Drivers and Barriers for Electric Vehicles in the USA and Brazil: A Comparative Analysis

Abstract

This research examines the diffusion of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) in Brazil, comparing them to those in the United States. The research focuses on the importance of this innovation in the context of technological and market evolution, highlighting environmental and energy issues. This study uses a comparative case study approach, analyzing socioeconomic and structural aspects of both countries, as well as relevant variables. The data are validated through a questionnaire answered by experts from the automotive industry. The innovation diffusion model developed by Everett Rogers is applied to the data, allowing the identification of differences in the stages of diffusion between the two countries. The results show that Brazil needs to strengthen socioeconomic and structural factors to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles and become a significant player in this market, highlighting the differences between the two countries.

1. Introduction

Electric vehicles (EVs), including plug-in hybrid and battery models, originated in the first half of the 19th century and could reach speeds of up to 100 km/h [1]. However, the mass production of gasoline-powered vehicles, advocated by Henry Ford, coupled with the increasing demand for long-distance road travel, has led to a significant decline in electric car production. This decline was further accelerated by lower gasoline prices and the advent of automatic starting devices, which made the crank obsolete [2].

Despite these challenges, EVs gained renewed industry interest due to growing environmental concerns and the 1970s oil crisis, spurring research into alternative technologies [2]. In recent years, climate policies and the Paris Agreement have reinforced the need to reduce emissions, boosting electric mobility as a mitigation strategy. In Brazil, renewable energy is high, around 80%, which increases the emissions advantage of EVs [3,4]. EVs offer greater energy efficiency and lower emissions compared to internal combustion engine vehicles [5,6]. Its main advantages include reduced greenhouse gas emissions, lower operating costs, and energy security benefits [7]. However, limited charging infrastructure and range anxiety are considered barriers to adoption, especially in emerging markets [8,9]. The establishment of charging infrastructure and the provision of financial/fiscal incentives (e.g., tax reductions) remain essential for the diffusion of electric vehicles, increasing economic attractiveness and mitigating barriers to use [10,11].

For Brazil, the diplomatic position maintains that contributions to the climate regime should be differentiated between developed and developing countries, in line with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities [12,13].

COP-26, held in 2021, reiterated the need to accelerate measures to meet greenhouse gas mitigation goals [14]. Despite advances, a limited understanding of the role of socioeconomic and structural factors in the adoption of electric vehicles across different development contexts remains, highlighting a significant gap for future research.

To understand the evolution of this market, using Everett Rogers’ model of diffusion of innovation becomes attractive [15]. Exploring this model to understand Brazil’s position on the EV diffusion curve relative to other markets can inform future research and decision-making by stakeholders. The comparison market chosen is the USA, as it is a country of continental dimensions, and Brazil, as it is one of the strongest automotive markets in the world and has been exploring this technology for the longest time.

EV adoption decisions involve several factors, including infrastructure compatibility, complexity, performance, autonomy, and more. Disadvantages are also observed in this type of vehicle, such as the battery, which consumes significant resources in its production. Rapid technological evolution leads to faster obsolescence, requiring disassembly and remanufacturing processes to recover valuable components [5,16]. Research conducted in Brazil primarily focuses on emerging technologies and domestic industrial feasibility [17], with limited emphasis on comparing different adoption contexts, thereby reinforcing the need for comparative analyses.

Therefore, for this research, the comparison factors considered are the structural and socioeconomic aspects that can influence the decision. The research question that guides this study is as follows: What socioeconomic and structural factors drive or hinder the adoption of electric vehicles in Brazil and the United States?

This study analyzes the socioeconomic and structural factors that drive or hinder the adoption of EVs in Brazil and the USA, exploring indicators, evaluating experts’ perceptions, classifying diffusion stages, and proposing recommendations. The chosen methodology is a comparative case study, which allows the structured analysis of different contexts even with limited data [18]. Understanding these barriers and drivers is crucial for guiding public policies and market strategies that accelerate EV adoption across countries with varying levels of technological maturity.

The survey is divided into seven sections. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework, followed by Section 3, which analyzes the state of the art and compares it between Brazil and the United States. Section 4 describes the methodology, while Section 5 and Section 6 discuss the results considering the Rogers model and apply the diffusion of innovation curve. Finally, Section 7 brings the conclusions, contributions, and recommendations for future research.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Diffusion of Innovation

The diffusion of innovations is the process by which a novelty is communicated through social channels over time and gradually adopted by the members of a social system [19]. This occurs through communication channels that allow the transmission of new ideas from one individual to another over time [20]. Diffusion is crucial for the dissemination of innovations. It involves persuasion in the decision-making process, communication through channels over time (sequentially), and the perception of novelty by audiences evaluating adoption [19].

The diffusion of innovations helps define demand forecasting strategies and understand the processes of product development and market penetration. The temporal dimension plays a key role in the diffusion of innovations [21]. In the consumption of goods, diffusion typically occurs in socially conditioned waves, starting among higher-income groups and, over time, reaching lower-income groups [22]. Diffusion curves generally exhibit an ‘S’ shape or a concave profile, depending on the inflection point in individual adoption [22].

2.2. Roger’s Model of Innovation Diffusion

The model proposed by Rogers examines the elements involved in the diffusion of innovations [15]. He argues that innovation is not adopted simultaneously by all members of a social system. Instead, he follows a sequence of time that allows them to be classified by adoption, based on the initial use of the new idea. This categorization involves five groups: Innovators (2.5%), Early Adopters (13.5%), Early Majority (34%), Late Majority (34%), and Laggards (16%) [15].

Rogers’ categorization typically produces an “S” curve: initial adoption is constrained by innovators, followed by acceleration to half of the potential, and deceleration as diffusion catches up with laggards. Rogers also proposed five stages of the decision to adopt an innovation: awareness, interest, evaluation, testing, and adoption [15]. These stages are represented in his diffusion model, which helps explain the search for information and processing activities that motivate individuals to reduce uncertainty about the advantages and disadvantages of innovation [23].

2.3. Electric Vehicles as a Technological Innovation

The adoption of electric vehicles represents a significant technological innovation in the transportation sector. Although experiments with electric vehicles began in the 1830s, preceding internal combustion engines, mass adoption has only recently accelerated due to improvements in battery technology, declining costs, and strengthened climate policies [24]. From the end of the 1990s, the scenario for EV introduction began to change. Some countries have started to identify the need to reinvest in this technology. Norway has stood out as a research hub for EVs, encouraging their adoption through tax exemptions, fee exemptions, and other benefits [2].

This resulted in a significant increase in electric vehicle sales, accounting for 29% of hybrid vehicles and 31.2% of zero-emission vehicles in 2008 [25,26].

Currently, traditional automakers, such as GM, Ford, Toyota, Renault, and Volkswagen, are among the leading manufacturers of electrified vehicles and have been expanding their participation through strategies and production focused on EVs and HEVs (Hybrid Electric Vehicles). In contrast, dedicated companies such as China’s BYD and the USs’ Tesla emerge as global leaders in the segment [27]. Global electric vehicle sales exceeded 20 million units in 2025, accounting for approximately 25% of the global market [28]. China led with over 13 million units, Europe registered approximately 4.2 million; in the USA, the share reached 11%; in Brazil, the share reached 6.2% [29,30]. This represents significant growth compared to 2021 data, with emerging markets in Latin America and Asia showing particularly strong expansion, driven by policy support and affordable imports from Chinese manufacturers.

3. State-of-the-Art of the Industry: A Socioeconomic and Structural Comparison of EVs Between Brazil and the USA

Chapter 3 was developed to provide a detailed analysis of the socioeconomic and structural factors that govern the diffusion of EVs. The United States was compared with Brazil, considering per capita income, EV sales, charging infrastructure, and government incentives. A 2021 Consumer Reports survey is presented, examining the barriers and drivers of EV adoption in the US.

