Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Committee for the Role of Public Transportation and Mobility Management in an Era of New and Expanding Shared Mobility A Consensus Study Report of PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
Transportation Research Board Special Report 337 Subscriber Categories: Policy; public transportation; transportation, general Transportation Research Board publications are available by ordering individual publications directly from the TRB Business Office, through the Internet at www. TRB.org or nationalacademies.org/trb, or by annual subscription through organi- zational or individual affiliation with TRB. Affiliates and library subscribers are eli- gible for substantial discounts. For further information, contact the Transportation Research Board Business Office, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001 (telephone 202-334-3213; fax 202-334-2519; or e-mail TRBsales@nas.edu). Copyright 2021 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America This publication was reviewed by a group other than the authors according to the procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the National Academy of Medicine. This study was supported by the TRB Executive Committee. International Standard Book Number-13: International Standard Book Number-10: Digital Object Identifier: Library of Congress Control Number: PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institu- tion to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the char- ter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and ad- vice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence- based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of trans- portation. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their exper- tise in the public interest. The program is supported by state departments of transportation, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org. PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the studyâs statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typi- cally include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committeeâs deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opin- ions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo. PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs v COMMITTEE FOR THE ROLE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY MANAGEMENT IN AN ERA OF NEW AND EXPANDING SHARED MOBILITY Gary C. Thomas, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Dallas, TX, Chair Regina R. Clewlow, Populus, San Francisco, CA Marlene Connor, Marlene Connor Associates LLC, Holyoke, MA Carlos Cruz-Casas, Department of Transportation and Public Works, Miami-Dade County, Miami, FL Sharon Feigon, Shared Use Mobility Center, Chicago, IL Jonathan Hall, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Brad Miller, Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, St. Petersburg, FL Deb Niemeier, University of Maryland, College Park Corinne Ralph, Los Angeles Department of Transportation, Los Angeles, CA Bruce Schaller, Schaller Consulting, Brooklyn, NY Kirk T. Steudle, Econolite, Anaheim, CA Transportation Research Board Staff Katherine Kortum, Study Director Stephen R. Godwin, Scholar Thomas R. Menzies, Jr., Director, Consensus and Advisory Studies Anusha Jayasinghe, Associate Program Officer
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs vii Contents FOREWORD ix PREFACE xi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 5 Shared Mobility, 7 Regional Transportation Systems and Governance, 14 Transit Agency Heterogeneity and Ridership, 20 Mobility Management, 23 Organization of This Report, 24 2 SHARED MOBILITY AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 27 Shared Mode Service to Social Goals, 27 Impacts on Transit, 36 Shared MobilityâTransit Coordination: Opportunities and Barriers, 49 Shared MobilityâTransit Services Across Region, 59 Chapter Findings, 65 3 MOBILITY-ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 71 Mobility as a Service, 73 Mobility on Demand, 83
viii CONTENTS PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Mobility Management, 85 Summary, 86 4 MOBILITY MANAGEMENT, PART 1: A FOCUS ON THE TRAVELER 89 Mobility Management Framework, 89 A. Easy, Open Access to O-D Trip Information, 91 B. Convenient and Easily Integrated Payment for O-D Trips by All Customers, 107 Findings and Observations, 112 Recommendation, 115 5 MOBILITY MANAGEMENT, PART 2: TRANSPORTATION SUPPLY AND MANAGEMENT 117 A. Provision of Multiple Trip Options, 118 B. Delivery of Quality Multi-Modal Service to Customers, 136 C. Transit-Supportive Development, 147 Findings and Observations, 150 Recommendations, 156 APPENDIXES A STUDY COMMITTEE BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 159 B MEETING AGENDAS 165
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs ix This report was largely prepared in 2019 and early 2020 before the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 struck the United States. Economic shutdowns and social distancing measures were put in place in multiple cities and states beginning in March 2020 to protect the public in the absence of treatments or vaccines. These measures resulted in profound impacts on the economy and society. Economic activity and employment plunged in weeks to depression-era levels and resulted in historic declines in travel by all modes. These impacts are still unfolding as this report is being released. Prior to the pandemic, shared modes with names such as ridehailing, micromobility, and microtransit had been growing quickly up to 2019 and had been well received by many travelers across the country. Ridehailing, of which Uber and Lyft are the best known providers in the United States, dropped as much as 80 percent by June 2020, as did public transportation ridership in major cities. The responses of micromobility providers varied across the country from complete withdrawal from some markets to sharp increases in use in others as consumers sought alternatives to being exposed to the virus while using ridehailing and public transportation. Between March and June 2020, during which time commute trips declined sharply, anecdotal evidence suggested that people were walking, bicycling, and sometimes using micromobility options in much greater numbers than be- fore the pandemic. It remains to be seen whether those changes will remain, and to what degree, in coming years. How the providers of modes such as ridehailing, micromobility, and microtransit will fare in the United States during and after the pandemic is simply unknown at this point. Foreword
