Governance challenges of mobility platforms: the case of Merwede, Utrecht

Abstract

Background Merwede is an envisioned neighbourhood in Utrecht (the Netherlands) that provides an instructive case to learn about the governance challenges of digital mobility platforms. Unique about Merwede is how the development of a mobility platform is envisioned to be integrated into the development of a new neighbourhood. Methodology This article discusses the case of Merwede and provides insights into its proposed mobility platform and how it is made. It illuminates governance challenges relevant to the design and operation of an unconventional mobility concept by disentangling outstanding practical issues concerning three key governance dimensions—organizational structures, decision-making processes, and instruments. Results The research provides an empirical illustration of governance questions that come up when mobility becomes a service and is integrated into the urban fabric from the very beginning of a development process. Already in the plan development stage, Merwede illustrates that difficult decisions are to be made and competing interests come to the fore.

A Classification of Digital Platforms Applied to the Governance of Smart Cities

“…However, due to their business focus, market platforms are insufficient for application in public management, where specific conflicts of interest occur [20]. They cannot achieve scalability since they disregard the specificity of each site and stray from the urban strategic planning in question [21]. In this sense, the platforms contradict the goals of Smart Cities.…”

“…Using financial and personal recognition for the ranking of users, the government encourages citizens to move in the most sustainable way possible, reducing the emission of greenhouse gases [24]. In turn, the platform under development in Utrecht aims to optimize the mobility of a developing smart neighborhood [21].…”

Developing mobility as a service – user, operator and governance perspectives

“…Van den Hurk et al [16] identify through a case study in Utrecht responsibilities for public and private actors in cities to develop digital mobility platforms. They identify open questions about the roles of stakeholders, ambiguous understanding of the mobility platform and highlight the need for public and landowner participation in the development process to enable market-based demand for MaaS in cities.…”

“…The papers can be clustered around three main themes. Firstly, three papers provide an overview of the state of MaaS development and discuss governance issues [14][15][16]. Secondly, three papers provide pilot and survey results with a focus on rural, urban and work-related mobility [17][18][19].…”

An assessment framework for safeguarding public values on mobility platforms

“…In addition, the media coverage by local news media and the invitation to give a presentation at the council meeting in the City of Utrecht (see Appendix 1), exemplify the possible impact the assessment framework can have, when discussed in relation to a local case, such as the debate on the mobility platform for the Merwede neighborhood in Utrecht (see Van den Hurk et al 2021;Riemens et al 2021). The meetings with the City of Utrecht made clear that the framework helps to identify possibly overlooked public values or value conflicts (see Appendix 1).…”