3.1. Brazil and USA Comparison for per Capita Income, Recharge Structure, and Government Incentives

An analysis of per capita income by federative unit in Brazil and the USA was conducted, a socioeconomic variable often used as a determinant of EV adoption in comparative studies. The average per capita income in the US is substantially higher than in Brazil, a contrast often associated in the literature with a higher propensity to adopt EVs [31,32]. Graph 1 shows the growth of the BEVs and PHEVs market in the US.

Graph 1. Electric vehicle fleet in the US, 2010–2024.

Graph 1. Electric vehicle fleet in the US, 2010–2024.

The literature attributes the preference for PHEVs to restrictions on public charging infrastructure, which is still expanding, and to cost and availability barriers to all-electric models, factors that slow the shift to BEVs and keep the pace of adoption more gradual [8,33,34]. Graph 2 shows the growth of the BEVs and PHEVs market in Brazil.

Graph 2. Electric vehicle fleet in Brazil, 2014–2024.

Graph 2. Electric vehicle fleet in Brazil, 2014–2024.

In contrast, Brazil still operates from a reduced base, despite the recent acceleration. Monthly records and inventory growth indicate progress, but the market’s composition differs from that of more mature countries. In Brazil, electrification has been driven by plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs).

3.2. Charging Infrastructure and Government Incentives

Regarding charging infrastructure, the United States has a publicly available network that is widely distributed nationally. In contrast, in Brazil, the supply is still incipient and uneven, concentrated in specific initiatives and priority areas. In contrast to the greater density and capillarity of points in the US, Brazilian expansion remains concentrated and with limited coverage, which helps to explain the preference for hybrid configurations and the gradual adoption of BEVs [35]. Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the distribution of public charging stations by state in 2025.

Government incentives are decisive for the diffusion of EVs. In the US, purchasing and access policies, especially in California, have leveraged adoption for decades [36]. In the US, federal and state policies to support charging infrastructure, combining subsidies and targeted programs, drove the rapid expansion of public charging points throughout the late 2010s and early 2020s, consolidating national coverage [37].

In the United States, the diffusion of EVs has federal support through policies and incentives. Historically, this is a tax credit of up to USD$7500 for eligible models, whose access declines after the manufacturer exceeds a threshold of 200 thousand units (a case already observed for Tesla and GM); in addition, several states offer additional subsidies (e.g., in California), while others have instituted specific annual registration fees for EVs [38].

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, enacted in 2021, represents a significant commitment, allocating $7.5 billion to deploy 500,000 public charging stations nationwide by 2030. These policies have been instrumental in supporting the transition to electric mobility, particularly in states with strong environmental commitments and well-developed charging infrastructure [39,40].

In the US, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act boosts electromobility by providing for a national network of 500,000 public charging points by the end of the decade, thereby reinforcing the expansion of infrastructure needed for both short- and long-distance travel [32]. The market also accelerated; the share of electric vehicles in US sales rose from 5.9% (2022) to 7.6% in 2023, with ~60% growth in annual sales in the period, signaling faster adoption [32].

In Brazil, the set of incentives for purchasing EVs remains limited compared to leading countries; not by chance, the share of EVs in sales is still low. This study shows that markets with higher penetration (e.g., Norway) arrived there by leveraging robust policies [38]. Public policies for energy efficiency have been implemented. Rota 2030, Mobility and Logistics, incorporates tax incentives for research and development (in addition to energy efficiency targets) to guide and empower companies to achieve the program’s objectives [35].