x FOREWORD PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs Much of the report focuses on the potential benefits of combining trips between these shared modes and public transportation. Even before the pandemic, this was a rapidly changing set of opportunities as private companies explored new markets and public transportation agencies sought ways to collaborate with them. The authors of this report relied on the most recent academic studies and papers and the most recent blog posts to keep abreast of these changing developments. Even so, these studies and blogs were written without foreknowledge of the pandemic and the profound impacts it would have. Assuming that economic recovery will bring renewed interest in these shared modes and eventual return of public transportation ridership from its precipitous decline, and acknowledging the uncertainty of when and how this will occur, this report can be useful to public officials in manag- ing how the future of personal mobility unfolds.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs xi Preface Many mobility alternatives have emerged and grown in popularity over the past decade or more, built on the ease with which urban travelers can request a ride or rent a bike, scooter, or car through a mobile applica- tion and pay electronically through the same app. These shared mobility services could provide substantial benefits to society by reducing single- occupant vehicle trips and their associated contributions to congestion and vehicle emissions. They could also be employed to enhance the mobility of people with disabilities, senior citizens, and low-income households lack- ing personal vehicles. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) Executive Committee commissioned this report to examine the growth of these travel alternatives, how public policy at all levels can enhance social goals through shared mobility, and the complementary role that public transportation can play. The TRB Executive Committee was aware of the quickly changing set of transportation services available to travelers and concluded that a study aimed at understanding how these services can be better integrated would be timely. COMMITTEE To develop this report, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a committee of experts, balanced in terms of exper- tise and perspective, which operated under the auspices of TRB. The com- mittee, chaired by Gary Thomas, Executive Director of Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), includes experts in public transportation, urban trans- portation, new mobility services, travel behavior, regional transportation
xii PREFACE PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs systems, economics, equity, and public policy. Biographical information about committee members appears in Appendix A. STATEMENT OF TASK The TRB Executive Committee charged the committee formed to guide this effort to consider the role of new shared mobility providers in regional transportation and their relationships to, and impacts on, existing public transit. (The full Statement of Task, and the committeeâs interpretation of it, appears in Chapter 1.) The committee was asked to consider how shared mobility can further societal goals, the role that public transportation and other agencies, levels of government, and private companies can play in this regard, and ways that transit agencies have coordinated with shared mobility providers in the United States and abroad. The TRB Executive Committee conceived of this report as serving the diverse set of audiences, across all levels of government and the private sector, who could use the results of the study to serve society. STUDY PROCESS To develop this report, the committee met five times and made special efforts to (a) reach out to the individuals, companies, and organizations involved in shared mobility services and (b) invite input to their deliberations from other experts and the public. The committee also coordinated with the Shared Use Mobility Center, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), and the National Association of City Transportation Officials to hold out- reach events in coordination with conferences held by each group. At these events, committee members engaged with those organizationsâ conference attendees to receive additional input. Consistent with its charge to âexamine ways that public transportation agencies have coordinated with the new mobility providers both in the United States and abroad,â the chair of the committee and the project study director also joined an international study tour in mid-2019 organized by APTA. Members of this tour visited cities and transit agencies in Austria, Finland, and Germany that are at the forefront of advancing public transitâs role in mobility as a service (MaaS). The committee also organized part of its third meeting as a public session devoted to sharing the reflections of tour participants about European efforts to integrate shared modes with public transportation and the potential for MaaS in doing so. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The committee appreciates the assistance of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and APTA staff in providing background information, updates on
PREFACE xiii PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs related federal programs and efforts, and an invitation to join the MaaS study tour in 2019. In particular, the committee thanks Gwo-Wei Torng and Vincent Valdes of FTA and Art Guzzetti, Petra Mollet, and Paul Skoutelas of APTA. This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Giovanni Circella, University of California, Davis; Jonathan Losos, Washington University in Saint Louis, Missouri; Therese McMillan, San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Commission, California; Petra Mollet, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC; Susan Shaheen, University of California, Berkeley; Kumares Sinha, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana; Jana Sochor, Research Institutes of Sweden, GÃ¶teborg, Sweden; Matthew Turner, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; Martin Wachs, University of California, Los Angeles; and Kari Watkins, Georgia Tech University, Atlanta. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive com- ments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by National Academy of Engineering members Chris T. Hendrickson, Carnegie Mellon Univer- sity, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Ross Corotis, University of Colorado Boulder. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the stan- dards of the National Academies and that all review comments were care- fully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the author ing committee and the National Academies. This report was developed under the overall supervision of Thomas R. Menzies, Jr., Director of Consensus and Advisory Studies, TRB. Katherine Kortum, Senior Program Officer, TRB, served as the study director. She and Stephen Godwin, Scholar, TRB, drafted the report under the commit- teeâs guidance. Karen Febey, Senior Report Review Officer, TRB, managed the report review process. Anusha Jayasinghe, Associate Program Officer, provided administrative and logistical support.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs