the characteristics of high power density and high efficiency to support the vertical take-off and landing of the aircraft and high-speed cruise, which undoubtedly puts forward extremely high requirements for the design and manufacture of the motor.

To achieve this goal, the motor needs to maximize thrust and torque while ensuring light weight. This not only requires the selection of high-performance materials but also requires in-depth research and optimization in the motor’s structural design and manufacturing process. Only in this way can the motor meet eVTOL’s power needs while achieving efficient energy use and excellent propulsion performance.

At the same time, electronic control technology also plays an indispensable role. It requires accurate energy management to ensure that the motor can obtain a stable energy supply in various flight states. In addition, electronic control technology also needs to achieve stable flight control through accurate algorithms and advanced control strategies to ensure the flight safety of eVTOL in complex environments [6].

Low Aerodynamic Noise Technology

Noise reduction is a crucial factor determining the feasibility of eVTOL aircraft for urban air travel. Various noise sources, such as paddle–vortex interference and blade–fuselage interference, significantly impact its suitability for urban environments. Currently, noise reduction measures for rotor noise are limited, with reducing rotor tip speed being a primary solution. However, decreasing tip speed often requires increasing rotor stiffness to maintain tension capacity, which may introduce performance challenges. Therefore, balancing noise reduction with overall performance enhancement has become a key focus of current technology research and development in the eVTOL sector [2].

Flight Control Technology

The commercial prospects of eVTOL depend, to a large extent, on innovations and advances in unmanned technology. At present, the research on eVTOL control technology mainly focuses on several key areas, such as redundant rudder control and cooperative control, multi-flight mode robust control, and fault reconstruction control. However, the difficulties in the process of commercialization cannot be ignored. Since the main flight area of eVTOL is concentrated over cities, this environment faces more constraints than conventional aircraft. These constraints not only come from the complex urban airspace layout but also involve flight safety, traffic management, and other aspects of consideration. Therefore, the level requirements for autonomous driving systems are also more stringent [3]. In the face of the needs of low-altitude cities, electric vertical take-off and landing flight control technology will develop towards autonomy and intelligence in the future. Through deep learning, reinforcement learning, and other methods, it can realize functions such as one-click autonomous take-off and landing, intelligent obstacle avoidance and fault reconstruction, and improve the automatic driving and intelligent level of eVTOL aircraft [6].

4.1.2. Future Prospects of eVTOL Key Technology Development

The future prospects of eVTOL key technology development still involve three key technologies: distributed electric propulsion technology, low aerodynamic noise technology, and flight control technology, as outlined in

Table 2. Future prospects of eVTOL key technology.

	Research and Validation	Early Commercialization	Rapid Commercialization	Mature Commercialization
Distributed Electric Propulsion	In a period of strategic opportunities, most tech inherited from NEV	Enhance efficiency, cutting energy use, and reducing emissions	As the industry chain improves, electric propulsion system production costs will decrease gradually	Enhance efficiency, manage costs, and incorporate intelligent automation
Low Aerodynamic Noise Technology	Reducing aircraft noise during take-off, landing, and flight	Optimizing multiple goals like noise reduction, energy efficiency, and emissions reduction	Achieve “Low Noise” or even “Zero Noise”, reduce cost	Reach the max limit, aligning with environmental sustainability goals
Flight Control Technology	Primarily human-controlled with program assistance	Primarily program-controlled with human assistance, the flight process is predominantly automated	Enable advanced autonomous operations, cooperative flight, and remote control	Utilizing advanced technologies to create a global autonomous driving network

.

4.2. Product

Based on the division into four stages: the research and validation stage, early commercialization stage, rapid commercialization stage, and mature commercialization stage, this section will make predictions regarding the main performance of eVTOL at each stage. Since it is not possible to accurately predict the specific parameters and performance of future eVTOL products, this section will combine existing eVTOL-related technologies and apply research reports from leading companies in the industry to roughly describe the functions that eVTOL can achieve at each stage from a perspective focused on product functionality implementation [15] (

Table 3. Predicted Development of eVTOL Products.

	Research and Validation Stage	Early Commercialization Stage	Rapid Commercialization Stage	Mature Commercialization Stage
Driving mode	Autonomous driving technology awaits validation	Requiring visual flight conducted by professional pilots in collaboration with assisted driving systems	The system is responsible for most flight missions, equipped with professional pilots for manual control in emergency situations	Passenger eVTOL achieves full autonomous flight, overseen remotely by a central control system, removing the requirement for onsite professional pilots
Performance	Prototypes need to be explored through continuous experimentation and trial applications	The ideal performance parameters include a range of 150–200 km, a cruising speed of 200–250 km per hour, and a capacity of 4–5 passengers	The emergence of second- and third-generation commercial eVTOL products and the larger size of eVTOL	A trend towards personalized design, with a variety of eVTOLs designed and produced for different speeds, ranges, and appearances
Air traffic control	Initial studies and simulations are conducted to understand the impact of eVTOLs on existing air traffic systems; tests are performed to evaluate the effectiveness of proposed air traffic management solutions	Airspace and air traffic control systems have been adapted for low-altitude eVTOL flights, establishing fixed routes; pre-approval from relevant authorities is required for flight missions	Airspace management and air traffic control policies are becoming more flexible, with increased automation and shorter flight notification times	The air traffic management system will be highly efficient, allowing airspace resources to be allocated on demand
Infrastructure	Experimentation with various vertiport designs, materials, and layouts to ensure safety, efficiency, and minimal impact on existing urban environments	Landing and take-off points are set up near traditional urban transport hubs	Start spreading to urban commercial and residential centers and expanding into suburban areas	eVTOL landing and take-off points are integrated into urban planning

).

4.3. Market

In this section, the article will focus on describing the application scenarios of eVTOL, the operators of eVTOL operations, and the target users across different stages. This will help depict the market situation for eVTOL applications at various stages from three dimensions: target users, application scenarios, and eVTOL operators.

