Conference PaperPDF Available

Mobility-as-a-Service: A Tentative Framework for Analysing Institutional Conditions

Abstract and Figures

Cities are growing expansively as an increasing population travels to work, school, and leisure activities. It is predicted that the need for transportation will rise, resulting in an even further increase in emissions, noise, congestion and in overloaded infrastructures. Different schemes have therefore been introduced in order to support a shift from less to more sustainable travel habits. In addition to economic and legal measures, such as for example congestion charging, commuters have been the targets of information and education campaigns to raise awareness and breed a more positive attitude towards public transport (PT). Efforts have also been made to increase the attractiveness of PT by introducing new solutions including bus rapid transit (BRT) and by launching improved traveller information services such as realtime information and different types of multi-modal travel planners. Other efforts have encouraged increased cycling and walking by for example introducing new cycling and walking lanes. The purpose of the project 'Institutional Frameworks for Integrated Mobility Services in Future Cities' (IRIMS) is to determine how, and to what extent, do existing institutional factors affect service development of Integrated Mobility Services in the field of urban transport. The project aims to provide suggestions for how institutions can be modified to enable new services to contribute to sustainable mobility. This paper will present part of the work: a tentative framework, intended to enable the analysis of the institutional factors that facilitate or create barriers to the further development and dissemination of integrated mobility services (see also Mukhtar-Landgren et al., 2016).
Content may be subject to copyright.
© AET 2017 and contributors
MOBILITY-AS-A-SERVICE: A TENTATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR
ANALYSING INSTITUTIONAL CONDITIONS
I.C.$MariAnne$Karlsson$
Chalmers$University$of$Technology$
Till$Koglin$
Annica$Kronsell$
Dalia$Mukhtar-Landgren$
Lund$University$
Emma$Lund$
Trivector$
Steven$Sarasini$
RISE$Viktoria$
Göran$Smith$
Chalmers$University$of$Technology,$K2$The$Swedish$Knowledge$Centre$for$Public$Transport$
and$Västra$Götalandsregionen$
Jana$Sochor$
Chalmers$University$of$Technology$and$RISE$Viktoria$
Björn$Wendle$
Trivector$
$
$
1 INTRODUCTION
Cities are growing expansively as an increasing population travels to work,
school, and leisure activities. It is predicted that the need for transportation will
rise, resulting in an even further increase in emissions, noise, congestion and
in overloaded infrastructures. Different schemes have therefore been
introduced in order to support a shift from less to more sustainable travel
habits. In addition to economic and legal measures, such as for example
congestion charging, commuters have been the targets of information and
education campaigns to raise awareness and breed a more positive attitude
towards public transport (PT). Efforts have also been made to increase the
attractiveness of PT by introducing new solutions including bus rapid transit
(BRT) and by launching improved traveller information services such as real-
time information and different types of multi-modal travel planners. Other
efforts have encouraged increased cycling and walking by for example
introducing new cycling and walking lanes.
More recently the concept of integrated mobility services (IMS) or mobility-as-
a-service (MaaS) have been introduced as a possible way forward - as a new
© AET 2017 and contributors
paradigm. The European MaaS Alliance argues for example that MaaS has
the potential to fundamentally change the behaviour of people in and beyond
cities, hence it is regarded as the biggest paradigm change in transport since
affordable cars came into the market” (maas-alliance.eu). Nevertheless, even
though examples exist and pilots have been run with positive outcomes (see
e.g., Karlsson et al., 2016) progress has been slow.
The reasons are no doubt multi-facetted. In the report ”Future of Urban
Mobility” (van Audenhove et al., 2014) the authors argue that current mobility
systems adapt poorly to changing demands, that the environment is
fragmented and not positive to innovation, that it lacks holistic and long-term
mobility strategies, and that decision-making focuses on public actors and
does not exploit synergies between public and private actors: "What is needed
is system-level collaboration between all stakeholders of the mobility
ecosystem to come up with innovative and integrated business models." (p.
26) The EU has called for a European action plan with broad public and
private stakeholder involvement to better understand and manage user needs,
market opportunities, policy and as regulatory changes. In Sweden, MaaS has
been a priority area, but at the same time it has been claimed that new forms
of cooperation need to be developed (e.g. Smith et al., 2017b).
Collaboration means that different public and private sector actors work
together with the common goal of implementing a solution or policy. Earlier
research shows that if one is to succeed in a sustainable innovation process
(such as MaaS) in a complex context over a longer period of time, with the
ability to achieve a development towards integrated and holistic mobility,
collaboration between public and private actors is required. More and more
areas are therefore organized in cross-sectoral collaboration structures and
temporary projects or networks, and social scientists see this as a transition
from a society based on hierarchy to a network-based society (e.g., Pierre and
Sundström, 2009). Despite this and despite the fact that cooperation is an
identified key factor that has strong normative undertones, public and private
activities at national, regional and local levels are permeated by formal as well
as informal institutions that endanger cross-sectoral cooperation. MaaS
requires collaboration, but today there is no deeper and empirically informed
© AET 2017 and contributors
knowledge of the “how and what” that hinder or create the conditions for
collaboration within the framework of these new services.
