Bridging Vehicle-to-Home Technology and Equity: Enhancing Household Resilience for Disaster Preparedness and Response

Abstract

This paper explores the potential of Electric Vehicle (EV) Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) technology to enhance household resilience during extreme weather events, integrating socio-economic, technical, and human rights perspectives. V2H technology enables EVs to provide backup power during outages, offering a promising solution for disaster preparedness and response. However, widespread adoption of this technology faces barriers shaped by socio-economic disparities, including income, housing, education, and access to infrastructure, as well as human decisions related to EV ownership, V2H utilization, and evacuation behaviors. To investigate these challenges, this study adopts a qualitative review of existing literature and policy frameworks, critically analyzing how social vulnerabilities and adoption barriers influence the effectiveness of V2H in improving household-level disaster resilience. The findings indicate that while V2H technology can significantly support disaster resilience, its benefits are contingent on equitable access, affordability, and public awareness. To maximize its potential, various public and private stakeholders must adopt equity-driven strategies that align technological innovation with socio-economic inclusion. This paper highlights the need for cross-sector collaboration to ensure V2H systems reach underserved and marginalized communities, advocating for policies that prioritize both technological advancement and distributive justice.

1. Introduction

As climate change exacerbates the frequency and severity of natural disasters, households worldwide face growing challenges in maintaining access to reliable energy during emergencies [1]. Vehicle-to-Home (V2H) technology, which enables electric vehicles (EVs) to supply backup power to residences during grid outages, has emerged as a transformative tool for enhancing household-level disaster preparedness and response [2]. By converting EVs into mobile energy storage units, V2H systems provide a decentralized, sustainable solution to mitigate disruptions caused by extreme weather events or other crises [3]. With global EV adoption surging from 40 million in 2023 to a projected 525 million by 2035 [4], the potential for V2H to revolutionize household resilience is substantial. This rapid growth underscores the urgent need to expand charging infrastructure, with projections from the United States alone estimating a requirement for 28 million private chargers and 1.2 million public chargers by 2030 [5].

However, despite its potential to democratize energy security, the benefits of V2H technology remain unevenly distributed, raising critical questions about equity in disaster resilience [6,7]. EV ownership, and thus V2H access, is concentrated among middle- and upper-income populations, who are more likely to own EVs as secondary vehicles, while low-income communities and rural populations face systemic exclusion due to high costs and infrastructure gaps [8]. Although lowering the total cost of EV ownership has demonstrated success in increasing adoption among lower-income groups [9], broader structural inequalities, such as inadequate charging infrastructure and policy neglect, continue to limit V2H adoption for marginalized populations.

The broader integration of EVs into the energy system introduces both opportunities and challenges for resilience planning [10]. Through vehicle-to-everything (V2X) technologies, EVs can serve as distributed energy resources during extended outages through mechanisms, including Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G), Vehicle-to-Home/Building (V2H/B), Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V), Vehicle-to-Network (V2N), Vehicle-to-Load (V2L), and second-life battery applications [11]. However, realizing this potential requires coordinated planning, strategic investment, and adaptive operational strategies, which are elements often lacking in current practices, particularly for underserved communities [12]. Importantly, renters and residents of multi-family housing remain disproportionately excluded, as they often cannot install home chargers: a gap that becomes particularly critical during emergencies when reliable power is most critical [13,14,15]. These inequities are compounded by the fact that the current infrastructure development plans and most emergency planning frameworks fail to account for EV-based resilience considerations and solutions, leaving vulnerable populations even more exposed to climate-induced disruptions.

Despite growing research on V2X technologies, most studies, aside from a few notable contributions [16,17,18], are hindered by a narrow technical focus and fail to account for broader societal factors. The uneven distribution of charging stations along racial and geographic lines, including disparities between rural and urban areas, has received limited scholarly attention [19,20]. Furthermore, most emergency planning frameworks lack provisions for assessing EV needs and resilience during extreme events [21]. Research on EV user behavior and system performance under disaster conditions remains limited, constraining the effective incorporation of V2X technologies into resilience planning [22]. Most critically, among the various V2X applications, V2H has received the least scholarly attention, with only a small subset of studies explicitly addressing its role in enhancing household-level preparedness and disaster response capacities [11,23,24,25].

To this end, this paper aims to address the systemic inequalities in V2H access, driven by socio-economic disparities and structural barriers, including high upfront EV costs and compatible infrastructure, insufficient policy support, and limited public awareness [26,27,28]. These challenges disproportionately affect marginalized communities, including low-income households and rural populations, deepening existing vulnerabilities in disaster-prone regions [29,30]. Without deliberate intervention, V2H adoption may reinforce rather than alleviate inequities in resilience [31,32]. Accordingly, this qualitative paper advocates for equity-focused policies and strategies to ensure inclusive access to V2H technology. By analyzing the socio-technical barriers to adoption and proposing targeted solutions, such as subsidies, community-driven programs, and regulatory reforms, the paper aims to bridge gaps in disaster resilience and empower all communities to harness the transformative potential of V2H systems.

