The Role of Transit, Shared Modes, and Public Policy in the New Mobility Landscape (2021)

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.

71 This brief chapter provides a bridge between the preceding chapter, which focuses on empirical evidence about shared modes, their impacts on public transit, and coordination between shared modes and transit, and the remain- ing chapters, which describe how technology and public policy can poten- tially influence future personal travel choices across regions in the United States. Whereas the previous chapter responds to questions in the commit- tee’s Statement of Task that can be addressed based on empirical evidence and experience, the remaining chapters address elements of the committee’s charge that are more speculative and judgment-based by their nature. These elements include how shared modes and transit “can improve the transpor- tation system’s ability to further [social] goals” and “the role transit agencies and other entities could play in managing and otherwise furthering the new mobility landscape” [emphasis added]. The remaining chapters continue to address the element of the Statement of Task that asks for consideration of the roles of shared modes and transit “in the provision of transportation services as part of regional transportation systems.” This chapter presents broad conceptualizations of the roles that (1) information and communications technology (ICT) can play in shaping personal travel demand and (2) public policies can play in facilitating ICT platforms and in shaping the supply of transportation to meet that demand. These concepts support the potential roles of shared modes and public transit, singly and in combination, in reducing the externalities associated with single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips. Chapter 4 carries this discus- sion forward by focusing on technology platforms that provide consumers with information about multiple choices. Chapter 5 focuses on policies and 3 Mobility-Enhancing Technologies, Concepts, and Early Experience

72 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY strategies for supplying transportation infrastructure and services influenc- ing the built environment in ways that support transit and shared modes. The rapid growth in shared modes demonstrates the role that ICT, par- ticularly smartphone apps, is playing in facilitating shifts in travel choices.1 In addition to making a wider array of travel choices available at con- sumers’ fingertips, ICT is making easy access to transportation services possible without having to own one or more vehicles. For some individuals, these services may be as convenient as having a personal vehicle as well as being less expensive. To the extent that consumers in car-free or car-light households choose less polluting alternatives to SOV use (e.g., micro- mobility, pooled ridehailing, microtransit, and public transit), such lifestyle choices could be more efficient and sustainable for society. As described in the previous chapter, the possible benefits of shared modes for individuals and society may not play out in ways that benefit both. The potential for benefiting both individuals and society has analysts and planners developing conceptual frameworks for how that potential might be achieved. This chapter describes three similar concepts: mobility as a service (MaaS), Mobility on Demand (MOD), and mobility manage- ment. All three build on the ways that ICT can shape travel demand. Although still an emerging practice, MaaS has been experimented with in multiple countries to test its impacts on travel behavior, as described later. Although still mainly concepts, MOD and mobility management also include ICT as a central element along with ways that public policy can influence transportation supply and demand to benefit society. The committee chose to respond to the element of its Statement of Task that asked for consideration of the “ways that transit agencies have coordi- nated with the new mobility providers ... abroad” in the MaaS context. This choice occurred because MaaS has the potential to encourage broader public use of transit and shared modes, and some transit agencies have been in the forefront of building toward MaaS and implementing it. After first describing MaaS in the following section, illustrative examples are provided of transit agency participation in MaaS. Subsequent sections describe MOD and mobility management. 1 This paragraph draws heavily on the framing provided by Circella, G., and F. Alemi. 2018. Transport Policy in the Era of Ridehailing and Other Disruptive Transportation Technologies. Advances in Transport Policy and Planning, Volume 1, edited by Y. Shiftan and M. Kamargianni, Elsevier, Chapter 5, pp. 119–144. https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/327933466_Transport_Policy_in_the_Era_of_Ridehailing_and_Other_Disruptive_ Transportation_Technologies.

