Mobility as a Service: Development scenarios and implications for public transport

Smith, Göran; Sochor, Jana; Karlsson, MariAnne

doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2018.04.001

Cited by 179 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…innovation on the ecosystem level). MaaS demands an increasingly integrated and coordinated value chain behind transport service provision, and that involved actors adjust accordingly (Smith et al, 2018a). Hence, drawing on the perspective on transitions introduced by Welie and colleagues 2018, we propose that the development and diffusion of MaaS, from a public sector perspective, can be conceptualized as (see Figure 2): The personal mobility regime can be understood as the sectorial regime, and the service regimes include both servitized modes of transport (e.g., public transport and taxi) and other modes of transport (e.g., privately owned cars and bicycles).…”

Section: How Can the Development And Diffusion Of Mobility-as-a-servimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, are multimodal travel planners such as TripGo examples of MaaS, or not? Furthermore, overlapping labels for the new roles in the value chain have been introduced (e.g., Kamargianni and Matyas, 2017;Smith et al, 2018a). As of now, the lack of a shared language seems to hamper trust building, knowledge exchange and joint efforts (Smith et al, 2017).…”

Section: What Is Needed To Make Mobility-as-a-service a Reality?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the introduction of MaaS is anticipated to cause fundamental shifts to how personal transport services are produced and delivered, especially in terms of increased inter-organizational collaboration(Smith et al, 2018a). This is discussed in Section 3.2 and 3.3…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards a framework for Mobility-as-a-Service policies

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public authorities are increasingly pursuing activities to pave the way for Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS). The range of activities includes regulation reforms, technology developments and investments in trials. Despite progress, concrete MaaS developments are still limited. Thus, it remains uncertain how effective the current MaaS policies will be in terms of facilitating the development and diffusion of MaaS that generate public value. Drawing on collaborative innovation and sustainability transition literature, this paper aims to provide a basis for analyzing MaaS policies by introducing a framework that identifies aspects that such policies should address. An empirical analysis of Transport for New South Wales's MaaS policy program is utilized to illustrate how the framework can be applied. The contribution to the transport literature is twofold. First, the paper refines the conceptual understanding of what MaaS is, and why it differs from the present state of affairs. Second, it advances the knowledge of how the public sector can facilitate its development and diffusion.

show abstract

Section: How Can the Development And Diffusion Of Mobility-as-a-servimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Is Needed To Make Mobility-as-a-service a Reality?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards a framework for Mobility-as-a-Service policies

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically on the impact on transit services however, Hall et al (2017) found considerable variability on the effect of Uber on transit services; with transit in smaller cities being potentially more affected, but overall a complementary effect. The implications for overall vehicle travel (and associated environmental and health impacts) therefore remain unclear (Smith et al, 2018).…”

Section: Product-to-service Shift (Shared Mobility)mentioning

confidence: 99%

User decision-making in transitions to electrified, autonomous, shared or reduced mobility

Whittle

Whitmarsh

Haggar

et al. 2019

Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mobility affords a range of benefits, but there are environmental, social and economic problems associated with current transport systems. Innovations to address these issues include novel technologies (e.g., electric and autonomous vehicles; EVs, AVs), and new business models and social practices (e.g., shared mobility). Yet, far more attention by policy-makers and researchers has been paid to the technical aspects of a low-carbon mobility transition than to social or psychological aspects, or the role of the user. In this paper, we integrate insights from the multi-level perspective on transitions and socio-psychological literature and draw on transport expert interview (N=11) data, to examine (a) what influences current attitudes and behaviours in respect of EVs and AVs, and shared mobility, and (b) how this may change in the years to come. We argue that technological change may be most compatible with the transport regime (dominated by personal car-based mobility) but potentially affords a narrower range of sustainability benefits, while mobility substitution (e.g., reducing the need to travel through tele-working or -shopping) may be most challenging for both policy-makers and publics, while potentially addressing a wider range of sustainability problems associated with the transport regime. Shared mobility options sit somewhere in between and challenge certain aspects of the regime (e.g., status associated with car ownership) while offering certain environmental, social and economic benefits. For all three areas of innovation, policy interventions need to address the needs, preferences, experiences and identities of users if they are to be effective and sustainable.2 KeywordsLow-carbon mobility, transition, multi-level perspective, psychology, decision-making Highlights-We provide a psychologically-informed discussion of the transition to low-carbon mobility.-Our analysis highlights nuances in the interaction between individuals and infrastructures, and how 'lock-in' is experienced in different ways.-Users fulfil important social as well as economic functions in innovation processes.-Social and psychological factors (identity, emotions, etc.), as well as physical environment and infrastructures, constrain and foster innovation. AcknowledgementsThe review on which this article is based was funded by the UK Government Office of Science's Foresight Future of Mobility Programme. We gratefully acknowledge the time provided by interviewees to participate in the research, as well as the helpful comments of reviewers in improving the manuscript.3

show abstract

“…Johansson et al [29] find that several changes have occurred in the residents' life and that the change in vehicle ownership and mobility patterns is connected to bundled practices. However, access to parking or rather the lack of access to easy and cheap parking can be a contributing factor to go from car owning to being car free [29,34].…”

Section: Summary and Analysis Of Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the Effects of Developments with Low Parking Requirements

Sprei

Hult

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parking management and planning can be used to address several issues related to sustainable urban development. For example, parking availability affects both car ownership and usage, and parking planning can affect both land use and building costs. A tool used in several countries is minimum parking requirements (MPR) and lowering these could be a pathway to more sustainable mobility. However, the actual effects of lower MPR have not systematically been studied. In this paper we present the results of a review of sixteen developments with low MPR in Sweden, Austria, Germany, Switzerland, and the UK. Existing research and reports have been analyzed to compare these and draw conclusions on the effect of MPR on mobility patterns and mobility services. In addition, interviews were conducted with representatives from municipalities and developers. Our results indicate that the mobility patterns of individuals in the studied projects are more sustainable than in nearby projects. However, the causality of MPR and mobility is hard to establish due to the risk of self-selection and that all of the studied projects have good prerequisites for sustainable mobility practices. Many of the studied evaluations are also of poor quality with, for example, lack of appropriate control group.

show abstract

Mobility as a Service: Development scenarios and implications for public transport

Cited by 179 publications

References 8 publications

Towards a framework for Mobility-as-a-Service policies

Towards a framework for Mobility-as-a-Service policies

User decision-making in transitions to electrified, autonomous, shared or reduced mobility

Review of the Effects of Developments with Low Parking Requirements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About