Due to the research and validation stage, eVTOL has not yet entered commercialization. The products are still in the prototype phase, and application standards and regulations are yet to be established. This section will not delve into the market situation during this stage.

4.3.1. Target Users

To analyze target users at different stages of eVTOL’s technology adoption progression, the Diffusion of Innovations theory, encompassing the Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC) model, provides a valuable framework. This theory elucidates how new technologies spread through a population and categorizes consumers into distinct groups based on their risk tolerance: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. Each group exhibits unique needs, preferences, and purchasing behaviors, necessitating tailored marketing approaches [16]. As illustrated in Figure 3, the gradual adoption by these consumer segments (represented by the blue line) leads to a characteristic S-shaped market penetration curve (represented by the yellow line), ultimately culminating in market saturation.

In the following section, we will employ the TALC theory to analyze the types of users and their characteristics that need to be focused on in different stages of eVTOL technology development and application, thereby providing a reference for the commercialization process of eVTOL. It is important to note that in the following analysis, the target users in subsequent stages often include user groups from previous stages (

Table 4. Users in each stage.

Stage	Consumer Groups	New Users	Characteristics
Research and Validation	Innovators	Technology pioneers, research institutions, aviation enthusiasts	-Interested in emerging technologies and new aircraft -Capable of investing significant resources into research and experimentation -Participate in research and testing processes
Early Commercialization	Early Adopters	Middle-income travelers, large corporations, affluent private users, individuals in need of air medical and tourism services	-Willing to try new products but more cautious compared to innovators -Often have substantial incomes
Rapid Commercialization	Early Majority	Ordinary consumers, urban residents, business travelers	-Majority of consumers -Wait for evidence of reliability and effectiveness -Willing to pay reasonable prices -Concerned about convenience and practicality
Mature Commercialization	Late Majority and Laggards	Suburban users, conservative individuals	-Cautious about new technologies

). Moreover, the user groups at each stage are not isolated but interconnected.

It is worth noting that with the advancement of eVTOL underlying technology and the reduction of production costs, private eVTOL will no longer be exclusive to high-income groups. The middle class may become important users of private eVTOL, similar to the current automobile market. Meanwhile, high-income individuals will focus more on personalized aviation solutions and be willing to invest in high-end personal air transportation as one of their routine travel modes.

Additionally, in the Technology Adoption Life Cycle, there exists a Chasm, which lies between early and mainstream markets [17]. Crossing this chasm is equally important for eVTOL, and the issues that eVTOL may encounter regarding this chasm will be analyzed separately in Section 6.2.

4.3.2. Application Scenarios

In the early commercialization stage, eVTOL serves primarily in short-distance passenger flights, business charters, medical transfers, and sightseeing tours, akin to helicopter services. Notably, eVTOL offers advantages like lower costs, improved safety, passenger comfort, and reduced noise levels compared to helicopters. In the rapid commercialization stage, technological advancements drive market expansion, enabling larger passenger capacities and introducing shared ownership models like “air taxis” and “air buses”. In the mature commercialization stage, the eVTOL market grows substantially, with small-scale eVTOL becoming common in private ownership. Personal eVTOLs are widely adopted for individual commuting, akin to the automobile market today.

4.3.3. eVTOL Operation

In the early commercialization stage, eVTOLs are mainly owned by enterprises and operated by professional pilots organized by eVTOL operators through leasing and other arrangements. A few high-income users may own private eVTOLs. In the rapid commercialization stage, eVTOL ownership sharing becomes more common, led by operators. “Air taxis” and “air buses” emerge, reducing ownership and usage costs. Moving into the mature commercialization stage, alongside operator sharing, private eVTOLs become prominent. Operators achieve cost-efficient, automated operations by remotely monitoring their fleet, marking a shift towards personalized and efficient air transportation services for both commercial and private users.

4.3.4. Further Market Segmentation Dimensional Analysis

While the preceding analysis has examined the time-based progression of eVTOL technology and its market adoption, a more nuanced understanding necessitates the exploration of additional segmentation factors. The successful adoption of eVTOL technology will be significantly influenced by a complex interplay of geographic, regulatory, and cultural factors.

Densely populated urban centers in developed economies are prime candidates for early eVTOL adoption, driven by existing traffic congestion and the potential for short-haul air taxi services. However, rural areas and developing nations may face greater challenges due to lower population densities, limited infrastructure, and economic constraints.

Regulatory environments will also be crucial. Effective air traffic management systems and stringent safety standards are essential for public trust and market growth. Moreover, the integration of eVTOLs into existing airspace will require careful planning and coordination.

Cultural factors will significantly influence the acceptance and utilization of eVTOL. Societies prioritizing individual car ownership are likely to embrace private eVTOL models, whereas those with robust public transportation systems may view eVTOLs as complementary modes of transport. Public perception will also be shaped by noise levels, necessitating technological advancements and carefully planned flight paths to mitigate concerns.

Finally, the speed of eVTOL adoption will vary across regions. While developed nations with robust infrastructure and supportive regulatory frameworks are expected to lead the way, challenges related to infrastructure development, public acceptance, and high initial costs must be addressed. In contrast, developing nations and rural areas may face more substantial barriers to entry, including economic feasibility, infrastructure investment, and regulatory hurdles.

4.4. Policy

The introduction to P-TRM and the three types of policy tools have been mentioned in Section 3.2. In this section, an analysis of the Policy component of the Policy–Technology Roadmap (P-TRM) will be conducted. Policy tools will be categorized into three types: supply-side policy tools, environmental policy tools, and demand-side policy tools [13]. Drawing from policies implemented by China targeting the new energy vehicle industry, a possible policy framework for eVTOL in the future will be constructed.