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 73 MOBILITY AS A SERVICE Providing information and integrating the variety of multi-modal services available to consumers is at the core of MaaS. While many have their own versions or definitions of MaaS, the Brussels-based MaaS Alliance describes it as follows: Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is the integration of various forms of trans- port services into a single mobility service accessible on demand. To meet a customer’s request, a MaaS operator facilitates a diverse menu of transport options, be they public transport, ride-, car- or bike-sharing, taxi or car rental/lease, or a combination thereof. For the user, MaaS can offer added value through use of a single application to provide access to mobility, with a single payment channel instead of multiple ticketing and payment operations. For its users, MaaS should be the best value proposition, by helping them meet their mobility needs and solve the inconvenient parts of individual journeys as well as the entire system of mobility services.2 Finland, and its capital city of Helsinki in particular, is widely consid- ered to be the birthplace of the MaaS concept. MaaS Global was the first commercial startup to develop a subscription service and did so in October 2016 with the launch of its Whim app. Whim has subsequently expanded its service to several other European cities. The company offers multiple service levels, from a pay-as-you-go option for individual ticket purchases to an unlimited use option that combines transit, taxis, bikesharing, and carsharing. As of mid-2019, more than 70,000 users,3 about 1.5 percent of Helsinki residents, had signed on as subscribers. The app developers have stated that it can be profitable with between 3 and 5 percent of the eligible population using the app.4 This type of integration was enabled by the Finnish Ministry of Transportation, which passed legislation making it mandatory for all transit providers to allow access to their application programming interfaces and ticketing systems. In the first year of Whim’s operation, users rode public transit more often than other city residents, with a 63 percent modal share compared to 48 percent citywide, despite making about the same number of average daily trips. Users also take taxis more than twice as often as other city residents.5 2 See https://maas-alliance.eu/homepage/what-is-maas. 3 Ramboll. 2019. Whimpact: Insights from the World’s First Mobility­as­a­Service (MaaS) System. https://ramboll.com/-/media/files/rfi/publications/Ramboll_whimpact-2019. 4 Reid, C. 2019. Netflix-of-Transportation App Reduces Car Use and Boosts Bike and Bus Use, Finds MaaS Data Crunch. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/03/28/ netflix-of-transportation-app-reduces-car-use-and-boosts-bike-and-bus-use-finds-maas-data- crunch/#472c17084923. 5 Ramboll. 2019.

74 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY Researchers have proposed a maturity model for MaaS provision that has four distinct levels:6,7 1. Integration of information, a multi-modal travel planner that also provides price information; 2. Integration of booking and payment, a service that allows a trav- eler to find, book, and pay for a trip at once; 3. Integration of the service offer, a service that provides bundles of transportation options or a subscription offer; and 4. Integration of societal goals, a service that steers transportation options to encourage societal goals based on regional policies and incentives. As of the writing of this report, most researchers agree that no ser- vice has yet reached the highest level of maturity.8,9,10 Outside the United States, some services have reached levels 2 and 3.11 However, within the United States, generally only the first level of MaaS provision, if any, is available, often through Google Maps or other mapping or travel appli- cations or websites.12 As mentioned in Chapter 2, some U.S. transit agencies, including Dallas Area Rapid Transit and Portland’s TriMet, are developing apps for trip planning that represent early-stage building blocks toward more robust MaaS platforms.13,14 The platforms available 6 Sochor, J., et al. 2018. A Topological Approach to Mobility as a Service Research. Transportation Business and Management 27:3–14. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S2210539518300476. 7 National Center for Mobility Management. 2018. Mobility as a Service: Concept and Practice. NCMM, Washington, DC, March. 8 Kamargianni, M., and R. Goulding. 2018. The Mobility as a Service Maturity Index: Preparing the Cities for the Mobility as a Service Era. Proceedings of the 7th Transport Research Arena, April 16–19. 9 Esztergár-Kiss, D., and T. Kerényi. 2020. Creation of Mobility Packages Based on the MaaS Concept. Travel Behaviour and Society 21:307–317. 10 Hensher, D., et al. 2020. Understanding Mobility as a Service: Past, Present, and Future. Elsevier, pp. 41–47. https://www.elsevier.com/books/understanding-mobility-as-a-service-maas/ hensher/978-0-12-820044-5. 11 Hensher et al. 2020, Table 3.2. 12 Shared-Use Mobility Center. 2020. Towards the Promise of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) in the United States. https://learn.sharedusemobilitycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/Towards- the-Promise-of-MaaS-in-the-US-July-2020-Shared-Use-Mobility-Center.pdf. 13 Parks, R., and S. Moazzeni. 2020. Mobility on Demand Sandbox Demonstration: DART First and Last Mile Solution. Federal Transit Administration. FTA Report 0164. https://www. transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/mobility-demand-mod-sandbox-demonstration-dart-first- and-last-mile-solution-0. 14 Martin, E., et al. 2020. Mobility on Demand (MOD) Sandbox Demonstration; Tri­ County Metropolitan District of Oregon (TriMet) OpenTripPlanner (OTP) Shared­Use Mobility Evaluation Report. FTA Report 0170. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/ files/2020-07/FTA_Report_No._0170.pdf.

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 75 through companies such as Uber and Lyft are sometimes referred to as a version of MaaS, but may be more appropriately viewed as “transport as a service” and a precursor to MaaS.15 However, efforts by these compa- nies to expand their platforms by including other travel options such as micromobility and public transit could emerge as rival versions of MaaS, as discussed in more detail in Chapter 4. Notably for possible applications in the United States, MaaS platforms, whether offered by transit agencies, private providers, or some combination of public and private entities as described in Chapter 4, could offer service areas that transcend the U.S. regional jurisdictional boundaries and regional institutional complexities described in Chapter 1. Early International Experience with MaaS As a concept, MaaS is only 7 years old at the time of this writing, but the concept has spurred worldwide interest among government agencies, practi- tioners, and researchers.16 As of the end of 2019, at least 43 MaaS schemes had been trialed, piloted, or were under way as operational programs, primarily in Finland, Sweden, and across Europe, but also in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates.17 To date there has apparently been little interest in China, although many ridehailing companies there are advancing the sophistication of their user interfaces.18 Only initial interest in possible schemes has occurred in Japan. Despite the great interest and multiple experiments, few trials or opera- tional programs have been evaluated and reported on.19 Five have been more thoroughly documented: two in Sweden (UbiGo in 2013–2014 and EC2B starting in 2019 in Göteborg), one in Helsinki (Whim, 2016 to the present), one in Germany (Mobil-Flat in Augsburg starting in 2019), and one in Australia (Tripi in Sydney starting in 2019). Aside from UbiGo, the other four were still under way at the end of 2019 and results have not been fully reported. Other than Whim in Helsinki, these trials are relatively small in scale and have existed for short periods of time; hence to date there is a lim- ited ability to understand scalability or long-term impacts.20 Some initial lessons, however, are emerging from early experience:21 15 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 41. 16 Hensher et al. 2020, pp. 1–2. 17 Hensher et al. 2020, Table 3.2. 18 Hensher et al. 2020, pp. 41–47. 19 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 59. 20 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 67. 21 Hensher et al. 2020, pp. 68–74.

76 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY • Early adopters of MaaS are primarily digital natives residing in urban areas along major transit lines (most trials and pilots are also occurring in such areas); • Early experience suggests reduced automobile use among early adopters; and • Larger trials at a much larger scale with thorough evaluations that reach a wider population are needed in order to better understand the broader feasibility and appeal of MaaS. Pending further experience, trials, and evaluations of experience, many questions remain open about the feasibility of MaaS on a scale significant enough to shift travel behavior to an appreciable degree. Among questions pertinent to this report are the appeal of MaaS to those who rely mostly on personal vehicles, whether the concept has sufficient appeal if private- sector parties serve as aggregators of data and services and distributors of information, and whether interest in the services offered could extend beyond center cities. Appeal to Auto Owners A central premise of most definitions of MaaS is that the simplicity of access ing transportation services through an app will decrease consumer interest in owning one or more personal automobiles. This premise is based on several assumptions, including whether the convenience of pur- chased services matches that of personal automobiles. Another assumption is that automobile owners are willing to trade their low marginal cost per trip, but high fixed cost of ownership, with a high marginal cost of purchased services.22 There are also behavioral barriers for some users in the form of learning new apps and navigating use of modes (bikesharing, carsharing, and transit) that may be unfamiliar or unappealing to some. The level of effort required to determine the merits and cost savings of purchasing subscription bundles is another potential barrier.23 Even if some consumers are willing to make the tradeoff of purchasing services over owning personal vehicles, the question remains about how broadly this willingness would be shared across the population. These choices, of course, can be influenced by policies that reduce some of the explicit and implicit subsidies that encourage automobile ownership and use,24 as discussed in Chapter 5. 22 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 37. 23 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 118. 24 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 115.

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 77 Private­Sector Appeal of MaaS An important initial premise of MaaS was that it would be market driven by profitable enterprises that aggregate services to offer to users through their platforms. Integrators have to be able to develop and negotiate profitable bundles, from an array of private and public providers, that are sufficiently attractive to consumers in a very low-margin business.25 A key issue is whether the share of trips that would go to private providers would be sufficiently profitable if the public-sector policies drive a sub- stantial share of trips to subsidized transit. In addition, if owner-operators of platforms are also incumbents such as Uber and Lyft, it is not obvious that they would encourage more use of transit over their own offerings, often referred to as “walled gardens.”26 There are other concepts of MaaS platforms, however, that would avoid the walled garden problem but, nonetheless, raise questions about whether they also provide adequate in- centives for private operation and competition.27 These issues are discussed further in Chapter 4. Appeal Outside of Center Cities In terms of the spatial scale of MaaS, only 11 of 43 trials to date had a rural component, most of which were primarily based on trip planners. Some of the 11 trials with rural components were actually regional in character (spanning both urban and rural areas).28 Little documentation, however, is available about the results of MaaS trials outside of central urban areas. An open question is whether rural and regional applications are less important than ones offered in central cities because the externalities of auto use that MaaS is meant to address are most pronounced in these settings.29 Answers to these and other questions will emerge over time from ongo- ing experimentation, pilot projects, and innovation. Transit Agency Participation in MaaS Development in Finland and Europe Many regions, cities, and transit agencies across the European Union (EU) have been actively and collectively working to build toward and provide 25 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 130. 26 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 131. 27 Mulley, C., and J. Nelson. 2020. How Mobility as a Service Impacts Public Transport Service Models: Discussion Paper. International Transport Forum, Figure 2 and accompanying text. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/maas-impacts-public-transport-business- models.pdf. 28 Hensher et al. 2020, pp. 49, 160. 29 Hensher et al. 2020, p. 160.

78 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY MaaS capability.30 European cities and transit agencies have been improv- ing multi-modal travel options for their residents for many years.31 To achieve carbon emission reduction goals established by the EU member states, many countries have been actively promoting public transportation and multi-modal strategies to reduce reliance on personal automobile trips. This includes a particular emphasis on enhancing shared mode connections to public transportation.32 Carsharing and bikesharing began in Europe, and efforts to integrate these services with transit have been ongoing for more than a decade. Examples of Finnish and European transit agency efforts in building toward and facilitating MaaS are summarized below, drawing on the cities visited during a tour arranged by the American Public Transportation Asso- ciation (APTA) that the committee chair and study director participated in during summer 2019. These examples are not based on detailed case studies, and little has been documented about their effectiveness. Instead, these are illustrative examples based on information shared among prac- titioners about how transit agencies abroad are attempting to position themselves as active participants in MaaS. Austria Vienna’s primary public transit operator, Wiener Linien, and the city’s infra- structure company, Wiener Stadtwerke, jointly formed their own startup company, Upstream, in early 2016. Upstream is a MaaS platform that provides planning, payment, and access to a variety of mobility services in Vienna and the surrounding region. Upstream is also a publicly owned company that began as a pilot project of the city, building on a network of 10 mobility providers within the city,33 and now acts as a business- to-business startup. As of summer 2019, Upstream has more than 50 employees who run platforms for Vienna and other cities; these platforms include the back end of Wiener Linien’s app. Upstream’s platform has an open interface, allowing all apps to access its data. The company’s leaders 30 APTA. 2019. Being Mobility­as­a­Service (MaaS) Ready: APTA International Study Mission Final Report. https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/MaaS_European_Study_ Mission-Final-Report_10-2019.pdf. 31 Buehler, R., et al. 2017. Reducing Car Dependence in the Heart of Europe: Lessons from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Transport Reviews 1. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ full/10.1080/01441647.2016.1177799. 32 Feigon, S., et al. 2018. Shared Use Mobility: European Experience and Lessons Learned. U.S. Department of Transportation. https://international.fhwa.dot.gov/sum/fhwapl18026.pdf. 33 Telepak, G., and A. Scholz. 2018. Making Vienna Smarter and More Digitally Connected. Intelligent Transport, March 6. https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-articles/65517/ making-vienna-smarter-digitally-connected.

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 79 consider themselves an information technology development sector for the public sector, allowing the public sector to make use of its knowledge and data analytics. The private sector creates new business models for bundling services, trip planning, and payment that can be integrated into the Wiener Linien app; however, the public investment is in the technical infrastructure (broadband, data storage, and so forth) and in central public platform ser- vices for shared use (e.g., accounting and ticketing).34 Germany In Hanover, with a metro area population of just over 1 million people, the transit agency (ÜSTRA) has been providing a version of integrated mobility services for several years. ÜSTRA provides its users with access to a variety of mobility services, including transit and other services avail- able in the city, and develops an automated invoice for each user at the end of the month. This invoice includes all of the transportation services the traveler used, requiring one monthly payment, which ÜSTRA auto- matically debits from the traveler’s checking account. There is currently no option for direct cash payments, and the system runs a credit check prior to finalizing the contract, thus minimizing the risk of customer non- payment. This process is the result of well over a decade of incremental action, from coopera ting with carsharing in the 1990s to launching a first bundled mobility offering in 2004. Additional actions, including the launch of a mobile app in 2016, have continued to increase the pro- gram’s capabilities. Consumer adoption to date is very limited: less than 0.5 percent of city residents as of mid-2019. However, the agency has seen significant positive effects on a per capita basis. Half of the customers, for example, have either sold a vehicle or refrained from purchasing a new one. The agency plans to continue to innovate, providing new discount mechanisms, new billing organization efforts, and a more a la carte set of transportation offerings. Other German cities are implementing variations of MaaS concepts as well. In 2019, the public transportation agency in Berlin, Germany’s largest city, launched Jelbi, an app that merges more than 12 public and private mobility options including transit, shared vehicles, and on-demand 34 Wiener Linien and Upstream. 2018. Vienna’s Views and Solutions on Developing Transport Services and MaaS. https://paikallisliikenneliitto.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/16_Bamberger_ Aichholzer_Viennas_solutions_developing_transport_services_and_MaaS_20170922.pdf.

80 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY services.35,36,37 (The name is a play on the German word “gelb,” or “ yellow,” which is the iconic color of the Berlin U-Bahn vehicles.) A Lithuanian com- pany called Trafi developed the app for the transit agency.38 The public agency made it clear that they “didn’t want to leave it to private players to take on this integrator role.”39 In addition to providing integrated transpor- tation options to Berlin residents and visitors, the city and transit agency plan to use the data to better understand how people move around the region in order to improve their transportation services. In Hamburg, the primary transit provider, Hamburger Hochbahn, is creating mobility hubs near its train stations and stocking them with carsharing and bikesharing options. Mobility hubs make connections among modes simple and con- venient and include staff to assist travelers in making connections or clear signage with guidance to travelers.40 Each of these mobility hubs reflects the needs and use patterns of the immediate area. Regarding fares, ticketing, and customer information, these are han- dled by regional transit associations, called Verkehrsverbünde (VVs).41 Beginning in the 1960s the primary German-speaking countries (Austria, Germany, and Switzerland) began to organize their transit operations into VVs to coordinate service, fares, and ticketing among all of the regional providers within a metropolitan area or within a state; in some cases, this is a coordination with more than 50 providers. VVs are unique among regional associations in that they include both transit operators and gov- ernment representatives in the process of making decisions about fares and service. There is some variation among the VVs in their organizational structure, but all offer one unified route network, coordinated schedules, and a single fare structure and ticketing system. The first VV began in Hamburg in 1967, and there are now approximately 70 VVs in the three 35 Jelbi. 2019. https://www.bettertogetheraward.org/jelbi. 36 Berlin Launches the World’s Largest MaaS Solution. 2019. Intelligent Transport, September 25. https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-news/88799/berlin-launches- the-worlds-largest-maas-solution. 37 ERTICO. 2019. Trafi and BGV Launch One Integrated Mobility Service for Berlin. https://2019.itsineurope.com/2019/05/21/trafi-bvg-launch-one-integrated-mobility-service-for- berlin. 38 Walmsley, J. 2019. Watch Out, Uber. Berlin Is the New Amazon for Transportation (with Lower Fares). Forbes, June 26. https://www.forbes.com/sites/juliewalmsley/2019/06/26/watch- out-uber-berlin-is-the-new-amazon-for-transportation-with-lower-fares/#3a1112d269b8. 39 Peters, A. 2019. In Berlin There’s Now One App to Access Every Mode of Transportation. Fast Company, February 18. https://www.fastcompany.com/90308234/in-berlin-theres-now- one-app-to-access-every-mode-of-transportation. 40 Feigon et al. 2018, pp. 15–16. 41 Buehler, R., et al. 2018. Verkehrsverbund: The Evolution and Spread of Fully Integrated Regional Public Transport in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. https://ralphbu.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/buehler-et-al- verkehrsverbund.pdf.

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 81 German-speaking countries, covering a significant majority of the popula- tion. These organizations and the integrated transit service that results has led to increased transit use and decreased car use throughout most of the metropolitan areas.42 Finland In parallel with the development of Whim described earlier, the Helsinki Public Transportation Authority developed its own app allowing for pay- ment and ticketing for all modes under its control (bus, ferry, streetcar, subway, and train). The app, which two-thirds of residents had downloaded as of mid-2019, also provides information about park and ride capacity and city bikeshare operations. This transit agency app effectively competes with Whim in Helsinki but does not offer as wide a range of service options. Lessons from European and Finnish Experience Among the most salient lessons in this report are how some EU cities have integrated shared modes with public transportation in ways that have sup- ported the emergence of MaaS. The experience of the cities visited during the APTA study tour showed the incremental, building-block nature of progress over the past two decades: • Cities and regions have been working to provide bicycle infrastruc- ture and improve the seamlessness of multi-modal travel for many years, including coordination of fares and routes across different transit providers; • Cities started integrating with shared mobility providers by first im- proving physical linkages (parking and mobility hubs) near transit; and • Next came integrated payment across modes through fare cards and monthly invoicing, which evolved into transit apps to facilitate trip planning and payment as smartphones have become widely used. The cities and transit agencies visited in the APTA study tour have placed particular emphasis on building software platforms and integrating data from public and private providers that can be shared with the public 42 Petersen, T. 2016. Watching the Swiss: A Network Approach to Rural and Exurban Public Transport. Transport Policy 52(3):175–185. https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/306422461_Watching_the_Swiss_A_network_approach_to_rural_and_exurban_ public_transport.

82 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY to improve their choices. They have not had issues with data sharing across private providers as noted in the U.S. pilot studies summarized previously, but that is attributable to the stricter regulatory environment in Europe than in the United States. App development for MaaS has been undertaken by both public and private organizations in Europe, which is likely attribut- able to the less distinct separation between the public and private sectors than exists in the United States. In contrast, ridehailing companies in the United States, which are actively promoting their own apps and purchas- ing other shared mobility providers to include within them, have shown themselves much less willing to share data and intending to compete for customers with public apps offered through transit agencies. To the extent that information is available from the APTA report about adoption of MaaS at this early stage by city residents (e.g., Helsinki, Hanover), the user base remains quite small (roughly 1.5 percent or fewer of city residents). This may be attributable to the novelty of the MaaS concept. Additional experience and evaluation will be needed to develop a fuller understanding of the appeal of MaaS beyond center city residents already inclined to rely on public transit for a considerable share of their trips. As illustrated in the APTA MaaS tour of cities in Austria, Finland, and Germany, transit agencies and cities have been enhancing the customer transit experience by providing parking for shared modes near transit agen- cies; integrating fares, schedules, and routes across regional transit agencies; and improving the quality, frequency, and speed of transit. Indeed, the cities visited in the APTA tour illustrate how transit agencies and cities have been building toward these latter goals over many years. Many European cities and countries also make transit more attractive relative to personal auto- mobiles through public policies to reduce automobile use, including street design, auto parking restrictions and pricing, congestion fees in the cores of large cities, high gas taxes, interagency cooperation, dedicated rights of way, zoning to facilitate clustering of high-density development at transit stations, and other transit-supportive policies and public funding.43,44,45,46 EU investments in research and development (R&D) and pilot studies to advance shared mode options have also been valuable.47 43 National Research Council. 2001. Making Transit Work: Insights from Western Europe, Canada, and the United States. Transportation Research Board Special Report 257. http:// www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/152248.aspx. 44 Buehler, R., and J. Pucher. 2012. Demand for Public Transportation in Germany and the USA: An Analysis of Rider Characteristics. Transport Reviews 32(5). https://www.tandfonline. com/doi/abs/10.1080/01441647.2012.707695. 45 Feigon et al. 2018. 46 Buehler et al. 2017. 47 Feigon et al. 2018, p. 28.