Another relevant federal program is RenovaBio, launched in 2017, which aims to expand biofuel production and use and to improve regulatory governance in the sector. The policy is structured in three instruments: annual national decarbonization targets (deployed to distributors); certification of producers/importers; and development of decarbonization credit markets [41]:

Brazil has implemented several policy mechanisms to encourage the adoption of battery electric vehicles (BEVs), including the Rota 2030 program and state-level Tax exemptions. Research on Brazilian tax exemption policies demonstrates that greater fiscal incentives result in larger electric vehicle fleets, with states offering full Tax exemptions [42]. Economic analysis reveals that BEVs can achieve annual operating costs 60.9% to 73% lower than those of conventional vehicles, highlighting the importance of incentive policies in reducing the total cost of ownership [43]. However, the fragmented nature of state-level policies creates inconsistencies in the availability of incentives across regions, potentially limiting their effectiveness in driving nationwide adoption, as the disparity between regions with comprehensive incentives and those without remains a significant barrier to market penetration [42,43].

In a study conducted by Borba, two alternative future scenarios for incentive policies on the diffusion of light electric vehicles in Brazil through 2050 were developed [44]. The research concluded that charging infrastructure development is the highest-impact policy lever for stimulating BEV sales growth, followed by vehicle cost reductions through import tax [44]. The study projected that under an optimistic scenario with coordinated infrastructure investment and sustained fiscal incentives, Brazil could achieve 15–20% BEV market share by 2050. Conversely, under a conservative scenario with minimal policy support, market penetration would remain below 5% by mid-century, highlighting the critical importance of sustained government commitment to EV adoption policies [44].

A research article, “Bass Diffusion Model Adaptation Considering Public Policies to Improve Electric Vehicle Sales—A Brazilian Case Study,” presents two scenarios: one without public incentives and an alternative suggesting incentives, projecting annual licensing by regression. The trajectories indicate more contained long-term progress and suggest that policies that reduce the cost of acquisition have a greater effect than operational measures [45].

The market projection for EVs in 2050, based on the scenarios developed, indicates a 20% share of vehicle sales, which the proposed public policies could stimulate. Considering the projection, Brazil falls short of forecasts for countries such as Germany, with a 61% share, and Norway, with an 88% share [45].

In early 2022, Consumer Reports [46], a nonprofit organization focused on North American consumers, conducted a survey of 8027 US residents about their outlook and concerns regarding the transportation sector. The survey assessed Americans’ likelihood of acquiring a BEV, vehicle knowledge, purchase barriers, incentives, and fuel use.

The result showed that the smallest share of respondents is those who would buy a BEV, with 14%. Although added to the shares of those who are seriously considering it and those who are only considering buying a BEV, the result would exceed 70%. Those who did not consider purchasing a BEV had a 28% response rate, due to barriers such as charging logistics, autonomy, and costs. The availability of free charging stations is desired to increase autonomy on trips.

4. Methodology

Scientific research functions as a systematic and rational procedure for generating responses when information is scarce or dispersed, as methods such as structured literature reviews enable mapping, critical evaluation, and integration of evidence to solve problems [47]. In the context of electric vehicles (EVs) research, there is a scarcity of studies on the diffusion of this innovation and the challenges Brazil faces. To fill this gap, a comparative case study was adopted, an approach that systematically compares cases and highlights similarities and contrasts [48].

It is a small-N design that works with a limited number of cases and employs in-depth analysis across multiple sources, favoring contextual understanding over conventional statistical inference [48]. A comparative case study enables the empirical examination of relationships among variables and the exploration of relevant factors, actors, and contextual aspects in each case, providing a basis for robust analytical comparisons [49]. In case studies, a contemporary phenomenon is investigated in a real-world context, using multiple sources of evidence and limited researcher control over the events [19].

Conducting comparative case studies requires a transparent chain of steps: (i) outlining the question and the logic of comparison; (ii) design the study with attention to external validity, reliability, and equivalence between contexts; (iii) prepare protocols and collect data from multiple sources; (iv) analyze and synthesize intra- and inter-case evidence; and (v) report in a transparent and auditable manner, suitable for technical review [49]. Another critical factor is that research can be biased toward qualitative or quantitative methods.