The purpose of the project 'Institutional Frameworks for Integrated Mobility
Services in Future Cities' (IRIMS) is to determine how, and to what extent, do
existing institutional factors affect service development of Integrated Mobility
Services in the field of urban transport. The project aims to provide
suggestions for how institutions can be modified to enable new services to
contribute to sustainable mobility.
This paper will present part of the work: a tentative framework, intended to
enable the analysis of the institutional factors that facilitate or create barriers
to the further development and dissemination of integrated mobility services
(see also Mukhtar-Landgren et al., 2016).
2 THE FRAMEWORK
2.1 Accomplishment
The development of the framework is based upon a combination of:
literature reviews (see also Lund et al., 2017);
a series of workshops with project partners who represent different
competencies and experience; and
interviews with stakeholders (public as well as private) who have been
or who are presently involved in the development of MaaS services.
2.2 Theoretical basis
The framework draws upon institutional theory, a theoretical tradition that has
been developed to understand and/or explain organisational as well as
individual action (Dacin et al., 2002).
According to March and Olsen (1989), institutions are to be broadly
understood as “... a relatively stable collection of rules and practices,
embedded in structures of resources that make action possible(1989). This
definition is further developed by Scott (2014) who suggests that institutions
comprise “... regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive elements that,
together with associated activities and resources, provide stability and
© AET 2017 and contributors
meaning to social life (Scott 2014, p. 56). Regulative refers in this case to
rules and sanctioning activities that are formal and explicit; normative
elements include values and norms; and cognitive aspects are those
categories and conceptualisations through which identities and meanings are
constantly interpreted and re-interpreted (Thornton et al., 2012; Scott, 2014).
Institutional obstacles and opportunities are thus not restricted to formal
aspects; also informal aspects, including identity and perceived roles,
meaning making stories about the institutions, daily habits and practices, must
be considered (March and Olsen, 2006; Niemann, 2013). In the proposed
framework, regulative aspects are referred to as formal features while
normative and cognitive features are described as informal features that are
embedded in institutions.
Institutional theory emphasises the importance of institutions to understand
both societal development and individual actors' goals and actions (e.g. March
and Olsen, 1989). Institutions are significant as they affect what actors
perceive that they get to, can and should do but the factors that limit an actor
may be actual or perceived. While actual limitations can be counteracted by
external action, the perceived limitations require an internal, mental change on
the part of the player, which may be harder to achieve.
Although neo-institutionalist theory tends to emphasize continuity rather than
change, the role of institutions is here considered as being both enabling and
constraining. This means that actions are made possible but also constrained
by the institutional environment. Societal rules and planning processes,
organizational cultures, consumption patterns, and habits and routines of
individuals are examples of institutional frameworks that contain both factors
that can enable and hinder innovation. Examples of potential enabling factors
are: societal change (e.g. sustainability), attitude changes (e.g. shared
ownership or no ownership), but also technological development (e.g. in
Information and communication technology, ICT). Earlier studies of
institutional barriers highlight various potential barriers such as a lack of trust
between different actors; the distribution of power, resources and
responsibilities; goal conflicts when different organizations have different
goals for the cooperation or when representatives need to balance the
© AET 2017 and contributors
project's goals against ‘superior’ goals in their own organization (see, e.g.,
Vangen et al., 2014).
In the area of mobility, the risk is that institutional barriers counteract the
potential factors so that it is not possible to take full advantage of new mobility
services and changing behaviours and attitudes. In order for integrated
mobility services to be created, designed and implemented in a way that
contributes to behavioural changes, and to transport policy objectives,
institutional frameworks need to be facilitating rather than hindering.
2.3 The framework
The framework is based on the notion of institutions, formal as well as
informal. Formal institutions include rules and regulations that can vary from
highly regulated laws to more vague plans and local documents whereas
informal institutions describe norms, values, and conceptions, in other terms,
"what we should do and how we should do it" (Mukthar-Landgren et al. 2016).
These institutions are related to three different levels: macro, meso, and
micro.
2.3.1 Macro level
The macro level includes political and societal institutions, national as well as
international. On a macro level, government plays an important role as it
creates the preconditions for implementing MaaS but also protects public
interest (Lund et al. 2017).
In many countries legislation has been found to act as a barrier (Trafikanalys,
2016). Issues concern the boundaries between state subsidised mobility
services (in many countries PT tickets are subsidised) and commercially
viable services and how these can or cannot be combined, who can sell PT
tickets, but also, for example to what extent carsharing stations can be
allowed to use public space for parking (Trafikanalys, 2016) easy access
carsharing being an important part of most MaaS (cf. König et al., 2016).
Another formal factor is taxation. Even though MaaS is likely to present new
opportunities for revenue and tax income, current models for taxation may
constitute a barrier as they have not accommodated to the ideas of a sharing
economy.