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 83 The main lesson drawn from the examples cited above is the impor- tance of a robust transit network on which can be added additional services to create an even more attractive set of non-personal auto options. Progress within the European Union in transit integration with shared mobility and MaaS is occur ring in large part because of clear and shared public-sector goals articulated and promoted through EU and national policies. MOBILITY ON DEMAND MOD refers to the ability of consumers to access transportation services as a commodity, typically with a smartphone app. MOD can be defined as an innovative transportation concept where consumers can access mobility, goods, and services on demand by dispatching or using shared mobility, courier services, UAVs, and public transportation solutions.48 The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) adopted MOD as an operational concept that links demand with supply through intelligent transportation systems and with an emphasis on public transit.49 The MOD Sandbox initiative described in Chapter 2 is a research and demonstration element of the USDOT’s approach to MOD.50 It has been integrated into a broader R&D initiative, integrated mobility innovation, that also includes strategic research in transit automation and mobility payment integration (a topic addressed in the next chapter).51 A USDOT background paper presents the MOD operational concept very broadly to include both passengers and freight as well as possible future aviation applications.52 Here the committee describes only the per- sonal travel and surface transportation elements. At the core of the opera- tional concept are multi-modal operations management decision support functions that facilitate a balancing of demand with supply in real time, as illustrated in a simplified depiction of a more complex system of systems (see Figure 3-1). The demand side includes all travelers and all surface 48 Shaheen, S., et al. 2017. Mobility on Demand Operational Concept Report. U.S. Department of Transportation, p. 144. FHWA-JPO-18-611. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/ dot/34258. 49 Mobility on Demand (MOD). https://www.its.dot.gov/factsheets/mobilityondemand.htm. 50 MOD Sandbox. https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/mobility-demand-mod- sandbox-program. 51 Integrated Mobility Innovation. https://www.transit.dot.gov/IMI. 52 Shaheen, S., et al. 2017. See also Shaheen, S., and A. Cohen. 2020. Similarities and Differences of Mobility on Demand (MOD) and Mobility as a Service (MaaS). ITE Journal, June. https://www.nxtbook.com/ygsreprints/ITE/ITE_June2020/index.php?startid=29#/p/28.

84 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY FIGURE 3-1 Simplified Mobility on Demand operational concept. SOURCE: Based on Shaheen et al. 2017, Figure 5 MOD Ecosystem, p. 19. modes (autos, transit, cycling, walking, etc.); the time of the trip; and an origin-to-destination (O-D) trip request to a MOD supplier. The supply side includes vehicles of all types including personal, public transit, and shared modes; facilities including roadways, parking, and tollways; and transpor- tation management and information systems. The multi-modal operations management components at the core of the concept are constantly moni- toring system conditions and performance and providing information to consumers and suppliers about current and predicted congestion on specific routes and modes (see Figure 3-1). In current practice, consumers communicate directly with providers of shared modes without the decision support systems of the type envi- sioned in Figure 3-1. This conceptual system could improve future system performance by providing information about current traffic flow, as well as predictions of future travel flows, to enhance the ability of private and public transportation providers, as well as trip planning apps, to predict trip times and costs. These predictions could then influence the choices that consumers make about modes and timing of trips. As described in the MOD Operational Concept background paper, the nature of the relationships among consumers and suppliers could take myriad forms that would differ across different built environments. They would also change over time through private and public actions affect- ing supply. The full “MOD ecosystem” described encompasses all the major stakeholders in personal transportation (governments, transporta- tion agencies, private providers, and consumers) and all the “enablers” of supply, including state and local government programs and policies affect- ing information standardization; highway, road, and transit system capacity and performance; development patterns that influence travel demand; and equitable access to all modes. FIGURE 3-1 Simplified Mobility on Demand operational concept. DEMAND Individual travelers O-D trip requests User needs and preferences Time and location Vehicle size/type needed Multi-modal transportation operations Management decision- support systems SUPPLY Public transit Private providers Facilities and vehicles Transportation information management systems