The research begins with the exploration of databases to identify research related to the diffusion of innovations and relevant socioeconomic aspects. Automotive experts validated the data collected on socioeconomic and structural elements through interviews, and researchers then applied it to Everett Rogers’ Innovation Diffusion Model, which was chosen for its ease of replication and for its consideration of the influence of the social system on the diffusion of innovation.

Given the specificity of Brazil’s social system, its use is justified to explore factors related to the introduction of light electric vehicles (BEVs) and to generate relevant information for the automotive industry, supply chain, government, and associations.

4.1. Expert Interview Design and Implementation

The sample comprised 10 automotive industry experts representing strategic positions in major vehicle manufacturers operating in both the United States and Brazil. Although this sample size is small, it is appropriate for exploratory case study research, which aims to understand complex phenomena in specific contexts rather than to generalize statistically [18].

These experts represent key stakeholders with deep knowledge of EV market dynamics, policy frameworks, and technological developments in both countries. The selection of specialists from different manufacturers ensures diverse perspectives on market conditions, competitive strategies, and regulatory environments.

All participants hold degrees in Engineering and/or Administration with specialized knowledge in areas such as product development, market strategy, regulatory compliance, and future studies. They occupy strategic positions in management, planning, and innovation departments within their respective organizations, ensuring access to current market intelligence and decision-making perspectives. The expert interview process followed a rigorous protocol:

• Recruitment: Prior contact was made with the invited experts via email, explaining the research objectives and providing a summary of the study’s subject matter.
• Instrument Design: A semi-structured questionnaire was developed based on the theoretical framework and data collected during the research on the two countries. The initial questionnaire contained 24 questions, which was subsequently validated by two PhDs and two automotive managers, resulting in a final version with 16 questions. The questionnaire was designed to elicit expert opinions on socioeconomic factors, infrastructure barriers, technological readiness, government policies, and market dynamics affecting EV adoption.
• Data Collection: The questionnaire link was sent by email and applied via Google Forms. The semi-structured format allowed interviewees to include any other relevant information in their answers, capturing nuanced perspectives beyond predetermined response categories.
• Ethical Considerations: Following confidentiality protocols (TCLE), a closed, mandatory question with answer options “yes” and “no” was added, asking respondents whether they would agree to participate in the questionnaire, provided the researcher kept their identities and the companies they work for confidential. All participants provided informed consent.
• Data Analysis: The responses were synthesized and analyzed using a thematic coding approach to identify key patterns and dimensions. The most cited terms and concepts were grouped into specific analytical dimensions for systematic comparison across respondents and countries.

The complete interview questionnaire, including the 16 questions and their respective theoretical references, as well as the synthesis of responses from each expert, is available in Appendix A.

4.2. Global Analysis of Respondents’ Perceptions

The 10 expert respondents, representing strategic positions in the automotive industry of both countries, provided comprehensive insights into the barriers and drivers for BEV adoption. In the USA, experts emphasized the maturity of charging infrastructure and established market mechanisms as key enablers, while highlighting consumer range anxiety and high vehicle prices as persistent barriers. Brazilian experts, conversely, focused on infrastructure deficiency and high import costs as critical obstacles, while recognizing growing consumer awareness and government incentives as emerging drivers. The responses revealed significant contextual differences between the two markets, reflecting distinct stages of BEV market development and varying policy environments.

Thematic analysis of expert responses identified three primary dimensions influencing EV adoption:

• Economic Dimension: Market maturity, cost structures, price competitiveness, and economic incentives.
• Technological Dimension: Battery technology advancement, charging infrastructure development, and technological readiness.
• EV Industry Planning Dimension: Automaker strategies, government policy frameworks, regulatory structures, production capabilities, and incentive mechanisms.