Following this introduction, Section 2 outlines the conceptual approaches used to assess the role of V2H technology in disaster preparedness and response. Section 3 presents an overview of the technical operations and practical applications of V2H systems. Section 4 situates this technology within the broader landscape of disaster resilience. Section 5 examines the critical nexus between equity and resilience by analyzing how socio-economic, infrastructural, and behavioral factors shape household preparedness and drive disparities in access to emerging technologies. Section 6 proposes a range of policy and technological interventions aimed at reducing access barriers. It emphasizes the importance of targeted financial mechanisms, infrastructural investments, and inclusive outreach strategies, while highlighting the need for coordinated action among diverse stakeholder groups. This section also presents a summary of stakeholder-specific recommendations, equity considerations, and potential market and societal impacts. Finally, Section 7 reaffirms the potential of V2H to strengthen household resilience, advocates for equity-centered policy design, and identifies key directions for future research to support the widespread and just implementation of V2H systems.

2. Analytical Framework

This paper employed a qualitative synthesis methodology to systematically examine the potential of V2H technology in enhancing household disaster preparedness and response, with a focus on equity and resilience across socio-technical, economic, and regulatory dimensions. The analysis was grounded mainly in an interdisciplinary review of peer-reviewed journal articles, government and agency reports, technical standards, industry publications, research institute white papers, and conference proceedings published over the past two decades. Particular attention was given to the notable increase in research interest and the evolving focus observed over the past five years. Only English-language sources were included, with no explicit regional restrictions; however, most publications originated from the United States, followed by global reviews, Europe, and Asia.

Sources were identified through structured keyword searches using databases including Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science. Additional policy and technical documents were retrieved from official government portals, standards databases, and industry platforms. A strategic keyword taxonomy was developed to capture the intersection of disciplines. Core search terms included “electric vehicle,” “vehicle-to-home,” “V2H,” “bidirectional charging,” “backup power,” “household resilience,” “disaster preparedness,” and “emergency response.” To address issues of equity and infrastructure, supplementary terms such as “energy insecurity,” “vulnerability,” “energy equity,” “energy justice,” “consumer acceptance,” “accessibility,” “adoption,” “socioeconomic,” and “infrastructure planning” were applied. Broader governance and policy dimensions were explored using terms such as “regulatory barriers,” “incentive programs,” “energy governance,” “decentralized energy,” “grid interconnection,” “technical standards,” and “V2X pilot programs.” Boolean operators were used to refine results and ensure comprehensive coverage across disciplines and contexts.

A two-stage screening protocol guided source selection. In the first stage, titles, abstracts, and keywords were screened for relevance to V2H technology, energy equity, and disaster preparedness. The initial search identified over 470 documents. In the second stage, 150 full texts were thematically reviewed based on their contributions to the technical capabilities of V2H systems, relevance to disaster resilience, socio-economic and equity considerations, access barriers, and policy or technological solutions. Sources were retained if they addressed at least one relevant thematic area and informed policy or practice related to household resilience. By integrating a focused literature review with a robust theoretical framework, this review presents a comprehensive synthesis across socio-technical, economic, and policy domains. It offers equity-centered recommendations to guide the inclusive deployment of V2H technology across varied socio-economic and geographic contexts.

3. V2H Technology Overview

The growing EV adoption presents both challenges and opportunities, positioning these vehicles as dynamic platforms for mobility as well as decentralized energy storage and supply systems [33]. V2X topologies define both the electrical interface and operational mode through which EVs supply energy, such as V2G, V2B, V2H, V2V, V2N, and V2L (Figure 1). In addition, Vehicle-to-Community (V2C) represents a promising model in which aggregated EVs provide distributed energy support to residential communities, functioning similarly to community storage or solar systems [34]. The energy capacity of V2X systems depends on EV battery size, charge/discharge rates governed by onboard chargers and EV supply equipment, and, in aggregated applications, the number of vehicles required to ensure reliable capacity [35,36].