First, let us review China’s policies regarding new energy vehicles (NEVs). Since 2001, the Chinese government has implemented various policies targeting the NEV industry. These policies have led to NEVs gaining a significant market share in China’s automotive market, making it an influential industry internationally. eVTOL can draw on China’s policy experience in the new energy vehicle (NEV) sector because China successfully implemented a range of policy tools—supply-side, environmental, and demand-side—to accelerate NEV industry growth. Both NEVs and eVTOLs are emerging high-tech industries facing similar challenges, such as technical barriers, market acceptance, and infrastructure development. China’s success in NEV policy provides valuable insights for eVTOL policy formulation. The Chinese government’s use of financial incentives and tax breaks effectively boosted NEV market adoption, a strategy that is equally important for the nascent eVTOL market. Moreover, NEV policies focus on environmental protection and sustainability, aligning with the eco-friendly goals of eVTOLs as a future urban transportation solution. The consistency and long-term planning in China’s NEV policies have created a stable environment for businesses and investors, which is also crucial for fostering innovation and attracting long-term investment in the eVTOL industry. Figure 4 illustrates key policies for the NEV industry in China from 2001 to 2020 [17].

The Chinese government initially focused on supply-side policies in the early stages of the new energy vehicle industry, particularly through industrial policy planning schemes. During the early and rapid commercialization stages, numerous demand-side policy tools were utilized, including purchase subsidies, tax exemptions, and the promotion of charging station construction. Infrastructure development and subsidy policies typically follow market stimulation measures. Environmental planning has been integral throughout the industry’s development. In summary, supply-side policies prioritize scientific research advancement, demand-side policies aim to meet market demand, and environmental policies influence each stage of development. This observation aligns with the discussion in Section 3.2.

While China’s new energy vehicle industry has experienced rapid growth under the support of government policies, it is evident that policy tools have also led to a number of prominent issues. For instance, excessive reliance on government subsidies has resulted in a lack of innovation among enterprises, overcapacity, and product homogeneity. Meanwhile, the incomplete battery recycling system and the lagging development of charging infrastructure have hindered the industry’s healthy development. These issues highlight the importance of balancing government guidance with market mechanisms, reducing policy dependency, enhancing the industry’s independent innovation capabilities, promoting product differentiation, and improving supporting infrastructure to ensure the sustainable development of the new energy vehicle industry. The negative lessons from China’s policy tools in the new energy vehicle sector should be taken into account when formulating policies for the emerging eVTOL industry.

Based on the study of China’s policies for the new energy vehicle industry, potential government policies tailored for eVTOL can be envisioned, considering its characteristics as follows:

• R&D Support: The government will allocate funds and establish research grants to facilitate advancements in eVTOL-related technologies, aiming to enhance safety and efficiency;
• Financial Support and Incentives: Tax breaks, subsidies, and loan guarantees will be provided to alleviate enterprise expenses, encouraging investment in eVTOL research, development, and manufacturing;
• Planning and Policy Guidance: Comprehensive industrial plans will be formulated to delineate goals for the eVTOL sector, fostering an environment conducive to investment and innovation;
• Market Access and Regulation: Stringent regulations and industry standards will be developed to ensure the quality and safety of eVTOL products, promoting standardization and instilling consumer confidence;
• Infrastructure Development: Significant investments will be made in eVTOL infrastructure, including charging stations and landing facilities, to bolster operational efficiency and facilitate the expansion of eVTOL transportation networks;
• Market Incentives: Subsidies and incentives will be offered to consumers to encourage the adoption of eVTOL technology, thereby accelerating market penetration and uptake.

All the mentioned policy tools actually need to enter at different time points during the development of eVTOL technology and exit in an orderly manner at the appropriate time, which will be illustrated in Section 5.

5. The Construction of the Technology Roadmap

This paper constructs the P-TRM framework of electric VTOL aircraft in four dimensions of “policy–technology–product–market” and describes the relationship between each dimension at different stages. Through the analysis of the graph, the paper elucidates the mechanism of the policy tools of the landmark policy text on the market, product, and technology in the dimension of the industrial development stage. Among them, the arrow represents the interaction between levels and the function dimension of policy tools, the solid line represents the direct relationship at this level, and the dashed line represents the cross-layer relationship.

5.1. Policy Role Dimensions at Different Commercialization Stages

This paper outlines the future development of eVTOL in four stages: research and verification, early commercialization, rapid commercialization, and mature commercialization. Three types of policy tools are identified to align with different developmental phases, gradually releasing policy effects to facilitate transformation.

Demand-side Policies: These policies streamline market access and foster consumer demand, which is crucial for eVTOL commercialization. Early-stage market innovation initiatives will reduce entry barriers and stimulate competition, while subsidies accelerate consumer adoption. Infrastructure development, prioritizing urban landing and charging facilities, enhances operational efficiency and scales the eVTOL network.

Environmental Policies: Across eVTOL development stages, these policies shape product design and innovation environments. Governments provide industrial planning and policy guidance, establish safety standards, and supervise markets to prevent unethical practices. Infrastructure promotion supports eVTOL operations.

Supply-side Policies: Primarily targeting research and development, these policies propel early-stage eVTOL innovation. Governments offer funding and equipment support, facilitating research projects and reducing production costs through financial incentives like tax subsidies and innovation grants.

5.2. Technology–Product Dimensions at Different Commercialization Stages

The development of eVTOL technology initially influences aspects of the product before indirectly impacting the market, as discussed in Section 4.1, where key technological advancements for each commercialization stage were examined. Technological progress is a driving force behind industrial innovation, directly shaping product performance and user experience. Key technologies such as electric propulsion and flight control significantly influence product design, flight performance, and cost-effectiveness. For instance, enhancements in electric propulsion contribute to improved flight efficiency and range, while innovations in flight control technology enhance stability and safety, thus aligning eVTOL with market demands.

The eVTOL policy–technology roadmap should delineate the development path and application principles of flight control and electric propulsion technologies. Flight control technology undergoes iterative enhancements to meet evolving safety standards, directly guiding product development. Meanwhile, advancements in electric propulsion seamlessly integrate, enhancing performance and cost efficiency, thereby accelerating market adoption and supporting commercialization [18].

