Abstract:Governments have attempted to advance alternative fuels (AFs) in the on-road transportation sector with the goal of addressing multiple environmental, energy security, economic growth, and technology transition objectives. However there is little agreement, at all governmental levels, on how to prioritize goals and how to measure progress towards goals. Literature suggests that a consistent, aligned, and prioritized approach will increase the effectiveness of deployment efforts. While literature states that goal alignment and prioritization should occur, there are few studies suggesting how to measure the alignment of deployment programs. This paper presents a methodology for measuring goal alignment by applying the theories of goal ambiguity. It then demonstrates this methodology within the context of fuel- and project-neutral (wide-scope) grant programs directed toward AF deployment. This paper analyzes forty-seven (47) wide-scope federal, state, and regional grant programs in the United States, active between 2006 and 2011. On the whole, governments most use deployment grant programs to address environmental concerns and are highly aligned in doing so between agency levels. In contrast, there is much less consensus (and therefore goal alignment) on whether or how governments should address other priorities such as energy security, economic growth, and technology transition.