V2X technologies enable EVs to interact with and support external electrical systems, offering varying degrees of energy resilience, operational flexibility, and grid integration. Among these, V2L is the simplest and most widely available form, facilitating unidirectional energy transfer from an EV battery to directly power external loads using an onboard charger without the need for additional equipment or electrical upgrades [37]. It offers a low-cost, accessible solution for emergency backup power in outage scenarios or remote, off-grid areas. V2L is particularly well-suited for supporting critical equipment in healthcare and research settings or serving temporary and recreational needs such as powering floodlights, evacuation signs, or campsite electronics [38]. However, its limited power capacity constrains its use to low-demand applications, making it unsuitable for high-load appliances. Building on this functionality, V2H systems enable bidirectional energy exchange between an EV and a residential energy system. V2H offers practical means to maintain critical household loads during outages, reduce grid-tied peak demand, and optimize energy use when integrated with home energy management systems (HEMS) and renewable sources [39]. For example, a 100 kWh EV battery can supply an average U.S. home for over 70 h [35], positioning V2H as a promising near-term profit potential and option for enhancing household resilience. At a broader scale, V2B systems apply the same principles to commercial or institutional buildings by aggregating EVs to offset demand charges, balance loads, and reduce operational costs. While V2B is subject to greater uncertainty due to site-specific requirements, it can offer high returns under favorable conditions [40]. In contrast, V2G systems interface directly with the electric grid, allowing EVs to provide ancillary services such as frequency regulation or peak shaving. Despite their long-term potential, V2G applications face significant regulatory, technical, and infrastructural challenges, including standardization, interconnection logistics, and compensation mechanisms, that currently limit widespread implementation.

Recent advancements in bidirectional power flow have initially centered on V2G systems, with a focus on charger and inverter technologies, system efficiency, and business models [41,42]. V2G applications have been shown to offer a range of grid-supportive functions such as enhancing microgrid resilience, reducing operational costs, aiding grid restoration, providing frequency regulation, and facilitating demand response [43,44,45]. Likewise, research has expanded into V2H systems, exploring their roles in zero net-energy homes, peak load reduction, cost minimization, and emergency backup power for residential use [46,47]. Unlike V2G, V2H faces fewer regulatory and infrastructural barriers, but its adoption is constrained by the high upfront costs of bidirectional charging infrastructure and necessary electrical upgrades [37]. These systems remain significantly more expensive than unidirectional alternatives, with residential bidirectional setups often ranging from $5000 to $20,000 [48]. This cost includes not only the charger itself but also expenses for installation, interconnection permits, panel upgrades, and, in some cases, additional components such as HEMS, smart inverters, and transfer switches. As a result, these costs and infrastructure challenges hinder the broader deployment of V2H systems, limiting their potential to enhance household-level disaster resilience.

4. Relevance to Disaster Resilience

An effective and resilient power system must be capable of rapidly responding to disruptions and restoring electricity, even during emergencies. However, the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events, ranging from hurricanes and wildfires to prolonged heatwaves and winter storms, have placed unprecedented strain on energy infrastructure and emergency response systems. For example, wildfires in California have led to preemptive power shutoffs that disproportionately affect vulnerable populations [49]. Similarly, during the 2021 Texas winter storm, widespread blackouts left millions without power for days, highlighting critical limitations of centralized grid systems [50]. As power outages become more frequent and prolonged, particularly in high-risk regions, the need for innovative and decentralized energy solutions has grown. In these contexts, households equipped with V2H-capable EVs could have maintained access to essential electricity services, including refrigeration, lighting, and communication, thereby reducing hardship and associated health risks. Although still emerging in practice, pilot programs and anecdotal evidence suggest that V2H can offer localized resilience strategies, such as improved load restoration, reactive power support, peak demand reduction, and ultimately energy resilience [51,52,53,54].

Resilience in infrastructure systems refers to the ability to withstand, adapt to, and recover from external disturbances while sustaining or restoring core functionality [55]. This includes both short-term operational strategies and long-term system-level investments designed to reduce the severity, duration, and impact of disruptions [56,57,58]. Commonly, resilience is assessed through three interconnected dimensions: (1) preparedness measures implemented prior to a disruptive event [59,60]; (2) operational responses deployed during the event [61,62]; and (3) long-term planning measures, including system design, network reconfiguration, and infrastructure upgrades such as grid hardening techniques [63,64,65]. These dimensions are increasingly relevant to household-level disaster resilience, where reliable energy access is essential for maintaining shelter, health, and safety during disruptive events (Figure 2). Collectively, V2X technologies can strengthen household-level disaster resilience by bridging infrastructure-scale preparedness with localized, user-driven energy autonomy across the full resilience continuum.