The frequency analysis of expert responses identified key patterns of terminology. In the economic dimension, terms such as “market,” “cost,” and “price” dominated expert discourse, reflecting the centrality of economic factors in BEV adoption decisions. The technological dimension featured frequent mentions of “technology,” “battery,” and “charging,” underscoring the importance of technical capabilities and infrastructure. The EV industry planning dimension highlighted “automaker,” “government,” and “structure,” indicating expert recognition of the systemic nature of the transition. These linguistic patterns provide empirical evidence of the multi-dimensional nature of BEV diffusion, confirming the theoretical framework applied in this research.

It is essential to emphasize that the experts were unanimous about the roles of automakers and the Government, both of which have a responsibility for the diffusion of EVs. The aspects cited by the experts align with the explored framework. Government policies, biofuel technology, automakers’ responsibility, and socioeconomic factors are essential factors in the diffusion of EVs.

The interviews enabled us to broaden our understanding of the problem and refine the research framework. The experts’ opinions, based on their answers, generated a new data source that, combined with the sources of the theoretical framework, facilitated a more comprehensive analysis of the differences between Brazil and the USA.

5. Comparative Analysis Between Brazil, the USA, and the Rogers’ Model

The comparative analysis examined six key dimensions of BEV diffusion. The socioeconomic dimension analyzed per capita income, income distribution, and purchasing power across regions. The infrastructure dimension evaluated charging station density, geographic distribution, and accessibility. The technology dimension assessed manufacturing capabilities, battery production capacity, and research and development investment. The market dimension examined BEV sales volumes, market share trends, and fleet composition. The government dimension analyzed policy instruments, fiscal incentives, and regulatory frameworks. The environmental dimension evaluated the energy matrix composition, renewable energy penetration, and the potential for emissions reductions. This multi-dimensional approach enabled a comprehensive comparison of the distinct contexts in which BEV diffusion occurs in the USA and Brazil.

A comparative analysis was conducted between the two countries studied and Everett Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation model. First, through the literature reviewed and subsequently through the data sources extracted from the interviews, the researchers came to understand that the study variables made sense.

The analysis of innovation adoption, grounded in Everett Rogers’ theory, revealed that the US is at a more advanced stage of adoption for battery electric vehicles (BEVs) than Brazil. The following analysis examines six key factors that influence this difference:

Socioeconomics:

Average per capita income varies across countries. In Brazil, BEV sales are concentrated in the highest-income states, unlike in the USA. Although US per capita income is relatively uniform across states, BEV sales do not mirror that distribution. This suggests that income is not a determining factor in BEV purchase decisions in the US, indicating that other factors (infrastructure, incentives, and technology availability) play a more significant role. In Brazil, this hypothesis warrants further study as the number of BEVs sold increases.

Infrastructure:

Charging infrastructure appears to be one of the most critical determinants of EV diffusion. The United States exhibits a more mature and geographically distributed charging network, which reduces uncertainty and supports adoption among early majority consumers.

In contrast, Brazil shows a fragmented and regionally concentrated infrastructure, limiting adoption primarily to urban and higher-income segments. Experts consistently identified infrastructure availability as the most decisive factor for transitioning from early adopters to the early majority.

Technology:

The two countries have divergent trajectories. The US has technology for BEV manufacturing and battery production. Brazil still lacks such technology for light passenger vehicles (it currently assembles BEVs through the Completely Knocked Down system). However, Brazil has biofuel technology with an already established supply structure and strategic programs like RenovaBio, which could complement EV adoption strategies.

Market:

The North American market is ahead of the Brazilian market. The USA shows significant fleet growth each year, unlike Brazil, where it is minimal. Even with substantial increases in the US, consumers still identify barriers such as charging logistics, autonomy, and costs. This suggests that while infrastructure and incentives are improving, consumer acceptance is still evolving.

Government:

Public policy plays a central role in shaping EV adoption trajectories. In the United States, long-term and stable incentive policies (e.g., tax credits, infrastructure investments) contribute to reducing adoption barriers. In Brazil, although programs such as Rota 2030 and tax incentives exist, their fragmented and inconsistent implementation reduces their overall effectiveness. Experts highlighted that policy uncertainty negatively impacts consumer confidence and investment decisions.