5.3. Products at Different Stages of Commercialization—Market Dimension

The impact of products on the market is direct and profound compared to the more indirect influence of technology. Product features, functions, and user experience directly shape market demand and direction. Market feedback guides product iteration.

During research and development, eVTOL targets innovators and investors to validate technology feasibility and basic functionality. In early commercialization, eVTOLs are used in specific activities like medical transport and sightseeing, with limited market size due to technical challenges and incomplete infrastructure. Private ownership indicates potential growth, prompting product innovation for enhanced competitiveness. As technology matures and infrastructure develops, the eVTOL market sees rapid expansion, with increased sales and leasing. Manufacturers invest in R&D to meet rising consumer expectations for performance and safety. In mature commercialization, eVTOL technology integrates into daily transportation, solidifying its role as a vital mode of travel in people’s lives.

Integrating the above discussion, we constructed the policy–technology roadmap (P-TRM) for eVTOL, incorporating the TALC theory, as shown in Figure 5.

6. Further Analysis of the TRM

Section 5 of this paper constructs a technology roadmap for eVTOL. The technology roadmap itself serves as a qualitative tool for managing and planning the product–technology innovation research and development process. It needs to be applied to actual innovation management rather than being a simple outlook for product–technology. In this chapter, the focus will be on the key nodes that eVTOL needs to pay attention to in the process of innovation research, development, and commercialization.

As the technology roadmap itself is a qualitative tool, relying solely on “intuition” to identify key nodes in the qualitative relationship diagram is obviously not rigorous enough. It is not difficult to notice that the elements of a technology roadmap can be viewed as nodes, and the relationships between these elements can be abstracted as directed edges. Without loss of generality, it is feasible to transform a technology roadmap into a structural model for further study. This structural model essentially corresponds to the direct-influence matrix in the DEMATEL method. By manipulating the matrix using the DEMATEL procedure and focusing on significant output indicators, we can pinpoint critical nodes within the eVTOL technology roadmap. This, in turn, allows us to indirectly identify key milestones in the development and commercialization of eVTOLs. Subsequently, we will leverage TALC and related theories, such as the Chasm theory, to interpret the DEMATEL output and conduct further analysis. Therefore, in the analysis based on the technology roadmap in this chapter, the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method and Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC) theory are used to explain the key nodes reflected in the technology roadmap in the eVTOL R&D process.

6.1. Analysis by DEMATEL

6.1.1. Brief Introduction to DEMATEL

Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) is a powerful method for identifying the components of causal chains in complex systems and assessing the interdependence among factors. It is a systematic analysis method that utilizes graph theory and matrix tools to interpret problems. Through expert evaluations, a direct influence matrix among various factors is established to reflect their interactions. By analyzing this matrix, key factors are identified, and an influence relationship diagram is drawn to visually display the mutual influence of each factor.

DEMATEL is widely applied to analyze various complex decision-making problems, such as balanced scorecards, supply chain management, and sustainable development. Not only can it transform the interdependence among factors, but it can also identify key factors in complex systems, providing a basis for long-term strategic decision-making and improvement. Furthermore, the DEMATEL method has been extended to decision analysis under uncertain conditions, such as fuzzy environments and gray environments, to better address complex real-world problems [19].

DEMATEL, a versatile systemic analysis method, has been widely applied in diverse fields. For instance, in innovation management, it can identify key industry innovation requirements and reconstruct innovation policy portfolios, as exemplified by studies on developing Taiwan’s SIP Mall industry [20]. Similarly, in sustainability and supply chain management, DEMATEL aids in pinpointing critical driving factors and mapping their causal relationships for enhancing the sustainability of hydrogen supply chains [21]. Moreover, in strategic management, DEMATEL can be utilized to identify causal relationships among lean objectives, thus providing a systematic and logical approach for auto part manufacturers to construct lean strategy maps [22].

The DEMATEL technique can convert the interrelations between factors into an intelligible structural model of the system and divide them into a cause group and an effect group. The following are the general steps of DEMATEL [19,23].

Step 1: Generate the group direct-influence matrix (also called “relationship matrix”) Z based on the relationships between the elements. This step is usually accomplished through expert evaluation. In this study, we will generate it through the structural model corresponding to the eVTOL technology roadmap.

Step 2: Normalize the group direct-influence matrix to obtain the normalized direct-influence matrix X

$$X_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{Z_{ij}}{{\sum }_{k=1}^n{Z}_{ik}}},k=\mathrm{1,2}\dots ,n$$

(1)

Step 3: Calculate the total-influence matrix T

$$T=X+X^2+X^3+\dots +X^h=X{(I-X)}^{-1},h\to \infty$$

(2)

Step 4: According to the total-influence matrix T, calculate the effect degree (r) and cause degree (c), representing the sum of the rows and the sum of the columns from the total-influence matrix T, then calculate Prominence (r + c) and Relation (r − c). For r and c:

$$r={\left[r_i\right]}_{n\times 1}={\left[{\sum }_{j=1}^n{t}_{ij}\right]}_{n\times 1},i=\mathrm{1,2}\dots ,n$$

(3)

$$c={\left[c_i\right]}_{n\times 1}^{\prime }={\left[{\sum }_{j=1}^n{t}_{ij}\right]}_{n\times 1}^{\prime },j=\mathrm{1,2}\dots ,n$$

(4)

Step 5: Normalize the Prominence and calculate the weight of each element. The criteria weights are determined based on the prominence through a normalization procedure as follows:

$$w_i={\displaystyle \frac{r_i+c_i}{{\sum }_{i=1}^n{r}_i+c_i}},i=\mathrm{1,2},\dots ,n.$$

(5)

Step 6: Visualize the relationship between Prominence and Relation using an Influential Relation Map (IRM). Nodes with high scores in both Prominence and Relation are often considered critical nodes within the system.

Step 7: Analyze specific problems accordingly.