EVs equipped with bidirectional capabilities, particularly V2H systems, can support all three phases of disaster resilience. In the preparedness stage, V2H-enabled EVs function as pre-positioned energy storage assets. When coordinated with HEMS and integrated renewable sources, they allow households to implement anticipatory load-shifting and storage strategies that reduce grid dependence and enhance local autonomy. This is particularly important in regions with aging infrastructure or high outage exposure. EVs, with average daily use leaving around 90 percent of battery charge upon return home, offer substantial potential as backup energy sources [66]. When integrated with solar photovoltaic (PV) and stationary battery systems, EVs can significantly enhance household resilience. For example, a combination of a 7.2 kW PV system, an 11-kWh stationary battery, and an 80-kWh EV can enable uninterrupted off-grid operation for at least 72 h [67]. During outages, EVs offer decentralized and flexible backup power to sustain essential household functions. In both V2H and V2G modes, EVs can support critical residential loads or contribute energy to networked microgrids. For instance, Simental et al. [68] demonstrated that residential EVs can provide up to six hours of backup power and reduce outage-related economic losses. Similarly, Candan et al. [69] introduced a HEMS that utilizes EVs to prioritize critical household loads in emergencies, extending energy availability by up to 241 percent. In the recovery phase, EVs, particularly when deployed as mobile assets, can support energy continuity where centralized services remain disrupted. Examples include electric buses and fleet EVs serving temporary shelters, medical facilities, and community hubs [22]. Their integration into emergency restoration can simultaneously support evacuation efforts and enhance household resilience. For example, Lin et al. [70] proposed a V2B planning model that mobilizes private EVs as emergency power sources for commercial and public buildings. These distributed and flexible assets not only reduce reliance on centralized infrastructure but also enable more responsive, community-oriented restoration strategies. Ali et al. [71] demonstrated that parked EVs and mobile battery storage, when optimally operated within networked microgrids, can sustain energy supply during emergencies and support system recovery without incurring added costs of additional battery storage systems.

While the benefits of V2X technologies are substantial, their deployment during extreme events is not without challenges. Rising EV market penetration may impose dynamic and intense stress on the power grid during disasters, with impacts varying by location and regional load profiles [72,73]. Furthermore, user concerns about maintaining sufficient vehicle charge for personal or evacuation purposes may limit the willingness to participate in grid-supportive programs. Accordingly, high EV charging demand can overload critical infrastructure, leading to potential failures under emergency conditions [74,75]. These vulnerabilities necessitate effective demand response strategies, as transformer unreliability could severely hinder EV-dependent evacuation or restoration efforts. Importantly, V2H should not be viewed in isolation, but rather as one element within a broader portfolio of disaster planning and resilience tools. When integrated with early warning systems, reinforced infrastructure, and coordinated community response efforts, V2H technology can strengthen the capacity of households to endure and recover from disruptions. However, household resilience is influenced not only by technical performance but also by access to technology, socio-economic conditions, and behavioral choices [76]. A comprehensive assessment of V2H’s resilience contribution must therefore consider multiple interdependent factors, including user behavior, household energy demand, storage capacity, and the integration of renewable energy systems.

5. Equity and Resilience Nexus

This paper contributes to the existing literature by emphasizing the critical need to integrate equity and social vulnerability into assessments of household disaster resilience, particularly amid growing electrification and the deployment of V2X technologies. Social vulnerability stems from systemic disparities in access to financial resources, essential services, education, political representation, healthcare, quality housing, and critical infrastructure, among other socio-economic determinants [77]. These structural inequalities directly shape a household’s capacity to prepare for, withstand, and recover from disasters. Notably, even under comparable hazard exposure, the consequences of disasters can vary substantially based on underlying spatial and socio-economic conditions [78,79]. In this context, unequal access to backup power during outages further compounds existing inequities, disproportionately affecting socially and economically marginalized populations by increasing their risk exposure and delaying recovery periods [10,80,81].

Prolonged power outages can cause significant economic, environmental, and humanitarian harm, particularly when emergency services and backup power are disrupted [20,82]. While the financial toll of extended outages is substantial, the collapse of critical services and systems, such as cooling, heating, water, and healthcare, can have far more devastating human consequences [83]. Power outages pose serious health risks for medically vulnerable populations [84]. For example, research in New York City found that older adults, individuals relying on electric medical devices, and those requiring daily assistance are disproportionately impacted by power disruptions [85]. Similarly, children are highly vulnerable to extreme temperatures, and outages can severely compromise their health and safety [86]. During the February 2021 winter storm in Texas, millions of residents endured five days without electricity, resulting in numerous deaths due to carbon monoxide poisoning, exposure to freezing temperatures, and the worsening of pre-existing medical conditions [87]. Likewise, following Hurricane Maria’s landfall in Puerto Rico in 2017, over 4600 fatalities were reported, with more than one-third linked to interruptions in access to essential healthcare services. These examples underscore the urgent need for resilient energy solutions that protect vulnerable populations during extreme events [88]. The disproportionate exposure of these groups highlights the importance of integrating social and medical vulnerability into resilience planning and emergency response strategies. Building on these insights, Dugan et al. [87] proposed a multidimensional framework for assessing vulnerability to prolonged outages, incorporating indicators of health status, household preparedness, and evacuation capacity.

