| 1. |
- Boyer, Robert, et al.
(författare)
-
D6.1 : STRONGER COMBINED MaaS IN 2020 : A REVIEW OF EXISTING RESEARCH AND ROUTES FOR THE FUTURE
- 2021
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This report was composed as part of Stronger Combined – an international R&I project funded by Interreg to explore the role of combined mobility, primarily within rural regions and areas. As such, this report examines the academic literature on Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) to investigate the geographical and conceptual areas that are covered by existing MaaS research and those which have been overlooked, aiming to deliver insights that can 1) spur developments in rural areas; and 2) inform future R&I programming within the broader MaaS field. Hence in addition to the above aims, this report also identifies gaps and shortcomings in academic scholarship, making recommendations for future research. The main findings of this report are summarized as follows: - MaaS is a concept forming in real-time. There is still much debate about the ‘true meaning’ of MaaS and the steps necessary to fully realize it. - MaaS research is overwhelmingly focused on urban places and populations. Rural and suburban areas are severely underrepresented in existing peer-reviewed research. MaaS for special populations and purposes like riders with disabilities or tourists is also underrepresented. - Authors of MaaS scholarship come from institutions in multiple countries, but 80% of articles come from seven countries: Sweden, Australia, UK, Netherlands, Switzerland, and Finland. These countries also tend to be the focus of MaaS research, although a sizeable number of articles are context-free (e.g. theoretical or conceptual). - Existing experimental and pilot-based research shows that access to MaaS has a measurable influence on individuals’ use of different travel modes, including a decline in personal vehicle use. However, multiple studies cast doubt on the ability of MaaS to displace personal vehicles completely. - The individuals most likely to adopt MaaS are mode agnostic – they already use multiple transportation modes for daily travel and are not strongly committed to any single mode. - Stated-preference surveys reveal that 10-15 percent of surveyed individuals are enthusiastic about adopting MaaS while another 30-40 percent are at least open-minded to the concept. The remainder are unlikely to adopt MaaS as currently conceived, for a variety of reasons. - Subscription-based MaaS with multiple bundled transportation services faces many obstacles including the complexity of service agreements and low stated-preferences for mobility bundles (albeit with exceptions). Several papers recommend that MaaS initiatives advance incrementally by including a small number of service providers and/or pay-as-you-go rather than subscription payment. - The governance of MaaS (i.e., the approach that different government entities take to making MaaS work) is critical. Different cities and public transit systems have approached MaaS governance in different ways. While there is no apparent “one-size-fits-all” approach, there is some consensus in the governance literature that enhanced data sharing, standardization, and participatory visioning processes have been and will continue to be important to the success of MaaS in the coming years. - The COVID-19 pandemic presents challenges to MaaS as conventionally envisioned, but some experts see opportunities for MaaS with expanded service offerings or as a tool for transportation resilience.
|
|
| 2. |
- Boyer, Robert, et al.
(författare)
-
D6.2 STRONGER COMBINED : SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT
- 2023
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Stronger Combined is a research and innovation project co-funded by the Interreg North Sea Region Programme. The overarching goal of the Stronger Combined project is to support experimentation with multimodal and intermodal passenger travel solutions in rural, small-town, and tourist (RUSTT) regions. The project consists of nine independent experimental sites, or living labs, in seven Interreg North Sea Region countries. Living labs are administered by either regional public transit authorities or municipalities with support from research institutes, universities, or private consultancies. Each living lab conducted at least one transportation pilot that attempted, through various means, to encourage alternatives to the personal motor vehicle. In all living lab contexts, the personal motor vehicle is the single dominant mode of transportation, which presents environmental, social, and economic challenges that Europe and the world must begin to address. The purpose of this report is to summarize and assess the performance of each pilot with special attention to increases in use of public transportation and decreases in carbon dioxide (equivalent) emissions. Communities in RUSTT regions face special transportation challenges largely because they lie outside dense transportation networks that tend to make multimodal