6.1.2. DEMATEL for Roadmap of eVTOL

In the following analysis, the technology roadmap constructed for eVTOL in the previous section will be transformed into a structural model. This structural model, in fact, corresponds to the group direct-influence matrix in DEMATEL. By manipulating the matrix according to the DEMATEL procedure and based on the significant output indicators, we can identify the critical nodes in the eVTOL technology roadmap, thereby indirectly finding the key points in the development and commercialization process of eVTOL.

For each node in the technology roadmap, red labeling is applied. The nodes of the Product layer and Technology layer at each stage are considered as a whole. The nodes within each layer are numbered from left to right, except for the nodes in the Policy layer, which are numbered from top to bottom. For example, the first node of the Market-Operation layer is labeled as M11, the third node of the Market-Scenarios layer is labeled as M23, the second node of the Product layer is labeled as P2, and the fourth node of the Technology layer is labeled as T4. Regarding the Policy layer, due to the numerous connections from the nodes of Planning and Policy Guidance and Market Access and Regulation, in order to appropriately reduce the complexity of the model, these nodes are excluded from the DEMATEL processing in this instance. Thus, Financial Support and Incentives are labeled as G2, and Infrastructure Development is labeled as G3. The labeling relationship is shown in Figure 6.

Given the nascent stage of eVTOL technology and the consequent paucity of quantitative data on the interdependencies among its components, a standardized weight of 1 was assigned to all relationships in the DEMATEL model. This simplification was adopted to streamline the analysis process while preserving the core functionality of the method in establishing relational connections. While acknowledging the limitations of this approach in capturing nuanced influence levels, it offers a pragmatic foundation for initial exploration and analysis.

The group direct-influence matrix (relationship matrix) Z (18 × 18):

	M11	M12	M13	M21	M22	M23	P1	P2	P3	P4	T1	T2	T3	T4	G1	G2	G3	G4
M11		1			1				1
M12			1							1
M13
M21					1
M22						1
M23
P1								1
P2	1			1					1
P3		1			1					1
P4			1			1
T1								1				1
T2								1	1				1
T3									1	1				1
T4										1
G1											1	1
G2												1	1
G3									1	1
G4				1	1

In each row, the weight number represents the strength of influence of the element in that row on the element in the column where the number is located. A weight of 0 (not displayed in the matrix) indicates that the element in the row has no influence on the element in the corresponding column.

By normalizing the group direct-influence matrix, we obtain the normalized direct-influence matrix X, which X(i, j) = Z(i, j)/ΣZ(i, k) for all k, and after performing calculations $T=X{(I-X)}^{-1}$, ultimately derive the total-influence matrix T:

	M11	M12	M13	M21	M22	M23	P1	P2	P3	P4	T1	T2	T3	T4	G1	G2	G3	G4
M11		0.444	0.235		0.444	0.235			0.333	0.259
M12			0.444			0.111				0.333
M13
M21					0.333	0.111
M22						0.333
M23
P1	0.111	0.086	0.055	0.111	0.123	0.067		0.333	0.148	0.078
P2	0.333	0.259	0.165	0.333	0.370	0.202			0.444	0.235
P3		0.333	0.259		0.333	0.259				0.444
P4			0.333			0.333
T1	0.148	0.165	0.128	0.148	0.214	0.144		0.444	0.346	0.219		0.333	0.111	0.037
T2	0.111	0.235	0.219	0.111	0.272	0.232		0.333	0.593	0.424			0.333	0.111
T3		0.111	0.235		0.111	0.235			0.333	0.593				0.333
T4			0.111			0.111				0.333
G1	0.086	0.133	0.116	0.086	0.162	0.125		0.259	0.313	0.214	0.333	0.444	0.148	0.049
G2	0.037	0.115	0.151	0.037	0.128	0.155		0.111	0.309	0.339		0.333	0.444	0.148
G3		0.111	0.198		0.111	0.198			0.333	0.481
G4				0.333	0.444	0.148

Calculate the effect degree (r), cause degree (c), prominence (r + c), relation (r − c), and weight from the total-influence matrix T (

Table 5. DEMATEL calculates indicators.

	Effect Degree (r)	Cause Degree (c)	Prominence (r + c)	Relation (r − c)	Weight
M11	1.951	0.827	2.778	1.123	0.057
M12	0.889	1.993	2.882	−1.104	0.059
M13	0.000	2.649	2.649	−2.649	0.054
M21	0.444	1.160	1.605	−0.716	0.033
M22	0.333	3.047	3.380	−2.713	0.069
M23	0.000	3.000	3.000	−3.000	0.061
P1	1.114	0.000	1.114	1.114	0.023
P2	2.342	1.481	3.823	0.860	0.078
P3	1.630	3.152	4.782	−1.523	0.098
P4	0.667	3.954	4.620	−3.287	0.095
T1	2.439	0.333	2.772	2.105	0.057
T2	2.974	1.111	4.085	1.863	0.084
T3	1.951	1.037	2.988	0.914	0.061
T4	0.556	0.679	1.235	−0.123	0.025
G1	2.471	0.000	2.471	2.471	0.051
G2	2.308	0.000	2.308	2.308	0.047
G3	1.432	0.000	1.432	1.432	0.029
G4	0.926	0.000	0.926	0.926	0.019

).

The Bar chart reflecting the weights of each element (Figure 7):

It is easy to see that the weights of P3, P4, T2, and P2 are greater than 7%, indicating that these nodes representing products or technologies deserve attention.

The influential relation map (IRM) (Figure 8):

The influential relation map (IRM) is a crucial output of the DEMATEL method. By visualizing the interrelationships among factors, it offers a clear depiction of the interdependence of various elements within a complex system. Through the IRM, decision-makers can visually identify key factors within a complex system and develop targeted improvement strategies.

Specifically, an IRM consists of two axes. The “Prominence” axis represents the intensity of a factor’s influence, indicating the total influence it gives and receives. The “Relation” axis represents a factor’s net influence, signifying its contribution to the system.

