Five major EV charging standards exist worldwide BOX 1 –Chinese standard based on GB/T 20234 –North American standard CCS1 based on J1772 –European standard CCS2 based on IEC 62196 –Japanese standard based on CHAdeMO –Tesla standard based on NACSx Inconsistent charging interfaces in different regions have caused issues to the production and sales of automobiles and the production and construction of charging piles. Source: Bonnen Battery. (2024). Understanding The Diversity Of The Five Electric Vehicle Charging Standards Worldwide. Second, adoption faces critical resource gaps: limited financial resources to cover high upfront and operational costs, compounded by a shortage of skilled labour necessary for implementation. Advanced technologies, such as hydrogen systems and automated infrastructure, demand substantial initial capital and often entail extended payback periods, while green fuels remain considerably more expensive than traditional fuels. In emerging markets, this financial hurdle is compounded by end-user reluctance to absorb the “green premium”, which challenges the commercial viability of cleaner alternatives. The substantial upfront investment required for infrastructure, such as charging networks, further slows the broader uptake. Concurrently, a critical shortage of a skilled workforce, including technicians, engineers and data analysts proficient in new energy systems and digital platforms, impedes both the implementation and effective operation of these advanced solutions in emerging markets. While a good number of our clients, especially multinational corporations, are willing to work together with us even with a green premium for logistics services to meet decarbonization targets and compliance requirements, broad scaling will require stronger demand-side incentives and clearer policy signals. Elaine Chen, Vice-President, Corporate Public Affairs, DHL Group Third, a lack of ecosystem-wide alignment and persistent data fragmentation impede coordinated progress. In emerging markets, collaboration across the value chain remains segregated, leading to disparate technology choices, interoperability gaps and missing standardized industry-wide development pathways. This misalignment between upstream technology providers and downstream logistics operators results in inefficient resource allocation. Concurrently, pervasive data segregation limits end-to-end supply chain visibility, hindering performance benchmarking, accurate progress measurement and the implementation of systemic optimization opportunities. Building an integrated green supply chain requires systematic innovation and collaboration. JINGDONG Logistics is working with partners and clients to advance sustainable logistics through company-wide low-carbon initiatives. By aligning technology, resources and sustainability goals, we can accelerate the transition to a green logistics system that delivers sustainable value for both business and society. Wang Ying, Vice President, JD.com Partnerships between producers and end users are the key to unlocking green fuel at scale. Our collaboration with demand-side players such as DHL exemplifies this approach. In this partnership, we supply SAF to support DHL’s decarbonization goals. By driving systematic innovation, Envision is making SAF cost-competitive and transforming this ‘new oil’ into a scalable solution for the global energy transition. Zhang Lei, Founder and Chairman, Envision GroupSource: International Air Transport Association (IATA). (2025). Fuel Fact Sheet.High cost of green fuels BOX 2 Sustainable aviation fuel costs more than conventional jet fuel, though the premium varies widely by technology. In 2024, the airline industry used all SAF produced at a price of 3.1 times that of jet fuel. Green Logistics Innovation for Emerging Markets: Driving Competitiveness and Shared Value 19

Green Logistics Innovation for Emerging Markets Driving Competitiveness and Shared Value 2025