transportation more efficient in larger cities. The Stronger Combined project aims to address these special challenges by piloting alternatives to the personal motor vehicle that allow travellers to more easily transition among multiple modes of transportation on a single journey. The piloted solutions vary enormously across living labs. They include several bikeshare programs that serve unique purposes in each context, a ridesharing service, a contractual restructuring that affords populations with special needs easier access to traditional public transit, a technical pilot testing a new national ticketing-and-payment standard, and a demand-responsive bus program in a mountainous tourist region. The pilots targeted user groups in very different ways and tested solutions over different time scales, making of pilots very challenging. At the beginning of the Stronger Combined project, the authors of this report endeavoured to apply the KOMPIS framework a series of data collection tools designed to evaluate mobility-as-a-service (MaaS) to each pilot. In most living labs this framework had to be adapted and downscaled to fit the capabilities and time scale of individual pilots. As a brief example, the full KOMPIS framework involves travellers completing travel diaries every day for a full week. Such a task is well suited for a pilot in which the key goal is for travellers to adopt multimodal travel habits, but it is unnecessarily detailed for a pilot that involves endusers renting a cargo bike for one or small number of specific trips. The COVID-19 pandemic also meant that several pilots were delayed or overhauled, requiring the relatively rapid development of new data collection strategies tailored to each pilot. The report below summarizes each pilot?s contribution to public transit ridership and carbon savings, yet the most important and perhaps ironic finding in this report is that the context-specific nature of piloted solutions does not lend itself well to a one-size-fits-all evaluation framework. Substantial Stronger Combined D6.2 5 increases in public transit ridership were apparent in several pilot projects, however calculating the number of individuals that shifted to public transit modes was either irrelevant or impossible in most of the pilots. Similarly, we calculate substantial CO2 savings due to shifts in travel modes across many of the pilots, but it is arguably unfair to compare shifts across living labs. Living labs collected data in a variety of ways at a variety of time scales in pilots of varying size. Some pilots achieved relatively large absolute carbon savings (due in part to a larger number of participants) while others achieved impressive per person- or per kilometre savings relative to a baseline scenario (due in large part to a focus on transitions from personal vehicles to bicycles). Improving person-transportation in RUSST regions is it is effectively a set of unique problems that resist being solved at scale. A bike sharing program that works well as a first/last mile solution for hospital employees in a semi-rural Swedish region would not offer much value to a Danish village where many households have access to personal bicycles for local trips and where transportation outside the village by bicycle is practically impossible. The different pilots presented in this report each present unique and useful findings beyond the reported target KPIs. A sample of these findings include: Introducing e-bikes as a mode of transportation makes the biggest difference for utility trips (e.g. trips to work or school), but is associated with relatively little change in individuals leisure travel or short trips around the neighbourhood (Genk pilot). Elderly and disabled travellers will use public buses when offered for free or when given lowcost access (Groningen Drenthe pilot). Ridesharing in small towns is already rather common but tends to occur among family, friends, and familiar neighbours. Encouraging the use of ridesharing mobile apps will require enhancing drivers sense of familiarity with potential co-riders (Skive pilot). Experts project that ID-based ticketing will be most useful to individuals that already use public transportation uncertain. These findings reflect existing academic research on MaaS, which shows that the most likely users of combined mobility offerings those without strong loyalties to any particular mode (Hallandstrafiken pilot). A sizeable majority (87.5 percent) of registered uses of a bikeshare service appear to use their subscription at least once a month, suggesting they are integrating bikeshare as a part of their routines rather than as a one-time solution (HiTrans pilot). Subscribers to an e-cargo bike pilot tended to be individuals that use a standard bicycle for travel several times a week and have positive attitudes toward bicycles. Thus, familiarity and positive attitudes about non-cargo bicycling may influence willingness to adopt cargo bikes as an option for transporting heavier loads or children (Rinteln pilot).
|
|
| 3. |
- Brunklaus, Birgit, 1970, et al.