© AET 2017 and contributors
Taking into consideration more informal aspects, Lund et al. (2017) argue that
many policy makers consider MaaS to be an important part of the solution of
pollution, noise and congestion in urban areas, which may result in supporting
actions. However, there are also those who are concerned that MaaS will
create increased access to transport services and hence result in an increase
in the number of trips made, and with the potential introduction of autonomous
vehicles even an increase in the number of car trips. This may create a barrier
for policy makers at different levels to support the development of MaaS.
2.3.2 Meso level
The meso level is complex and refers to organisations (private, public,
private/public hybrids as well as non-profit organisations) and communities,
including collaborative networks. The formal dimension here includes policies
and regulations that are implemented on a regional and local level whereas
the informal dimension includes for example the way collaboration and
partnerships are established among actors that have not previously worked
together.
An important challenge for creating MaaS is coordination and collaboration
between different actors (Holmberg et al., 2016), as it is a precondition for the
creation of the service content of MaaS and the integration of information,
payment, etc. At the same time, a survey carried out within the MaaSiFiE
project showed that stakeholders regard the lack of existing cooperation
between for example public and private service providers as a potential barrier
(König et al., 2016a; cf. also van der Audenhove et al., 2014) to the
development of MaaS.
Yet another aspect of integration is the integration of physical infrastructure
which is considered as an important enabler (Goodall et al., 2017). This
concerns, for example, an efficient infrastructure for bike- and carsharing in
the vicinity of PT hubs (Lund et al., 2017).
A major issue is also to what extent key actors believe that MaaS provides a
business opportunity. According to Datson (2016), there is a large market to
exploit and attract customers to new, innovative transport solutions, at least in
the UK, but several sources (e.g. Karlsson et al. 2017) argue that there is as
yet little knowledge on travellers' actual willingness and intention to adopt
© AET 2017 and contributors
MaaS, an uncertainty which hinders the actors taking "the next step" (Smith et
al., forthcoming). Also, even though MaaS implies a potential increase in
customers as well as access to new customers, public as well as private
actors express a fear of losing customers to other service providers. There is
also a fear of losing one's own brand image as well as one's relation to the
customers (e.g. Smith et al., 2017a; Sochor et al., 2015).
A related obstacle is the perceived lack of appropriate business models.
Although various models have been proposed in which different actors take
on different roles (see e.g., König et al. 2016b), both private and public actors
express uncertainty as to what their respective roles could, or should, be
within a MaaS. In particular this concerns PT organisations who are generally
considered the backbone of MaaS. It has been suggested that public sector
leadership can be crucial for the development and implementation of MaaS
(Holmberg et al., 2016; Weber et al., 2014), but at the same time the private
sector may be essential in order to develop a service with an innovative
height. The absence of an entrepreneurial mindset, which can be expected
from institutions and organisations that are not accustomed to implementing
new ideas, can prevent a further development of Maas (Mukthar-Landgren et
al., 2016).
A major enabler for MaaS is the development of ICT cloud infrastructures, the
dissemination of smartphones and tablets and the creation of apps for travel
planning, booking and ticketing (Ambrosino et al., 2016; Lund et al., 2017).
Another facilitator is access to open data but a key question is who should be
responsible for these platforms. In addition, Laurell (2017) concludes that
although a number of platforms are available on the market, only a few has
been tested in contexts other than small pilots.
2.3.3 Micro level
The micro level describes the individual as citizen, with democratic rights, as
tax payer, contributing to for example, subsiding PT, but more in particular the
micro level refers to the individual as customer and user of MaaS, i.e. the
traveller.
From a formal perspective, a number of macro and meso level measures
have targeted the individual to make certain that some transport solutions are
© AET 2017 and contributors
perceived as less and other solutions as more attractive. Some of these
measures can be denominated 'push" measures, exemplified by economic
disincentives in terms of taxation of car and fuel, while others can be
described as 'pull' measures, such as subsidising the investment in electric
vehicles.
Also at the micro level, the informal dimension plays a key role. For example,
subjective norms influence individual travel behaviours (e.g. Verplanken et al.,
1998). The private car has often been described as the norm but several
investigations indicate a shift within certain societal groups, not least among
the younger generation. Similarly, the private car has been described as a
status symbol, whereas for example PT has been associated with lower
status, but again, at least in certain communities, the perception of car
ownership appears to be changing from convenience and freedom to hassle
and burden. Societal trends in terms of environmental concern and towards
joint or shared ownership or no ownership at all, will open up opportunities for
services such as MaaS (e.g. König et al., 2016b). However, in communities
where the private car remains the norm, the dissemination of MaaS will still be
slow.
Travel patterns are habitual, and habits and routines create path
dependencies at this level. Changes in travel behaviour are not likely to occur
unless changes in travel options are salient and have positive outcomes
(Gärling and Fuji, 2009). Pilot trials of MaaS have shown that these new
services can provide several perceived benefits, such as convenience,
flexibility, and perceived increased access to mobility options (Karlsson et al.,
2016) but not for all. Barriers to the adoption of MaaS include economic
aspects but also perceived efforts associated with having to learn how to use
the new service (Sochor et al., 2016).
3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING REMARKS
The IRIMS project has been able to create a framework based on institutional
theory as well as identify institutional factors of importance though literature
studies, workshops involving actors with different expertise and experience,
and by interviewing actors who have been or are involved in the development
of MaaS.
© AET 2017 and contributors
Figure 1 is an attempt to summarise the framework. The different levels of
analysis are exemplified and related to one another in order to illustrate a
complex web of interdependency which must be considered in any further
analysis of MaaS.
Figure 1. Summary of analytical framework. Source: Mukthar-Landgren et al.
2016.
In sum, on a macro level, government has an important role in enabling or
creating barriers to MaaS through taxation policies, regulations concerning
data availability and standardisation but in particular regulations of the sales of
PT tickets. On a meso level, regional and local authorities play a role in
enabling a MaaS environment by, for example planning a supporting physical
infrastructure. However, the driving force is most probably perceived business
opportunities. Several actors need to collaborate in order for MaaS to
materialise, but all actors must also benefit from its existence, organised in a
business ecosystem where the different actors add their contribution to the
integrated mobility service offering. On a micro level, societal trends including
a sharing economy support the idea of MaaS. However, travel habits are
difficult to change even though pilots show that there are those categories of
travellers who are attracted by MaaS, provided that the service offers a price-
worthy and attractive alternative.
© AET 2017 and contributors
The described framework is tentative and empirical evidence is (as yet) to a
large extent lacking. It requires further empirical evidence in order to
understand, in-depth, the factors that influence the development and
dissemination of MaaS.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ambrosino, G., Nelson, J.D., Boero, M., and Ramazzotti (2016) From the
Concept of Flexible Mobility Services to the "Shared Mobility Service Agency".
Chapter 10 in Paratransit: Shaping the Flexible Transport Future. Transport
and Sustainability. 8, 2013-2015.
van Audenhove, F-J., Dauby, L., Korniichuk, O. and Pourbaix, J. (2014) The
future of urban mobility 2.0. Imperatives to Shape Extended Mobility
Ecosystems of Tomorrow. Report. Arthur D Little and UITP, Brussels.
Datson, J. (2016). Mobility as a Service - Exploring the opportunity for mobility
as a service in the UK. Catapult Transport Systems, Milton Keyes. Available
at https://ts.catapult.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Mobility-as-a-
Service_Exploring-the-Opportunity-for-MaaS-in-the-UK-Web.pdf
Dacin, T., Goodstein, J., and Scott, W.R. (2002) Institutional Theory and
Institutional Change: Introduction to the Special Research Forum. The
Academy of Management Journal 45 (1), 43-56.
Goodall, W., Dovey Fishman, T., Bornstein, J. and Bonthron, B. (2017) The
Rise of Mobility as a Service - Reshaping How Urbanities get Around. Deloitte
Review 20, 112-129.
Gärling, T. and Fuji, S. (2009) Travel Behaviour Modification: Theories,
Methods and Programs. In Kitamura, R., Yoshii, T. and Yamamoto, T. (eds)
The Expanding Sphere of Travel Behaviour Research. Selected papers from
the 11th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research. Emerald
Group Publishing Ltd, Bingley, UK, 97-128.
Holmberg, P-E., Collado, M., Sarasini, S. and Williander, M. (2016) Mobility as
a service - MaaS. Describing the framework. Report. Victoria Swedish ICT,
Gothenburg.
© AET 2017 and contributors
Karlsson I.C.M., Sochor, J. and Strömberg, H. (2016) Developing the
"Service" in Mobility as a Service: Experiences from a Field Trial of an
Innovative Travel Brokerage. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 3265-
3273.
Karlsson, M., Sochor, J., Aapaoja, A., Eckhardt, J., König, D. (2017).
Deliverable 4: Impact Assessment. Report. Deliverable to the MAASiFiE
project funded by CEDR.
König, D., Sochor, J., Eckhardt, J., and Böhm, M. (2016a) State-of-the-art
survey on stakeholders' expectations for Mobility-as-a-Service. 23rd World
Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems, Melbourne.
König, D., Eckhardt, J., Aapaoja, A, Sochor, J. and Karlsson, M. (2016b)
Deliverable 3: Business and Operator Models for MaaS. Deliverable to
MaaSiFiE funded by CEDR.
Laurell, A. (2017) Förarbete - Swedish Mobility Program (SMP). Samtrafiken,
Stockholm.
Lund, E., Kerttu, J. and Koglin, T. (2017) Drivers and Barriers for Integrated
Mobility Services. A Review of Research. K2 Working papers 2017:3, K2,
Lund.
March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (2006) The Logic of Appropriateness. In Moran,
M., Rein, M. and Goodin, R.E. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Mukthar-Landgren, D., Karlsson, M., Koglin, T., Kronsell, A., Lund, E.,
Sarasini, S., Smith, G., Sochor, J., and Wendle, B. (2016) Institutional
Conditions for Integrated Mobility Services (IMS). K2 Working papers
2016:16, K2, Lund.
Niemann, C. (2013) Villkorat förtroende: Normer och förväntningar i relationen
mellan politier och tjänstemän i regeringskansliet. Stockholm Studies in
Politics 153, Stockholm.
Pierre, J. and Sundström, G. (2009) Samhällsstyrning i förändring. Liber,
Lund.
© AET 2017 and contributors
Scott, W.R. (2014) Institutions and Organisations: Ideas, Interests, and
Identities. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
Smith, G., Sochor, J., and I.C.M. Karlsson (2017a) Mobility as a Service:
Implications for future mainstream public transport. 15th International
Conference Series on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger
Transport (Thredbo), Stockholm, August 13-17, 2017
Smith, G., Sochor, J., and I.C.M. Karlsson (2017b) Procuring Mobility as a
Service: Exploring dialogues with potential bidders. 24th World Congress on
Intelligent Transportation Systems, Montreal, 2017
Smith, G., Sochor, J., and Karlsson I.C.M. Karlsson (forthcoming) Public-
Private Open Innovation: Barriers in the case of Mobility as a Service in West
Sweden. Manuscript.
Sochor, J., Strömberg, H. and Karlsson, I.C.M. (2015) Implementing Mobility
as a Service. Challenges in Integrating User, Commercial and Societal
Perspectives. Transportation Research Record 2536, 1-9.
Sochor, J., Karlsson, I.C.M., and Strömberg, H. (2016) Trying Out Mobility as
a Service: Experiences from a Field Trial and Implications for Understanding
Demand. Transportation Research Record 2542, 57-64.
Thornton, P.H., Ocasio, W. and Lounsbury, M. (2012) The Institutional Logics
Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process. Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
Trafikanalys (2016) Nya tjänster för delad mobilitet. Rapport 2016:15.
Trafikanalys, Stockholm.
Vangen, S., Hayes, J.P., Cornforth, C. (2014) Governing Cross-sector Inter-
Organizational Collaborations. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1237-1260
Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., van Knippenberg, A., and Moonen, A. (1998) Habit
versus Planned Behaviour: A Field Experiment. British Journal of Social
Psychology 37, 11-128.
© AET 2017 and contributors
Weber, K.M., Heller-Schuh, B., Godoe, H. and Roeste, R. (2014) ICT-enabled
System Innovations in Public Services: Experiences from Intelligent Transport
Systems. Telecommunication Policy, 38 (5-6), 539-557
... Smith, Sochor, & Karlsson, 2017b) as well as lack of "cooperation" among mobility agents (M. Karlsson, 2017) and access to "sales and tickets interfaces" with consequence on 3 rd party reselling of tickets (Nikitas et al., 2017). These Often, and to some extent related to "cooperation" and "coordination" issues, the "fragmented" organization of the transport sector, arranged in silos, is highlighted as a challenge (T. ...
... The financial aspect is also several times proclaimed as a challenge, normally related with legislation and regulation related with subsidies of public transport (Nikitas et al., 2017;M. Karlsson, 2017;Y. Li & Voege, 2017;Mulley et al., 2018). This aspect brings an important question that is related with the redefinition of the role of Public Transport. The public transport can gain a bigger importance and increase its shares once the "MaaS" concept evolves and disseminates throughout the world in the years to come. The shift from "tra ...
... "cannibalization of Public Transport", "fear of losing the relationship with the customer" and "fear of losing the brand" are among some of the concerns) (M. Karlsson, 2017;G. Smith, Sochor, & Karlsson, 2017a). ...
Thesis
Full-text available
World population forecasted growth, ageing population, rising urbanization and congestion levels carry several challenges inside urban mobility systems. The digitalization megatrend is reshaping lives worldwide while at the same time “Usership” is thriving along collaborative consumption. “Mobility-as-a-Service” (“MaaS”) emerges as a potential mobility disruption, in this new mobility ecosystem. Inspired in Finland's “MaaS” ecosystem, this paper aims to propose a “Mobility as a Service Public Policy Framework” with a two-stage approach. First structuring the “MaaS” concept, looking for the core features, its relations, that leads to its reconceptualization and a topology proposal. Secondly, a public policy framework is proposed, considering the policy instruments, indicative group of stakeholders responsible and the different urban mobility management decision levels. The authors argue that is fundamental to understand the nature of decisions which are intimately connected with the Urban Mobility system, to design and implement a coherent and effective policy framework, where the policy tools chosen to materialize policy decisions regarding “MaaS” should first consider the identification of the founding pillars of the “MaaS” concept, guiding the process of policy design accordingly. If “MaaS” is considered a Mobility Management tool, it can constitute an opportunity to redefine public transport and its financing.
... Frequent claims have been made regarding the positive impacts of MaaS on travel behavior changes and sustainability. These claims mostly rely on the research findings of either pilot projects (e.g., Karlsson et al., 2017a;Sochor et al., 2015;Hensher et al., 2021;Ho et al., 2021) or primary data collection (e.g., Matyas and Kamargianni, 2019;Ho et al., 2018;Ho et al., 2020;Feneri et al., 2020;Caiati et al., 2020). MaaS pilots are mostly centered around European cities, such as Ubigo in Gothenburg, Smile in Vienna, the Mobility Shop in Hannover, MyCicero in Italy, Whim in Helsinki, and CityMapper in London. ...
... Another ex-post study by Strömberg et al. (2018) on the Ubigo trial identified several groups of travelers who showed different intentions in using MaaS, of which 'car shedders' and 'economizers' groups reduced their car use significantly by 95% and 53%, respectively. Similarly, the result of the Austrian pilot (Smile in Vienna) also reported positive effects of MaaS on its users' travel behavior, leading to an increase in the use of shared services and electric mobilities (Karlsson et al., 2017a). Furthermore, 48% of the Smile users stated that their travel patterns have changed since joining the trial project, and the service enabled them to take faster routes, combine multiple modes, and subscribe to new mobility options that they had never used before (Smile-mobility, 2015; Karlsson et al., 2017a). ...
... Similarly, the result of the Austrian pilot (Smile in Vienna) also reported positive effects of MaaS on its users' travel behavior, leading to an increase in the use of shared services and electric mobilities (Karlsson et al., 2017a). Furthermore, 48% of the Smile users stated that their travel patterns have changed since joining the trial project, and the service enabled them to take faster routes, combine multiple modes, and subscribe to new mobility options that they had never used before (Smile-mobility, 2015; Karlsson et al., 2017a). ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper examines the potential role of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) as a transport demand management (TDM) tool to influence commuting mode choice. A stated choice experiment was conducted among employees in the Netherlands to capture the effect of integrating TDM measures with MaaS on mode choice behavior. We found that the train and car-sharing attributes’ variations are influential factors on employees’ mode choice behavior. Moreover, the mobility package price played a significant role in mode choice even though most employees in the Netherlands receive a full or partial travel allowance from their employers. Similarly, the in-crease in parking tariffs was an influential measure for car users who used street/garage parking spaces. How-ever, the effects were not equal for all respondents. Young, low-income and multi-modal commuters are more susceptible to travel behavior changes than old, high-income, and car-dependent employees. In conclusion, MaaS could be seen as a promising element in TDM strategies combining carrots (enablers) and sticks (deterrents), albeit for specific groups users.
... However, we define MaaS as part of the concept of CASE ('S' for service). MaaS is an integrative concept that bundles different transport modalities into a single, seamless service to provide tailored mobility solutions that cater to users' travel needs (Mukhtar-Landgren et al., 2016;Karlsson et al., 2017;and Smith, Sochor, and Sarasini, 2018). For example, MaaS Global, established in 2015, started the first subscription style transportation in Finland. ...
Article
World population forecasted growth, ageing population, rising urbanization and congestion levels carry several challenges inside urban mobility systems. The digitalization megatrend is reshaping lives worldwide while at the same time “Usership” is thriving along collaborative consumption. “Mobility-as-a-Service” (“MaaS”) emerges as a potential mobility disruption, in this new mobility ecosystem. Inspired in Finland's “MaaS” ecosystem, this paper aims to propose a “Mobility as a Service Public Policy Framework” with a two-stage approach. First structuring the “MaaS” concept, looking for the core features, its relations, that leads to its reconceptualization and a topology proposal. Secondly, a public policy framework is proposed, considering the policy instruments, indicative group of stakeholders responsible and the different urban mobility management decision levels. The authors argue that is fundamental to understand the nature of decisions which are intimately connected with the Urban Mobility system, to design and implement a coherent and effective policy framework, where the policy tools chosen to materialize policy decisions regarding “MaaS” should first consider the identification of the founding pillars of the “MaaS” concept, guiding the process of policy design accordingly. If “MaaS” is considered a Mobility Management tool, it can constitute an opportunity to redefine public transport and its financing.
Conference Paper
The public sector is showing increased interest in Mobility as a Service (MaaS), as its introduction and market penetration is proposed to potentially disrupt the personal transport system. However, involved public actors are approaching MaaS very differently. This paper applies a neo-institutional perspective to study the activities of public actors in the ongoing development of MaaS in Finland and Sweden. To this end, it maps what policy instruments public actors are applying to govern the processes and discusses how this might relate to their perceived action spaces and roles. The contribution to extant MaaS-related research is twofold. Firstly, the analysis shows that public actors are applying a wide range of both hard and soft policy instruments in order to govern the development of MaaS. Secondly, a comparison across Finland and Sweden suggests that the perceived action spaces and the roles taken by public actors on regional and local levels are influenced by the activities of public actors on state-level. The paper concludes that public actors and policy instruments should not be studied in isolation. Rather, perceived action spaces and roles need to be analysed in a multi-level setting, where processes of enabling and promoting can vary between societal levels, and where the roles of the public sector are negotiated not only between public and private actors, but also between different public actors.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Following a political order in late 2014, the regional public transport organisation (PTO) in West Sweden has been on a quest to procure Mobility as a Service (MaaS). In spring 2016, they invited potential bidders to discuss the terms for such procurement through a 'request for information’ process. 65 actors participated in a start-up meeting, and 30 explicated their thoughts in subsequent individual meetings with the PTO. Based on participatory observation of these meetings, this paper explores which aspects that frequented the discussions. It identifies seven aspects that potential bidders believe are important to consider when procuring MaaS: cross-sector collaboration, allocation of responsibilities, governance, business models, target groups, service design and technical integration. Moreover, the analysis suggests that MaaS (in this context) is premature for public procurement at this point in time. Instead more collaborative forms of public-private partnerships seem to be needed to drive the development.
Presentation
Full-text available
Institutional conditions for integrated mobility services: an analysis of enabling and constraining factors. Conference presentation.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Executive summary The transnational research programme “Call 2014: Mobility and ITS” was launched by the Conference of European Directors of Roads (CEDR). Funded within that program, Mobility as a Service for Linking Europe (MAASiFiE) is a two-year project that investigates the prerequisites for organizing user-oriented and ecological mobility services in order to provide consumers with flexible, efficient and user-friendly services covering multiple modes of transport on a one-stop-shop principle. Megatrends like changing demographics in terms of population growth, ageing of population, new population requirements of millennials, and ICT technology transformation, play a major role enabling the evolvement of new mobility services. Mobility service concepts are changing in the direction of combining and implementing new business models, enabling the development of innovative services and products in mobility markets. With this respect, Deliverable 3 as part of Work Package (WP) 3 of the MAASiFiE project concentrates on the identification of new business and operator models providing an insight into the new transport paradigm of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS). Based on a state-of- the-art survey covering interviews with experts, an online questionnaire, case examples of MaaS services and a literature review, a more thorough understanding of how transport- related stakeholders perceive and interact with the topic of MaaS is gained. Thus, an elaboration of responsibilities/roles, business models, related value chains and operator models in the context of MaaS is enabled and results are provided in this document. As a common point of reference, the consortium has agreed upon the following definition of MaaS: Multimodal and sustainable mobility services addressing customers' transport needs by integrating planning and payment on a one-stop-shop principle. Mobility services are expected to increase the use of public transport and ride sharing and to provide the means for rationalising passenger transport and wherever possible freight transport as well as identified by the state-of-the-art survey within Deliverable 3. In addition, available freight transport and logistic operations are analysed wherever similar characteristics to MaaS-related passenger applications are identified. Overall, the state-of- the-art survey results focusing on international MaaS concepts have shown that there currently exist various smaller MaaS-pilots covering different geographical service areas, including for instance city, rural and/or regional areas. Very few larger MaaS services have been established with a wider geographical coverage, including national and international service coverage. Based on different MaaS service areas, different aims and requirements for implementing MaaS concepts arise. While for instance, urban areas focus largely on the reduction of private car usage, congestion and transport-related emissions, rural areas aim at promoting higher efficiency and utilization rates by emphasizing demand driven transport services. National and international MaaS services focus rather on providing combined all-in- one packages including for instance long-haul transport, accommodation, event and booking services. Identified value chains of MaaS services illustrate changes of roles and responsibilities in the organisation of transport of people and goods. In this respect, changes in value networks and related organisational requirements are derived and applied to show different combinations of MaaS services. Basically four MaaS operator models were identified: Reseller, Integrator, Public transport operator and PPP models. Based on service combination characteristics, it could be concluded that the commercial Reseller model may best fit travel agencies and therefore national and international traveling. The Public transport (PT) operator model could be mainly used in cities, where comprehensive PT already exists. The PPP model may be preferred for rural areas, as public actors have an interest in increasing efficiency of subsidized transportation. The commercial Integrator model would probably fit well in both urban and suburban areas and national/international MaaS; thus it could be considered the most versatile and flexible model. However, as MaaS is continuously developing, and can be implemented in various ways, the presented models and categorizations should be read and interpreted as a current understanding of an emerging phenomenon. http://www.vtt.fi/sites/maasifie/results
Conference Paper
Bundled offerings that facilitate using multiple means for solving everyday travel needs are proposed to hold potential to facilitate a modal shift from private cars to servitized transport modes, including public transport (PT). However, this type of offering, often coined Mobility as a Service (MaaS), may require new forms of partnerships, in which private actors play a larger role in the creation of public value. Accordingly, based on input from 19 interviews with MaaS actors in West Sweden, this paper explores how MaaS could develop and how future mainstream PT might be affected. Three predictive scenarios are identified – market-driven, public-controlled and public-private – and the impact on PT, in terms of the scope, usage, access, business model, competence structure and brand value, are discussed in relation to these. The paper also illustrates that the development of MaaS in Sweden seems to take the public-private route. Lastly, the authors conclude that finding a regulatory ‘sweet spot’ that drives innovation and secures public benefits will be key for future development.
