Electric vehicles are a dominant policy solution in the EU. In policy documents, a transition to electric vehicles is justified through promises of a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and oil imports, as well as positive impacts on citizens (through reduced pollution) and the economy (through a boost in manufacturing and the generation of jobs). The evidence supporting such claims remains uncertain. Taking a stance that is grounded in complexity science, we introduce a hierarchical mapping of policy mechanisms, concerns and solutions – the elements making up policy narratives. Building on this mapping, we focus on questioning the solution-justification relationship for electric vehicles, by critically inspecting the material coherence between these justifications and the existing existing evidence. A targeted review shows how, for example, positive economic impacts largely depend on the location of battery and car manufacturing; or GHG emission reductions depend on promises of decarbonisation of the electricity sector, as well as on driving behaviours. Innovations are not just material objects, and such evidence does not necessarily weaken the dominant policy solution, nor the socio-technical imaginary it is grounded in. By questioning the material coherence of EV justification narratives in the EU, this case study points to a discussion about the effects of dominant policy narratives on the generation of science, warning against policy-based evidence in the co-creation of socio-technical imaginaries.

电动汽车是欧盟的主要政策解决方案。在政策文件中，通过减少温室气体（GHG）排放和石油进口的承诺，以及对公民的积极影响（通过减少污染）和经济（通过促进制造业和制造业的增长），证明了向电动汽车过渡的合理性。创造就业机会）。支持这种说法的证据仍然不确定。本着复杂性科学的立场，我们引入了对政策机制，关注点和解决方案的层次映射，这些构成了政策叙述的要素。在此映射的基础上，我们通过批判性地检查这些理由与现有证据之间的实质一致性，来集中精力质疑电动汽车的解决方案－理由关系。有针对性的评论显示了如何，例如，积极的经济影响在很大程度上取决于电池和汽车制造的位置；减少温室气体排放取决于电力部门脱碳的承诺以及驾驶行为。创新不仅是实质性的对象，而且这些证据并不一定削弱主导性的政策解决方案，也不是削弱其基础的社会技术想象力。通过质疑欧盟中电动汽车合理性说明的实质性连贯性，本案例研究提出了一个讨论。关于占主导地位的政策叙事对科学生成的影响，并警告不要在社会技术虚构的共同创造中使用基于政策的证据。减少温室气体排放取决于电力部门脱碳的承诺以及驾驶行为。创新不仅是实质性的对象，而且这些证据并不一定削弱主导性的政策解决方案，也不是削弱其基础的社会技术想象力。通过质疑欧盟中电动汽车合理性说明的实质性连贯性，本案例研究提出了一个讨论。关于占主导地位的政策叙事对科学生成的影响，并警告不要在社会技术虚构的共同创造中使用基于政策的证据。减少温室气体排放取决于电力部门脱碳的承诺以及驾驶行为。创新不仅是实质性的对象，而且这些证据并不一定削弱主导性的政策解决方案，也不是削弱其基础的社会技术想象力。通过质疑欧盟中电动汽车合理性说明的实质性连贯性，本案例研究提出了一个讨论。关于占主导地位的政策叙事对科学生成的影响，并警告不要在社会技术虚构的共同创造中使用基于政策的证据。