The effectiveness of EV-capable V2H systems in enhancing household resilience is mediated by a range of socio-technical and behavioral factors. Research indicates that low-income, non-white, and rental populations are disproportionately affected by energy vulnerability, marked by limitations in acquiring non-perishable food and access to affordable and reliable energy services [10,86]. Low-income and rental respondents were over three times more likely, and non-white individuals seven times more likely, to report the absence of adequate heating [12]. These structural disparities also shape behavioral responses, such as decisions to evacuate, invest in emergency supplies, or adopt technologies like EVs’ V2H systems. Evacuation decisions during emergencies or prolonged power outages are influenced by capacity-related factors. Studies have found that higher household income and greater access to resources are positively associated with evacuation likelihood [89,90], whereas the absence of reliable transportation presents a significant barrier [91]. Relatedly, households with higher incomes and access to reliable information are more likely to invest in EVs equipped with V2H capabilities, while lower-income households may face economic and informational barriers that limit their participation in these resilience-enhancing technologies [92]. In addition to structural inequalities and capacity-related factors, household-level resilience is also influenced by other decision-making behaviors, including risk perception, trust in institutions, and prior experience with extreme weather events. These behavioral factors determine whether and how individuals invest in preparedness strategies such as V2H technology. To understand user preferences, an operator of V2G software surveyed a portion of its 150,000 base customers [48]. Survey results indicated that 77 percent of EV drivers found bidirectional charging appealing and perceived potential benefits from its use [93]. This highlights the importance of the human dimension in technology adoption, as some EV users may not recognize the value of bidirectional capabilities, while those who stand to benefit most may lack the financial means to access them.

The urban–rural disparity in EV adoption and infrastructure deployment across the United States reflects entrenched structural divides rooted in socio-economic and spatial inequities [94]. Prior research has documented systemic barriers to EV charging access, particularly for residents of low-income neighborhoods and those living in multi-family housing, where private home charging is often not feasible [95,96,97]. Lou et al. [98], using micro-level data from 121 million U.S. households, identified significant income- and race-based disparities in access to publicly available EV infrastructure. Their analysis revealed substantial variation in accessibility gaps across counties, urban and rural settings, and housing types. For example, rural regions, especially in the Midwest and South, have limited availability of EV chargers at multi-dwelling units [99]. Charging station placement strategies, often guided by utilitarian principles focused on maximizing usage, tend to prioritize high-demand urban areas and inadvertently exclude marginalized communities [16]. Although home charging remains the most cost-effective option, it is inaccessible to many households lacking private garages, off-street parking, or adequate space, which are conditions commonly found in lower-income and high-density urban housing [92,100,101]. As a result, these users rely on public infrastructure, which often lacks adequate coverage in underserved areas, forcing non-traditional users to travel longer distances to charge, thereby increasing range anxiety and operational costs [102]. In response, there is growing advocacy for equitable infrastructure solutions such as curbside, streetlight-integrated, and multi-unit residential charging stations [103]. However, disparities persist in charger type distribution, as fast-charging infrastructure remains disproportionately concentrated in wealthier, predominantly white, single-family neighborhoods [104]. These patterns of infrastructural inequity constrain the practical usability of V2H systems among marginalized populations and limit the equitable distribution of their potential benefits, ultimately reinforcing pre-existing vulnerabilities.

Equitable access to energy and disaster resilience is intrinsically tied to the fundamental rights to adequate living standards, economic and personal security, and protection from harm [8,105]. When underserved and marginalized communities are systematically excluded from resilience-enhancing technologies such as EVs and V2H systems, their vulnerability to disaster impacts increases, and the principles of energy justice are undermined. Studies have shown that integrating V2H with PV systems and energy storage can reduce household electricity costs by up to 65 percent, primarily through optimized load management and off-peak charging strategies [106]. To quantify the economic costs of power outages, Willingness-to-Pay and Willingness-to-Accept studies are commonly used to estimate the Value of Lost Load (VoLL), which tends to be higher among fuel-poor households, rural communities, and early EV adopters [35,107]. These groups rely more heavily on uninterrupted electricity and thus face greater consequences during outages [108]. These findings suggest that V2H technologies can offer significant resilience benefits in high-VoLL regions, supporting the case for their targeted deployment. This concern is particularly relevant in rural areas of the United States, where low-income, elderly, and non-white populations, especially in the Northeast and Southeast, face high energy burdens and elevated health risks during power outages [109,110]. These risks are exacerbated by limited resources and dependence on uninterrupted electricity access [86]. In this context, recognizing EVs as tools for advancing both technological resilience and social equity is essential for developing inclusive and sustainable disaster preparedness strategies.

6. Policy and Technological Solutions

Addressing structural gaps in technology accessibility and adoption requires a comprehensive, equity-oriented strategy. This should include targeted policy incentives, inclusive infrastructure planning, and community-engaged outreach efforts. Coordinated efforts among policymakers, industry stakeholders, civil society, and local communities are essential to advancing affordable and context-sensitive charging solutions. Such collaboration can ensure that resilience-enhancing technologies like V2H systems are deployed in ways that reflect local needs and reduce existing disparities.