Environment:

Brazil has a renewable energy matrix (80.33%) that is significantly larger than the global average (24.80%), thereby increasing the emissions advantage of EVs over internal combustion engine vehicles. The USA has a greater need for EVs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ICEVs, given its energy mix, providing additional motivation for EV adoption [43].

5.1. Final Considerations of the Variables Analyzed

Among the variables analyzed, each country is at a different stage in its EV market. The US is ahead of Brazil because it has been investing in this market for the longest time, has autonomous technology enabling internal production of vehicles and batteries, and, at the same time, needs investment to address environmental issues.

Brazil, in turn, is still developing an infrastructure compatible with the growth of the EV market, but it has strengths in biofuel technology and renewable energy production, representing an environmental advantage due to lower carbon emissions.

5.2. Comparison Between Brazil and the USA with Stages of Rogers Diffusion

In his model of the Diffusion of Innovation, Everett Rogers proposed five stages of decision-making for the adoption of innovation, as explained in the theoretical framework [15]. Figure 3 shows the five stages of Everett Rogers’ innovation diffusion model.

For a more thorough examination of the theme, each stage was tabulated using data from Brazil and the USA. Subsequently, a comparative analysis of the two countries’ EV diffusion is presented.

As a result, the analysis of innovation adoption based on Everett Rogers’ theory revealed that the US is at a more advanced stage of electric vehicle (BEV) adoption than Brazil. The US excels in the Knowledge and Persuasion stages, with better infrastructure and knowledge, while Brazil still faces socioeconomic and structural challenges that limit the adoption of BEVs.

6. Application of the Everett Rogers Diffusion Curve

The method of categorizing innovation adopters, developed by Rogers during his PhD studies, uses statistical concepts such as the mean (X) and standard deviation (SD) to classify adopters. It evaluates the moment at which individuals adopt an innovation relative to others in society. The resulting diffusion curve is divided into five categories: Innovators (2.5%), Early Adopters (13.5%), Early Majority (34%), Late Majority (34%), and Laggards (16%). The curve is not symmetrical, with three categories to the left of the average and two to the right.

To apply Rogers’ model to the market data for Brazil and the USA, we employed the following methodology:

• We collected market share data for BEVs in both countries for 2025;
• We positioned each country on the diffusion curve based on their BEV market penetration as a percentage of total vehicle sales;
• We cross-referenced this position with qualitative insights from expert interviews regarding market maturity, infrastructure development, and adoption barriers;
• We assessed alignment with Rogers’ five stages of adoption decision-making (Awareness, Interest, Evaluation, Trial, and Adoption) based on empirical evidence from both secondary and primary data sources.

This integrated approach ensures that the positioning on Rogers’ curve is grounded in both quantitative market data and qualitative expert validation rather than arbitrary classification. Figure 4 shows the positioning of Brazil and the USA on the diffusion curve.

According to market data, BEVs accounted for approximately 5.2% of the North American market in 2025, with 1.24 million units sold in the United States alone, representing the second-best year on record for BEV sales despite policy uncertainty [50,51,52]. In Canada, BEVs accounted for 9% of new vehicle sales, while the combined North American market showed resilience, with BEVs surpassing 1.3 million units across the region’s total vehicle fleet [53,54].

Based on this market penetration level (5.2%), the United States is positioned in the “Early Adopters” stage of Rogers’ diffusion curve. This positioning reflects:

(a)

Established charging infrastructure across most states;

(b)

Federal and state policy support;

(c)

Multiple vehicle options from diverse manufacturers;

(d)

Consumer awareness and growing acceptance;

(e)

Continued barriers (cost, range anxiety) that prevent broader adoption.