(författare)
-
Eco-innovative measures in large Swedish companies: An inventory based on company reports
- 2012
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The project creates a detailed picture through a survey of eco-innovative measures among Sweden's 100 largest companies from 11 industries. Data from latest corporate annual reports was gathered in 2012 and analyzed using a range of criteria that show what types of measures companies pursue in order to tackle environmental issues. These criteria range from internal measures, such as developing new products and processes, to measures that include the value chain and other public/private partners that can help boost eco-innovation. The study shows that the majority of companies see themselves as proactive and that most reported are internal measures, with an emphasis on energy efficiency and renewable energy and materials. Examples for energy efficiency measures are effective lightning, insulation and lean production. Examples for renewable measures regarding energy are green electricity based on wind, biomass and solar. Examples for renewable measures regarding materials are bio and organic based products, or biomass based production. Among the interesting eco-innovation examples there are biopharmaceuticals (Astra), ZERO mission (Skanska), “one tone life” (ICA), dinner parties “rest dating”(Landmännen), smart homes and cars (Semcon), smart application of technologies (ABB and Ericsson), smart grips to link homes, vehicles and users (Toyota), regenerative braking system (SJ), “Zee-weed” technologies (ITT), biomass-based fuels of their own process (SCA), light-weight materials (SSAB). Measures including the value chain focus on procurement and measures including the consumer are rarely mentioned. Drivers for these measures are ranging from business opportunities to cost and legislation. Companies in the construction and consultancy/service sector have taken up environmental issues as their business opportunity. Companies in general mention legislation, such as REACH, as well as consumer demands as driver, while companies in the automotive and transport sector seldom mention drivers. The study also shows that annual reports are sufficient for gathering general information on product development and production processes, while information regarding R&D is not always presented and needs to be complemented with questionnaires and interviews. The project provides a starting point for further research on eco-innovation regarding the value chain, the consumers and the role of networks.
|
|
| 4. |
- Brunklaus, Birgit, 1970, et al.
(författare)
-
Eco-innovative measures in large Swedish Companies - An inventory based on company reports
- 2013
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The project examines eco-innovative measures among 100 large companies from 11industries in Sweden. Data from corporate annual reports was gathered and analysedusing a range of criteria that show what types of measures companies pursue in order totackle environmental issues. These criteria range from internal measures, such asdeveloping new products and processes, to measures that include the value chain andpublic/private partners that can help boost eco-innovation.The study shows that the majority of companies see themselves as proactive and thattheir main focus vis-à-vis eco-innovation is on internal measures, with an emphasis onenergy efficiency and renewable energy and materials. Examples of measures that focuson energy efficiency include effective lighting, insulation and lean production. Examplesof measures that focus on renewable energy measures include sourcing electricitybased on wind, biomass and solar power. Examples of measures that focus on renewablematerials include bio- and organic-based products, or biomass-based production.The study highlights various eco-innovation measures that have the potential to bringabout meaningful change, including “ZERO mission” (Skanska), the “One tonne life”project to create a climate smart household (ICA as partner), launch of a “left overdating” matchmaker service to find “dinner partners” with supplementary ingredients(Lantmännen), smart homes and cars (Semcon), smart application of technologies (ABBand Ericsson), smart grids to link homes, vehicles and users (Toyota), regenerativebraking systems (SJ), “Zee-weed” membrane techniques for water treatment (ITT),biomass-based fuels of their own process (SCA), and light-weight materials (SSAB).The study finds some evidence that drivers of eco-innovation range from businessopportunities to costs and legislation. Companies in the construction and consultancy/service groups, for instance, see environmental issues as a business opportunity. Generally,companies note the importance of legislation such as REACH, and consumerdemands as drivers of eco-innovation. However other companies in our sample rarelymention drivers. The study also shows that annual reports are sufficient for gatheringgeneral information on product development and production processes, while informationregarding R&D is not always presented and needs to be supplemented withquestionnaires and interviews. The project provides a starting point for further researchon eco-innovation regarding the value chain, the consumers and the role of networks.
|
|
| 5. |
- Grauers, Anders, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Why electromobility and what is it?
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Systems Perspectives on Electromobility 2013. - 9789198097313 ; , s. 10-21
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this chapter we examine the notion of electromobility and aim to provide aworking definition of the term that underpins the analyses presented in the rest ofthis e-book. We also describe electromobility in technological terms by presentingvarious technological configurations of electric vehicles, charging infrastructureand energy supply. We then proceed to examine why electromobility is currentlysupported as a favourable means to transform road transport by discussing driversand barriers of change in the automotive industry. Whilst electromobility representsa significant technical challenge, it also requires complex social changes.By arguing from different perspectives we hope to illustrate that electromobility isbest understood by considering a range of systemic perspectives found in this andlater chapters of this e-book.
|
|
| 6. |
- Gremyr, Ida, 1975, et al.
