Corrigendum to “Joint operation strategy of parking and charging infrastructure” [Transp. Res. D: Transp. Environ. 144 (2025) 104773] (Transportation Research Part D (2025) 144, (S136192092500183X), (10.1016/j.trd.2025.104773))

Our requests are as follows: 1. When operator L appears for the first time, we would like to make it clearer to the reader by explaining operator L further. Accordingly, the abstract is set out below: Charging pile sharing transforms the structure of the supply chain and influences the production decisions of parking space operators. We develop three strategies to study parking space operators’ pile-building strategies using game theory: (1) commissioning a third-party company to build piles (Strategy P), (2) self-constructing charging piles (Strategy D), and (3) co-building and sharing charging piles with other operators (Strategy C). The results show that brand advantage has a negative effect on the low-brand operator in Strategies P and D but promotes revenue in Strategy C. Interestingly, the higher the brand advantage (or brand spillover) of the parking space operator, the smaller the fixed payment for the low-brand operator. Furthermore, operator L (low-brand operator) always has the lowest revenue in Strategy P. Finally, considering the maximization of social welfare, the government should provide parking space operator with a subsidy for building piles. These findings offer policy recommendations for parking space operators and the government to promote the implications related to facilitating sustainable transportation. 2. Propositions 6 and 7 are incorrectly formatted, and we would like the editorial board to re-edit them. The correct formatting is as follows: Proposition 6. (1) [Formula presented] and [Formula presented]. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.