Prominence in this eVTOL case represents the overall influence of a specific node or factor within the eVTOL technology roadmap. It quantifies the combined impact a node exerts on and receives from other elements in the system. A high prominence value indicates a node that is central and influential in shaping the technology’s development.

Relation, on the other hand, reflects the net influence of a node. It is calculated as the difference between the outgoing and incoming influences. A positive relation signifies a net positive impact on the system, while a negative relation indicates a net negative influence. In essence, relation helps determine the directional impact of a node on the overall technology roadmap.

Based on these two axes, the IRM divides factors into four quadrants: Quadrant I factors are core factors with high influence and high dependence. Quadrant II factors are driving factors with low influence but high dependence. Quadrant III factors are relatively independent factors with low influence and low dependence. Quadrant IV factors are dependent factors with high influence but low dependence.

Quadrant I factors, identified as core factors or intertwined givers, hold high prominence and relation. These critical nodes include technology and product nodes in the second stage, T2, P2, T3, T1, and M11. Quadrant II factors, termed driving factors or autonomous givers, exhibit low prominence but high relation, such as P3 and P4. Quadrant III factors, known as independent factors or autonomous receivers, have low prominence and relation, like T4, and are relatively disconnected from the system. Quadrant IV factors, termed impact factors or intertwined receivers, possess high prominence but low relation, such as policy nodes. Factors influencing government policies may extend beyond the technology roadmap’s scope, requiring assistance from other analytical models. This observation aligns with the theoretical analysis of the DEMATEL method.

It is worth noting that market nodes often reside in the lower half of the graph, with low relation (R − C). This is because, during the process of constructing system relationships (i.e., when building the technology roadmap), market category nodes are more widely dispersed. Additionally, market nodes often appear at the end of a stage’s sub-graph, indicating the culmination of commercialization in that stage, although some market nodes are indirectly linked to certain product nodes through feedback.

The selection of key nodes within the DEMATEL framework is primarily based on their prominence value. Prominence, as previously explained, represents a node’s overall influence within the system. Nodes with higher prominence scores are considered more critical due to their extensive connections and impact on other elements.

By applying the DEMATEL method, several prominent nodes were identified within the technology roadmap, such as P2, T2, and P3. These nodes exhibited high weights in the initial analysis and were predominantly clustered in Quadrant I of the influential relation map, indicating a strong influence and dependence within the system.

However, it is essential to note that while prominence is a crucial indicator, it is not the sole determinant of node importance. Other factors, such as the nature of the node (technology, product, or market), its position within the technology roadmap, and its alignment with strategic objectives, should also be considered. A comprehensive evaluation that incorporates both quantitative (prominence score) and qualitative factors is necessary for a nuanced understanding of node significance.

Moreover, the impact of node prominence extends beyond mere identification. High-prominence nodes often serve as focal points for strategic interventions. By targeting these nodes with development efforts or policy initiatives, organizations can potentially maximize their impact on the overall system. Nonetheless, a balanced approach is essential, as over-reliance on a limited set of high-prominence nodes may overlook potential synergies and opportunities offered by other system components.

Notably, both the weight map and influential relation map highlight prominent nodes in the early and rapid commercialization stages of the technology roadmap. These nodes align with the Early Adopters and Early Majority stages in the market layer, with connections spanning across these stages. This observation resonates with the chasm concept in the Technology Adoption Life Cycle theory, situated between early adopters and the mainstream market.

Is this just a coincidence?

6.2. Crossing the Chasm

In Section 4.3.1, we briefly discussed the Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC) theory and utilized it to analyze the classification of adoption groups, providing insights into the potential new target users for eVTOL at different stages. We also mentioned the gap or chasm between the early adopters of the product (the technology enthusiasts and visionaries) and the early majority (the pragmatists). Furthermore, in Section 6.1, we used DEMATEL to discover that nodes within the eVTOL technology roadmap, which logically need to cross the chasm, hold greater prominence and relation within the system, thus warranting special attention.

Crossing the chasm is vital for high-tech companies as it marks the transition from selling to early adopters to selling to mainstream customers. Early adopters are usually tech enthusiasts, while mainstream customers are more conservative and require more proof of a product’s value. Successfully crossing the chasm can unlock a broader market and sustained growth, while failure to do so can lead to stagnation, loss of market share, or even failure [17].

For specific products like eVTOL, initial interest may come from tech and aviation enthusiasts. However, broad market acceptance and adoption are necessary for eVTOL to become a mainstream mode of transportation. This requires demonstrating technical feasibility, safety, and value proposition, including comfort, convenience, reliability, and affordability. Addressing concerns like safety, regulations, and operating costs is crucial to win over mainstream customers.

So, why not incorporate the chasm (red front in Figure 9) into the technology roadmap? This way, the final eVTOL technology roadmap would be complete (Figure 9).

The key breakthroughs in crossing the chasm successfully should mainly focus on achieving breakthroughs in three areas: technical feasibility, safety, and affordability.

In terms of technical feasibility, eVTOL needs to develop advanced electric flight technology, including high-energy-density batteries, efficient electric motors, and intelligent power management systems, to meet the requirements for sufficient flight range and passenger capacity. Additionally, infrastructure construction and management need further research and deployment to ensure eVTOL can flexibly take off and land in urban environments with flexible scheduling. This part has been extensively discussed in Section 4.1.

Safety is one of the key barriers for eVTOL to enter the mainstream market. It requires advanced automatic flight systems, including functions such as automatic take-off and landing, obstacle detection and avoidance, and flight path planning, to ensure flight safety and stability. Moreover, emergency handling capabilities are also crucial, such as automatic switching to backup power, automatic return systems, and emergency landing procedures, to cope with possible failures or accidents.