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 85 Whereas the USDOT’s operational concept of MOD remains just that—a concept and not a plan or program—it has guided the department’s research and demonstration initiatives. It also provides one holistic ap- proach to integrating shared mobility into the operations and management of personal transportation at the regional scale. MaaS can be distinguished from the MOD Operational Concept by its emphasis on a service that integrates multiple transportation options into a user interface to provide consumers with a range of choices and that simplifies ticketing and pay- ment. In contrast, the USDOT MOD “ecosystem” is a loose confederation of services that users would interact with individually. In practice, how- ever, MaaS platforms might evolve in ways that include multiple public or private MaaS providers in the same region.53 They therefore may not be so easily distinguished from the role of consumer-facing platforms in the MOD Operational Concept. A more important distinction with MaaS is that the MOD Operational Concept includes within it public policies and transportation system management and operations that are not included within the usual definition of MaaS, even though many countries promoting MaaS view it as supported by a broader set of public policies to reduce the externalities of personal transportation.54 MOBILITY MANAGEMENT As briefly described in Chapter 1, the committee’s view of mobility man- agement is also a holistic conceptualization of how transportation services can be provided and managed to serve consumers’ travel needs while also serving social goals such as equity and sustainability. As with MaaS and the USDOT’s MOD Operational Concept, central to mobility management is providing information to consumers that helps them make informed choices among transportation alternatives. As with the USDOT’s MOD Operational Concept, mobility management includes all aspects of surface transportation supply that are within the domain of the public sector, including • Facilitating the availability of the information platforms and appli- cations that consumers can turn to for trip planning, comparison of the duration and cost of alternatives, arranging for services, and convenient means of payment; • Regulating the operations of shared modes in the public interest; 53 Mulley and Nelson. 2020. 54 Hensher et al. 2020.

86 THE ROLE OF TRANSIT, SHARED MODES, AND PUBLIC POLICY • Providing consumers with travel options by encouraging the avail- ability of shared modes and transit as well as roads and parking for SOV trips; and • Providing road, parking, and transit capacity and operating it efficiently. The committee’s vision of mobility management may be somewhat beyond today’s capabilities in transportation governance at the regional level. However, ongoing information and communications technologies and software development are making it increasingly possible, as are incremen- tal steps toward achieving mobility management across jurisdictional lines, as outlined in the next two chapters. MaaS is fundamentally a customer-facing platform that links con- sumers with transportation services. Both MOD and mobility management extend this to include all the policies and programs that deliver the supply of transportation options, including infrastructure, vehicles, parking, and information about system capacity and performance. Real-time information to consumers and providers about system capacity and performance would not be the centerpiece of mobility management as it is in the USDOT’s MOD Operational Concept. Instead, it would be an important component of the public sector’s supply response by sharing information about system capacity and performance with the platforms presenting travel choices to consumers. As with MOD, mobility management would also be dynamic— both providing and managing system capacity in the short term and modify- ing system capacity and the built environment in the long term. SUMMARY MaaS has generated broad interest in many countries because of its poten- tial role in encouraging greater use of transit and shared modes. Although limited experience to date leaves unanswered many questions about its feasibility and efficacy, pilot projects and private MaaS offerings are moving forward in multiple countries that will provide answers to these questions. Many of these countries also have a broad set of policies and programs supporting public transportation and discouraging use of private automo- biles. The MOD Operational Concept and the committee’s formulation of mobility management share with MaaS the central role that ICT and smartphone apps can play in shaping the choices of consumers. Both also incorporate the role of public policies in influencing demand and providing public-sector transportation services and infrastructure. Whether and how MOD or mobility management will unfold in the United States are also largely unanswered questions, but transit agencies and local governments are already moving forward with multiple different

MOBILITY­ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES, CONCEPTS, AND EARLY EXPERIENCE 87 aspects of these approaches. The next two chapters describe a framework for mobility management that identifies points of leverage that local gov- ernments, transit agencies, and regional planning organizations can use to influence the future direction of personal transportation to serve both individual consumers and society. This framework is intended to serve as a conceptual map for negotiating this unfolding terrain.