6.1. Addressing Barriers to Access

One of the primary barriers to the adoption of V2H technology is economic, as the high upfront costs limit accessibility, particularly for low-income households. To address this challenge, policymakers should implement targeted financial mechanisms such as subsidies, tax credits, and low-interest financing options. However, recent research shows that disadvantaged communities receive, on average, at least 75 percent fewer EV incentives per thousand households each month compared to non-disadvantaged areas [111]. Moreover, while higher-income buyers are more likely to purchase EVs regardless of incentives, lower-income consumers are significantly more responsive to financial support [112]. Initiatives such as California’s Clean Cars 4 All aim to mitigate these disparities; however, their effectiveness is constrained by structural barriers, including eligibility restrictions to plug-in EVs and limited dealership participation [8]. Further compounding the issue is the design of U.S. incentive programs, which typically provide benefits post-purchase rather than at the point of sale, reducing their immediacy and accessibility compared to models in other countries [113]. Additionally, most incentives target new vehicle purchases, excluding many low-income buyers who depend on the used EV market [98]. Equitable access to EV infrastructure also requires intentional investment strategies. A national analysis suggests that approximately 30 percent of charger deployments and associated funding should be consistently allocated to lower-income communities through 2030 to ensure more inclusive infrastructure development [99]. However, with infrastructure investments still largely concentrated along major corridors and urban centers, the gap in EV adoption between income groups and geographic regions is poised to widen further [114]. Addressing these inequities requires policies that reduce both the upfront and long-term costs of EV and V2H technologies through scalable manufacturing, shared ownership models, and inclusive financing mechanisms [115], thereby making these systems more accessible to underserved communities.

Innovation diffusion theory posits that the adoption of new technologies typically begins in metropolitan areas with higher income levels, greater educational attainment, and a stronger willingness to invest in emerging systems [116,117]. This early advantage is often reinforced by the neighborhood effect, where localized peer influence accelerates further adoption [118]. Over time, spatial feedback loops develop, with regions that initially invest in EVs and charging infrastructure continuing to advance, while rural and underserved areas fall further behind. This divergence exacerbates inequitable access to mobile, low-carbon energy storage technologies. As a result, urban areas that have prioritized investments in grid modernization, distributed energy resources, such as battery energy storage systems (BESSs) and renewable-powered microgrids, tend to demonstrate greater adaptive capacity and service continuity during crises [119,120].

To bridge these structural gaps, researchers emphasize the need to expand EV infrastructure to non-residential, destination-based locations that reflect diverse travel patterns [121,122,123]. Reducing disparities between homeowners and renters also requires grid enhancements that support flexible, context-sensitive charging solutions in both rural and high-density urban environments [124,125]. Diversifying charging solutions is equally important to accommodate varying user needs and geographic contexts. Regional planning should align infrastructure expansion with local grid capacity. For instance, Level 1 charging may suffice in urban areas with shorter travel distances, whereas Level 2 charging may be more appropriate in rural areas if it is effectively managed to prevent grid overload [126]. A complementary strategy involves battery swapping, which is gaining momentum through manufacturer support and national pilot programs. This approach can expand charging access in areas where conventional infrastructure is limited or delayed, while also addressing user concerns over long wait times and battery degradation [127]. In parallel, standardizing access and payment systems can improve interoperability and user experience. Furthermore, incentive structures must be redesigned to reflect the socioeconomic diversity of EV users and the distinct infrastructure requirements across regions. For example, Hayashida et al. [128] found that state-level EV policy adoption in the United States between 2010 and 2018 was shaped by political orientation and environmental ideology, influencing the distribution of subsidies and home charger incentives. Ultimately, advancing equitable V2H adoption demands comprehensive planning efforts that prioritize affordability, accessibility, and spatial equity across all communities.

Public awareness plays a critical role in promoting the benefits and practical applications of V2H technology. Targeted campaigns should be launched to raise awareness about the potential advantages of V2H in disaster resilience, particularly its capacity to provide backup power during outages and strengthen overall energy security. Effective coordination and sustained public engagement are critical for the operational success of these systems. Educational initiatives, especially those designed for non-technical communities, are vital for improving public preparedness for V2X participation, as well as for understanding restoration and evacuation procedures [129]. To reduce grid stress and ensure mobility during emergencies, complementary tools and strategies, such as mobile applications, are also necessary. One such strategy involves advising EV drivers to pre-charge their vehicles and maintain a state of charge between 20 and 80 percent, a practice that balances grid demand with operational mobility [21]. Additionally, incentivizing EV owners through monetary compensation to discharge electricity back to the grid via V2X systems can enhance supply stability and support peak demand management [130]. Coordinated deployment of EV clusters to support critical infrastructure, such as substation transformers, can further improve grid reliability [131]. V2H applications should also be tailored to address the specific challenges of underserved regions, which often face limited grid infrastructure, higher vulnerability to outages, and economic barriers to adoption. For instance, rural areas remain significantly underserved by EV supply equipment, resulting in lower awareness and adoption rates and reinforcing geographic disparities in access to clean transportation technologies. Strategic outreach and engagement are therefore essential to bridging knowledge gaps and encouraging adoption in communities that stand to benefit most from V2H integration.