Regarding affordability, eVTOL needs to reduce manufacturing and operating costs to enhance product competitiveness and market attractiveness. This involves improvements in materials and production processes, as well as the optimization of scale production and supply chain management. The realization and application of fully automatic flight are imperative; otherwise, it would be challenging for companies and individuals to afford the high costs of training and employing professional pilots. Furthermore, price competitiveness is also critical, and eVTOL needs to ensure that product prices are competitive to attract mainstream customers’ purchases.

In the future, as eVTOL enters the mainstream market, the above three aspects based on technology and product must be realized, and they need to meet market expectations. The achievement of these goals must start from the early commercialization stage or even from the present.

Government policies play a crucial role in shaping the commercialization path of eVTOL. As shown in Figure 4, “Representative Policies for China’s NEV Industry,” substantial policy investment often aligns with the transition from early to rapid commercialization, as identified by the TALC theory. Therefore, strategic policy support is essential for facilitating this transition. In China, while numerous policies aimed at fostering the low-altitude economy have been introduced, most policy issuers are local governments, and progress remains largely at the conceptual and planning stages. Overcoming significant obstacles and streamlining policy guidance and support for eVTOL remain pressing challenges.

In conclusion, the successful commercialization of eVTOL hinges not only on technological breakthroughs and product innovations but also on the effective implementation of marketing strategies and supportive governmental policies. By addressing these multifaceted aspects in a holistic manner, eVTOL companies can navigate the challenges of crossing the chasm and unlock the full potential of this transformative technology in reshaping the future of urban transportation.

7. Challenges in eVTOL Development and Commercialization

The promise of eVTOL technology to revolutionize urban transportation is undeniable. The preceding analysis has been based on such idealized assumptions. However, actualizing this potential hinges on overcoming a series of significant challenges. These challenges can be categorized into several key areas: economic feasibility, technological hurdles, safety, infrastructure, air traffic management, operational limitations, and environmental factors.

Economic Feasibility: A primary hurdle to widespread eVTOL adoption is cost. Currently, the production and operation of eVTOL aircraft are significantly more expensive than traditional ground transportation modes. The economic viability of eVTOL operations is influenced by both initial and ongoing costs. High procurement costs for aircraft and infrastructure, coupled with the need for economies of scale, pose significant challenges. The cost of a four-seater eVTOL aircraft is projected to range from approximately USD 1.2 million for annual production of 100 units to USD 200,000 for annual production of 5000 units. In comparison, the price of a four-seater helicopter is approximately USD 500,000 [2]. While leveraging technologies from other industries can help mitigate expenses, achieving competitive pricing will require production volumes exceeding 500 units annually. Operational costs, primarily driven by pilot salaries and infrastructure maintenance, further impact profitability. Transitioning to autonomous flight holds the potential to reduce labor costs but is not expected to be fully realized within the next decade. Achieving cost parity with conventional options will require substantial technological advancements, economies of scale, and innovative business models.

Technological hurdles: Several technical challenges are hindering the development of eVTOL aircraft. Battery technology is a major hurdle, as lithium-ion batteries, while promising, have limitations in energy density, safety, and charging time. For eVTOL to achieve a wider range and extended flight time, batteries with higher energy density are crucial. Another challenge lies in electric motor and electronic control systems. These motors need to be lightweight yet possess high power density and efficiency to enable both vertical take-off and high-speed cruising. Additionally, electronic control systems must be accurate and reliable to ensure stable flight, especially in complex urban environments with stringent safety requirements. Furthermore, rotor noise is a significant concern for urban applications of eVTOL. While reducing rotor tip speed is a common approach to noise reduction, it can negatively impact performance. Therefore, finding ways to mitigate noise while maintaining performance is essential. Finally, the commercial viability of eVTOL hinges on robust and autonomous flight control systems. These systems need to be adept at handling the complexities of urban airspace, adhering to stringent safety requirements for low-altitude flights.

Safety Concerns: Ensuring the highest safety standards is paramount for the successful implementation of eVTOL technology. Unlike traditional aviation, which relies on established safety protocols and regulatory frameworks, eVTOL operations necessitate the development of new safety standards and procedures. While efforts have been made to initiate discussions and formulate new eVTOL-specific regulations, such as those by the EASA in 2018 [4], the process of developing and implementing relevant laws and regulations takes time. Advanced flight control systems, redundant components, and comprehensive pilot training are essential to mitigate the inherent risks associated with air travel. Moreover, building public trust in the safety of eVTOL aircraft is crucial for widespread adoption.

Infrastructure Limitations: The successful integration of eVTOLs into urban environments necessitates robust infrastructure. Dedicated vertiports equipped with charging stations for electric models are essential. However, unlike traditional gas stations, eVTOL vertiports have more stringent site selection requirements. They require sufficient space for vertical take-off and landing while also considering noise, safety, and compatibility with the surrounding environment. Additionally, integrating these facilities into existing transportation networks presents challenges similar to those faced in expanding electric vehicle charging infrastructure. For instance, limited land availability in urban centers may necessitate retrofitting existing buildings or rezoning areas to find suitable locations.

Air Traffic Management: Managing air traffic, particularly in densely populated urban areas, is a complex task. Developing advanced air traffic control systems capable of safely and efficiently handling eVTOL operations is essential. This includes the implementation of collision avoidance technologies, real-time monitoring, and effective communication systems.

Operational Constraints: Weather conditions significantly impact eVTOL operations and overall service reliability. Adverse weather, including thunderstorms, strong winds, and reduced visibility, can disrupt flight schedules, limit operational hours, and consequently reduce aircraft utilization rates. To mitigate these challenges, enhancing aircraft weather resistance and developing advanced weather forecasting technologies are crucial. Additionally, implementing noise reduction measures is essential to ensure public acceptance and minimize operational restrictions. Due to noise and safety regulations, eVTOL operations are typically restricted to daylight hours, subjecting them to strict time constraints. The shorter flight window during daylight hours and complex airspace management poses significant challenges to eVTOL operations.