Conference Paper
Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) as an emerging key concept offers a new perspective on how to organise and implement mobility service concepts in the future. However, the path to that future is not clear. In some countries there already exists a more sophisticated notion of MaaS, but many countries do not yet consider MaaS in national/regional and/or local mobility planning strategies. As a step in easing the way forward, this paper presents international stakeholders’ perspectives on and expectations for MaaS. In the context of the international MaaSiFiE (Mobility as a Service for Linking Europe) project, a state-of-the-art survey has been conducted, including a stakeholder questionnaire gathering different views of MaaS as input for developing a roadmap for MaaS deployment. The questionnaire results include relevant modes and service features, spatial and temporal appraisals, as well as potential impacts, enablers and barriers.
Article
This paper presents some of the findings from the trial and evaluation of an example of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS). The service, UbiGo, was developed within the Go:Smart project in Gothenburg, Sweden. In total 195 individuals in 83 households became paying customers over a period of six months. Overall, outcome of the trial was positive, i.e. the service was used and the customers were satisfied, more so than with their previous travel solution. Based on questionnaires and interviews, key service attributes were identified, including the ‘transportation smorgasbord’ concept, simplicity, improved access and flexibility, convenience, and economy. It is argued that successful implementation of MaaS requires careful consideration of these design attributes. However, MaaS relies on cooperation and collaboration, on the notion of a co-operative and interconnected transport system (including services, infrastructure, information, and payment), where boundaries between not only transport modes are blurred but also between public and private operators. The evaluation of UbiGo indicated that the main obstacles to further dissemination of MaaS may be found within and between service providing companies and organisations in terms of, e.g. regulations and institutional barriers.
Article
The concept of Mobility as a Service or MaaS has been proposed as feasible way to achieve more sustainable transport. One example of such a service is UbiGo, a broker service for everyday urban travel developed and evaluated within the Go:Smart project in Gothenburg, Sweden. This paper presents evidence of travel behavior and related changes from a six-month field operational test (FOT), during which 195 participants tested the new service. Based on participant questionnaires, interviews, and travel diaries, change-enabling service attributes are identified, including the ‘transportation smorgasbord’ concept, simplicity, improved access and flexibility, and economy. Although not a service attribute per se, the FOT also enabled the trialability of new behaviors and a reevaluation of convenience. Additionally, the broader implications of the FOT findings on understanding travelers’ new choices and behaviors are discussed in terms of the future design of MaaS. Service design and demand are not independent of each other, and if a mobility service is to change behavior (i.e. achieve impact) as well as create added value, these goals need to drive design decisions and a deliberate, conscious development of service dimensions such as customization, bundling, and range of the offer. Based on the experiences gained, the authors emphasize a more holistic and flexible perspective on mobility (and design perspective on mobility services) that is focused on serving users’ needs, and that involves capitalizing on synergies between public and private actors, in order to develop the MaaS ‘offer’ and better meet the urban mobility challenge ahead.
Article
A field experiment investigated the prediction and change in repeated behaviour in the domain of travel mode choices. Car use during seven days was predicted from habit strength (measured by self-reported frequency of past behaviour, as well as by a more covert measure based on personal scripts incorporating the behaviour), and antecedents of behaviour as conceptualized in the theory of planned behaviour (attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control and behavioural intention). Both habit measures predicted behaviour in addition to intention and perceived control. Significant habit x intention interactions indicated that intentions were only significantly related to behaviour when habit was weak, whereas no intention-behaviour relation existed when habit was strong. During the seven-day registration of behaviour, half of the respondents were asked to think about the circumstances under which the behaviour was executed. Compared to control participants, the behaviour of experimental participants was more strongly related to their previously expressed intentions. However, the habit-behaviour relation was unaffected. The results demonstrate that, although external incentives may increase the enactment of intentions, habits set boundary conditions for the applicability of the theory of planned behaviour.
Article
This paper presents insights from a six-month field operational test (FOT) in Gothenburg, Sweden, during which 195 participants tested the UbiGo mobility service for everyday travel. The service integrates both public and private solutions into a new type of “collective transport”, thereby contributing to Swedish societal goals of a reduction of private car use and ownership. A triangulation approach to data sources and collection methods has been adopted in order to identify matches and mismatches between the expectations and experiences of three stakeholder groups: users (FOT participants/customers), commercial actors (the mobility broker and service providers), and society. Identified matches include the “transportation smorgasbord” concept, reducing private car ownership, and increased pre-trip planning. Identified mismatches relate to the greater than expected reduction in car use; the respective business models of the mobility broker and service providers; back office administration; and the smartphone platform. Gaps include the infeasibility of some trips and the need for more carsharing sites. All in all, the FOT was successful with 93% of participants satisfied with their travel and 97% wanting to continue using UbiGo. However, the mismatches and gaps need to be resolved or at least deliberated upon in order to create a commercially viable mobility service. Based on the experience gained, the authors conclude that truly “collective transport” must involve close cooperation between public and private actors, and the consideration of at least these three, sometimes conflicting, stakeholders’ perspectives in order to create integrated solutions. Furthermore, new business models are needed to address the challenges associated with future, integrated, urban mobility solutions.