6.2. Promoting Cross-Sector Collaboration

To counter these structural inequities, policy and decision-making frameworks must be recalibrated to explicitly center equity and inclusivity in the expansion of EV infrastructure systems [5]. This requires coordinated action among a diverse set of stakeholders, including policymakers and regulators, public and private sectors (i.e., utility companies, manufacturers, industry partners), civil society organizations, and affected communities, to develop targeted policies that advance access to affordable, reliable, and context-sensitive charging solutions. These efforts should align with environmental, social, and governance principles as well as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those addressing affordable and clean energy, sustainable cities and communities, and climate action [132]. Embedding these global objectives into local and national planning processes can help mitigate the adverse effects of climate change while advancing social resilience through equitable energy transitions.

Realizing a just and inclusive transition requires not only financial mechanisms but also intentional cross-sector collaboration in shaping both policy and practice [133]. While government initiatives and utility programs have provided financial incentives, these efforts have yet to fully address disparities, especially for non-white, low-income, and renting households [12]. Governments must lead in aligning policies across energy, transportation, housing, and climate adaptation, while the private sector plays a critical role in enhancing V2H accessibility through investment and standardization [134]. For example, manufacturers (i.e., Original Equipment Manufacturers and Retailers) and industry partners (i.e., EV Supply Equipment and Aggregators) are essential in scaling bidirectional technologies by ensuring product interoperability, reducing hardware costs, and developing viable compensation models for grid services. Furthermore, key EV stakeholders, including investor-owned charging companies, electric utilities, and regulatory agencies, must collectively shape a national infrastructure that is both robust and equitable. Engagement with civil society is equally important to ensure community voices inform the design and deployment of V2H systems, especially in underserved and high-risk areas. User-centered approaches should emphasize accessibility and ease of use, especially for individuals with varying levels of technical literacy. Enhanced user satisfaction and utilization rates can also boost revenue prospects, encouraging continued investment from infrastructure developers [135]. Without intentional planning, however, the transition to electrified transportation risks reinforcing existing patterns of exclusion and elitism.

Stakeholder implementation should be guided through clear performance metrics, timelines, and funding mechanisms. Utilities can be evaluated on interconnection speed and equitable charger deployment, with short-term targets (1–2 years) for approvals and medium-term goals (3–5 years) for managed charging, supported by clean energy and incentive programs. Manufacturers’ contributions can be assessed via cost reductions, warranty coverage, and product accessibility, scaling over the medium term through tax incentives and rebates. Industry partners can be measured on interoperability compliance and pilot initiatives, progressing from short-term demonstrations to long-term integration (5+ years) via consortia and innovation grants. Policymakers and regulators can be tracked through equitable incentive distribution, permitting efficiency, and alignment with equity frameworks. Civil society engagement, supported through rebates, leasing programs, and green financing, can be monitored through household adoption, usage data, and feedback mechanisms on user satisfaction, which serve as key indicators of ultimate intervention success.

To synthesize the multifaceted considerations surrounding bidirectional charging and equitable EV infrastructure deployment,

Table 1. Stakeholder Roles in an Equitable Bidirectional Charging Transition and Potential Impacts.