Environmental Impact: While often positioned as a greener transportation alternative, the environmental impact of eVTOL operations warrants careful consideration. The production of batteries, a key component of electric eVTOL aircraft, can have significant environmental consequences. Additionally, noise pollution from eVTOL operations can negatively impact urban environments. The environmental implications of eVTOL technology are multifaceted and require careful consideration. From noise pollution to potential carbon emissions, a comprehensive environmental impact assessment is crucial throughout the eVTOL lifecycle. This includes the development and implementation of noise reduction technologies and the exploration of alternative energy sources to minimize the vehicle’s carbon footprint.

Social Impact: Challenges in eVTOL development and commercialization will be significantly impacted by social factors. Public trust and acceptance are paramount, necessitating transparent communication, effective risk mitigation, and robust safety regulations. Ensuring equitable access to eVTOL transportation for all citizens will require substantial investment in supporting infrastructure while addressing noise concerns through technological advancements and careful flight path planning, which is crucial for widespread adoption.

Addressing these challenges requires a multi-faceted approach involving collaboration between government, industry, and academia. By developing innovative solutions, implementing robust regulations, and fostering public acceptance, the eVTOL industry can overcome these hurdles and realize its full potential.

In fact, uncertainties are common in technology foresight research. Building upon the use of Technology Roadmapping (TRM) to study eVTOLs in this paper, we can consider adopting a Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight, a novel approach that integrates Technology Roadmapping with scenario planning. This method can address the potential variability of timelines in future eVTOL development and application, compensating for the limitations of TRMs linear projections and single-scenario assumptions [24]. Multi-scenario technology roadmapping will be a deeper direction for future technology forecasting research. Furthermore, leveraging the Advanced Technology Roadmap Architecture, which integrates data analytics, machine learning, scenario planning, and risk analysis, a systematic quantitative analysis of eVTOL technology development and commercialization can be conducted when sufficient data are available [25].

8. Conclusions

This article provides a brief introduction to the characteristics and applications of eVTOL products. By analyzing the required technology, the current status of products, the expected market, and possible industrial policies for eVTOL, a four-stage development path consisting of technology, product, market, and policy layers is formed. Subsequently, a Policy–Technology Roadmap (P-TRM) model is constructed based on this framework to guide the R&D process of eVTOL.

By transforming the policy–technology roadmap of eVTOL into a system structural model, key nodes of this system structure, namely the technology and product nodes between the stages of early commercialization and rapid commercialization, are identified using the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method. Additionally, using the Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC) theory for interpretation, it is proposed that significant breakthroughs in technical feasibility, safety, and affordability are necessary for eVTOL to cross the chasm successfully. Several essential measures for crossing the chasm are outlined, along with policy support (

Table 6. Measures for crossing the chasm.

Aspect	Strategies
Technical Feasibility	Develop advanced electric flight technology, including high-energy-density batteries, efficient electric motors, and intelligent power management systems. Research and deploy infrastructure for flexible take-off and landing. Ensure sufficient flight range and passenger capacity.
Safety	Implement advanced automatic flight systems, including automatic take-off and landing, obstacle detection and avoidance, and flight path planning. Enhance emergency handling capabilities, such as automatic switching to backup power and emergency landing procedures.
Affordability	Reduce manufacturing and operating costs through improvements in materials, production processes, scale production, and supply chain management. Realize and apply fully automatic flight to minimize training and employment costs for professional pilots. Ensure price competitiveness to attract mainstream customers’ purchases.
Governmental Policies	Strategically direct policy support towards facilitating the crossing of the chasm. Overcome obstacles and streamline policy guidance and support for eVTOL to foster low-altitude economy development.
Environmental Impact	Develop and implement noise reduction technologies for eVTOL vehicles. Explore alternative energy sources for eVTOL propulsion to minimize carbon footprint. Conduct comprehensive environmental impact assessments throughout the eVTOL lifecycle.
Social Impact	Enhance public trust and acceptance through transparent communication and effective risk mitigation. Develop clear regulations and guidelines for safe eVTOL operation within urban environments. Invest in infrastructure development to ensure equitable access to eVTOL transportation for all citizens.

).

This article provides a preliminary analysis of the development path, key nodes, and necessary measures for crossing the chasm for eVTOL. It offers insights into the R&D and commercialization of eVTOL technology.

It must be acknowledged that this study still has many limitations. In the application of the P-TRM model, one limitation lies in the assumption of an idealized commercialization timeline. This implies that the model assumes a predictable and, to some extent, linear growth rate of technology maturity and market penetration. However, the actual development and commercialization of eVTOL may experience significant fluctuations due to factors such as technological breakthroughs, changes in market demand, or policy adjustments.

Another limitation is the assumption of consistent policy impacts across different regions. The P-TRM model often assumes that the impact of policies on technology development and commercialization is relatively uniform across different regions. This means the model assumes that policies have a similar promoting or hindering effect on technology development and commercialization in different regions. However, in the process of eVTOL commercialization, factors such as the policy environment, economic conditions, and market maturity in different regions can all affect the actual application effects.

Furthermore, due to the nascent nature of eVTOL products and markets, it was challenging to obtain accessible data, necessitating a qualitative analysis approach for this study. While technology roadmaps can be effectively combined with quantitative methods for more precise analysis and prediction, this study’s reliance on qualitative methods represents another limitation.

These uncertainties are common challenges in technology forecasting, thus necessitating further research in this area. To address these limitations, we can consider adopting Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight, a novel approach that integrates Technology Roadmapping with scenario planning. Multi-scenario technology roadmapping will be a promising direction for future technology forecasting research. Moreover, since eVTOL products and markets are still in their infancy, it is difficult to obtain accessible data on specific product parameters and market data. Future research on eVTOL technology forecasting and commercialization evolution can conduct quantitative analysis based on actual data. For example, the Advanced Technology Roadmap Architecture can be combined with data analytics, machine learning, scenario planning, and risk analysis to enhance the accuracy and effectiveness of eVTOL technology roadmaps in the future.