In Brazil, battery electric vehicles (BEVs) still account for a small fraction of sales and are advancing at a gradual pace, reflecting cost, infrastructure, and supply chain barriers [8]. Thus, the country remains in the Innovators category, requiring greater dissemination of knowledge, incentive policies, price reductions, and expanded infrastructure to facilitate the diffusion of this technology [55]. Brazil’s positioning in the “Innovators” stage is supported by:

(a)

Minimal BEV market share;

(b)

Concentrated geographic distribution of sales in high-income urban centers;

(c)

Limited charging infrastructure;

(d)

Fragmented state-level policies;

(e)

High vehicle prices relative to consumer income;

(f)

Expert consensus regarding early-stage market development.

7. Conclusions

This research aimed to map the socioeconomic and structural factors that affect the spread of light electric vehicles (BEVs) in Brazil and the United States. The decision to compare these two countries was justified by differences in the stage of technological adoption and the availability of relevant information. This research focused on analyzing the structural and socioeconomic issues that influence the spread of BEVs in both countries. To perform a comparative analysis, this study used theoretical references on innovation, the diffusion of innovation, and diffusion models. The diffusion model, proposed by Everett Rogers, was chosen as the basis for the research due to its applicability and the availability of a reasonable amount of data. This allowed understanding the concept of electric vehicles as an innovation and how diffusion of innovation occurs over time.

The comparative study between Brazil and the US focused on several aspects, including the BEV market, influence of government policies, battery charging infrastructure, per capita income, acceptance of the technology, and environmental impact. Additionally, a 16-question questionnaire was administered to 10 automotive experts in both countries to assess the effects of various factors on BEV adoption. The answers to the questionnaires helped to confirm the relevance of socioeconomic, structural, environmental, technological, governmental, and market aspects in the dissemination of BEVs. The research identified that Brazil and the United States are at different stages of BEV diffusion. The US is better prepared to address the spread, thanks to a developed charging infrastructure, government investments, and the presence of local automakers. On the other hand, Brazil is still in the early stages of development in this market.

This research applied the results to the five stages of innovation diffusion proposed by Everett Rogers. The US was positioned at stage IV (Implementation), while Brazil could not be placed at stage III (Decision) due to its early stage of development. In addition to analyzing socioeconomic and structural aspects, the survey also compared variables such as technology, markets, governments, and environments across the two countries. This helped us to understand the relevance of each of these aspects to the spread of BEVs.

The survey concluded that both markets are on the rise, albeit in different proportions due to the size of each country. No significant rejection of BEVs was identified, and the research suggests conducting broader consumer studies to assess their acceptance. The survey highlights that the electric vehicle landscape is constantly evolving, with automakers and governments investing in the diffusion of technology. This suggests the spread of BEVs will accelerate.

Limitations and Future Studies

The main limitation of this research is the small sample size of the experts interviewed (10 participants), which limits the generalizability of the findings to broader populations. However, this sample size is appropriate for exploratory case study research focused on understanding complex phenomena in specific contexts. Additionally, the lack of reliable data on Brazilian consumers’ perceptions of EVs limited the comparative analysis in the Decision stage of Rogers’ model.

Future research should address the following gaps identified in this study:

• Testable Hypothesis: Future research could test the hypothesis that the marginal effect of charging station density on BEV adoption is significantly higher in the US than in Brazil, after controlling for per capita income and government incentives. This would require econometric analysis with larger datasets from both countries.
• Phased Roadmap for Brazil: Develop a detailed phased roadmap for EV adoption in Brazil until 2050, specifying targets for infrastructure development, price reduction, and market share by phase, building upon the scenarios developed by Borba.
• Urban vs. Rural Dynamics: Investigate the differences in EV adoption barriers and drivers between urban and rural areas in both countries.
• Consumer Perception Studies: Conduct comprehensive consumer perception studies in Brazil to understand barriers to EV adoption beyond infrastructure and cost, including psychological factors, brand preferences, and technology acceptance.
• Technology Transfer: Analyze the feasibility and implications of technology transfer for EV manufacturing, mainly regarding quality standards [56] and battery assembly and disassembly lines [57] from developed to emerging markets, specifically for Brazil’s automotive industry.