Stakeholder	Priority Actions	Equity Considerations	Potential Impacts
Energy Utilities	Streamline interconnection using solar/battery storage models Accelerate early charger energization via pre-approval or grid upgrades Incentivize bidirectional charging Leverage managed charging for education	Prioritize underserved and energy-insecure areas Coordinate with housing for multi-unit dwellings Partner across sectors for equitable access Engage local communities in program design	Builds trust and participation among vulnerable groups Reduces infrastructure access barriers Expands equitable grid integration
Manufacturers	Offer affordable EV models Educate on V2X benefits and battery warranties Lower hardware and installation costs Promote EV leasing for secondary markets	Design products and warranties for low-income users Support used EV battery warranties Align production with equity-focused incentives Engage diverse buyers to reduce adoption gaps	Broadens market access Increases affordability and product diversity Enhances consumer protection and trust
Industry Partners	Standardize hardware/software interfaces Define fair compensation models for V2X services Collaborate with policymakers to reduce deployment barriers Advance multi-stakeholder coalitions for scaling	Design scalable models for diverse socioeconomic and geographic contexts Support public–private partnerships targeting underserved areas Incorporate civil society feedback	Facilitates widespread adoption Incentivizes participation Encourages stable investment and innovation Promotes inclusive growth and shared best practices
Policymakers & Regulators	Enforce income caps and consistent funding Provide point-of-sale incentives Support infrastructure and installation rebates Streamline permitting, zoning, and regulatory frameworks Promote cross-sectoral policy integration	Align policy with equity goals (UN SDGs) Target renters, low-income, and marginalized groups Design geographically adaptive, user-centric incentive programs Include civil society in program design	Reduces structural energy inequities Promotes resilient urban-rural connectivity Expands participation across income groups Strengthens investor and stakeholder confidence
Civil Society & Community Organizations	Advocate for vulnerable populations Facilitate community engagement and feedback loops Bridge technical and social knowledge gaps Hold responsible stakeholders accountable	Address local cultural and socio-economic needs Prevent exclusion through participatory design Monitor and report on equity outcomes	Builds trust and social acceptance Improves alignment with community needs Strengthens democratic accountability
Customers	Access new revenue streams via bidirectional charging Seek affordability and ease of access Request transparent information on costs, warranties, and battery performance Engage to improve experience and adoption	Benefit from subsidies, rebates, and supportive V2X and leasing programs Reduce technical literacy gaps with targeted education Participate in community-informed programs for relevance and responsiveness Shape programs via user feedback	Enhances household-level energy security Encourages sustainable behavioral change Promotes social and environmental justice

presents a comprehensive summary of key recommendations, organized according to major stakeholder groups. This table integrates technical, economic, regulatory, and social equity dimensions, highlighting the necessary roles and responsibilities of utilities, manufacturers, industry partners, policymakers, civil society, and customers (i.e., households). It also emphasizes the importance of cross-sector collaboration, inclusive policy frameworks, and user-centered approaches to ensure that the transition to sustainable, bidirectional charging technologies contributes to a just and resilient energy future. By explicitly centering equity and coordinated action, these summarized points serve as a roadmap to guide stakeholders in overcoming barriers and advancing widespread, inclusive adoption.

7. Conclusions and Future Directions

Unlocking the full potential of V2H and broader V2X applications depends on the development of comprehensive, forward-looking regulatory frameworks that facilitate seamless integration with energy systems. Operating at the intersection of energy, mobility, and information systems, V2X technologies offer significant societal benefits, including enhanced grid resilience, decarbonization, and consumer empowerment. Realizing these outcomes calls for collaboration across regulatory, industrial, and civic sectors, coupled with sustained efforts to make emerging technologies more accessible, equitable, and attuned to community needs. Moving forward, the implementation of V2X systems must also shift away from hardware-centric approaches toward more inclusive design strategies, flexible infrastructure planning, and governance models that prioritize public participation. At the core of this transformation is an equity-centered policy approach, which is critical to establishing V2X systems as reliable and inclusive pillars of the clean energy transition.

To support the widespread success of V2X technologies, regulatory and planning frameworks must address a diverse set of technical, economic, social, and institutional challenges. Key priorities include aligning utility rate structures with grid-supportive charging behaviors, streamlining interconnection procedures for distributed energy resources, and establishing fair compensation mechanisms for ancillary services provided by EVs. Achieving interoperability and scalability will require the implementation of open data standards, harmonized communication protocols, and robust cybersecurity measures that protect user privacy. At the same time, strategic investments in digital infrastructure, including spectrum allocation and coordinated public–private partnerships, are essential to accelerate deployment and ensure long-term commercial viability. Meeting the physical and operational demands of V2X systems also depends on continued advancements in battery technology and building design [136,137]. Although fast charging enhances user convenience, it can contribute to battery degradation through thermal stress and impose considerable strain on local grid infrastructure, particularly V2G applications. Enhancing system resilience will require improved thermal management, optimized charging protocols, and adaptive demand response mechanisms capable of responding to real-time grid conditions and user needs. The strategic choice of sites, standardization, and ongoing maintenance of charging infrastructure are therefore crucial not only for routine operations but also for supporting emergency preparedness, evacuation efforts, and post-disaster recovery.

Policy frameworks must holistically integrate climate goals with industrial development, workforce advancement, and resource security to support a resilient and equitable energy transition. Embedding V2H/V2X capabilities into emergency preparedness planning and the operation of critical infrastructure can enhance grid stability while also contributing to broader societal resilience goals. To ensure that infrastructure planning keeps pace with the dynamic nature of EV adoption, future research must move beyond static, historically based analyses and adopt artificial intelligence techniques to improve the accuracy and adaptability of demand forecasting. A truly sustainable mobility future is one that not only electrifies transportation but also democratizes access to resilience by advancing social equity, promoting environmental stewardship, and reinforcing systemic adaptive capacity.