(författare)
-
A Framework for Developing and Assessing Eco-innovations
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Greening of Industry Networks Studies. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 2543-0254 .- 2543-0246. ; 2, s. 55-79
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This chapter presents a framework entitled “ECORE,” which aims to assist in developing and assessing radical eco-innovations. Our proposed framework seeks to address theoretical gaps and unresolved problems from three research fields – eco-innovation, quality management, and life cycle assessment. ECORE synthesizes ideas and concepts from these three fields into a set of key principles and practices that can further integrate sustainability into business practices. These key principles are based on the idea that stakeholder interactions should form the basis of eco-innovation, that a life cycle perspective should be adopted in the design stage of eco-innovation, and that stakeholder needs must be translated into eco-innovation characteristics throughout the design process. We illustrate our framework with a hypothetical example that focuses on reducing the environmental impacts of carbonated beverage consumption. The chapter concludes by presenting the views of practitioners that were invited to provide feedback on our proposals.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Holmberg, Per-Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Kombinerad mobilitet uppskalning i Sverige (KOMPIS) : Projektrapport
- 2021
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Kombinerad mobilitet, Mobilitet som tjänst, Mobility as a Service (MaaS), integrerade mobilitetstjänster. Företeelsen har många namn, och många forskare, entreprenörer, innovatörer och konsulter som ägnat mycket tid åt den utifrån olika perspektiv. En del hävdar att det finns fler som studerar kombinerad mobilitet än faktiska användare. Det är dock en av de frågor vi inte adresserat i KOMPIS – alltså hur många som studerar kombinerad mobilitet. Flera av oss som varit delaktiga i projektet KOMPIS, allt från forskare, finansiärer och entreprenörer – har varit med på denna resa sedan långt före begreppet MaaS stadfästes i Finland . I Sverige startade den resan egentligen med ett förstudieprojekt 2011 som finansierades av Västra Götalandsregionen och leddes av Hans Arby och Olle Boethius - Den flexible trafikanten. En idé om en affärsmodell där det skulle gå att erbjuda mobilitet i delar, fast i ett paket; att det kanske skulle kunna finnas en tredje part vars affärsidé var att kombinera alla dessa delar till något bättre, och mer anpassat till resenärers verkliga behov.I förstudien deltog förutom forskare och entreprenörer även kollektivtrafiken, hyrbils- och bilpoolsföretagen taxi och många fler. Slutsatsen var ganska enhällig: “Ja det skulle nog behövas en sådan konsoliderande tjänst, men det är inte vi som ska ta den rollen”.Under förstudieprojektet till GoSmart som drevs av Lindholmen Science Park fick jag möjlighet att tillsammans med MariAnne Karlsson på Chalmers att utarbeta ett förslag till hur man faktiskt tillsammans med Hans och Olle skulle kunna pröva idén som de hade mejslat fram i förstudien. Det ledde till, påstår vi, det först riktiga försöket i världen att bygga och testa en KM-tjänst. Jo, jag vet – många kommer vända sig mot det påståendet och visa att det visst testats kombinerade mobilitetstjänster innan – men ingen hade på riktigt prövat affärsmodellen för kombinerad mobilitet före GoSmart – men det är mindre viktigt. Projektet, som måste sägas var lyckat, visade ändå att denna typ av tjänst var uppskattad av de som testade – och förmodligen behövde en sådan tjänst. Men hur många är de egentligen? Hur stor är potentialen?Samtidigt, i en annan ände av innovationssystemet, hade Viktoriainstitutet (numera en del av RISE) tillsammans med Samtrafiken och Chalmers precis genomfört innovationstävlingen Travelhack inom projektet Innovation för Hållbart Vardagsresande. Förutom tanken att få hela kollektivtrafiken att öppna upp sin data också erbjuda den på något man kallade Trafiklab, till tredjepartsutvecklare. En del i denna plan var också att stimulera tredjepartsutveckling med innovationstävlingar baserat på kollektivtrafikdata – Travelhack. En av pristagarna hade tagit fram en app där man kunde söka efter och beställa biljetter för olika kollektivtrafikaktörer i en och samma app. De hade under prisutdelningskvällen en lång diskussion, som jag fick lyssna på, med Samtrafikens VD och en av SL’s representanter, om varför man inte kunde få tillgång till kollektivtrafikens biljetter som API – detta var 2013.Västtrafik, som var en av parterna i GOSMART började i detta projekt sin resa kring kombinerad mobilitet; att utforska behovet och på vilket sätt de bör och kan engagera sig. Denna resa är väl beskriven i flera forskningsartiklar av KOMPIS egen bibliotekarie, Göran Smith, vilka tillsammans illustrerar hur komplicerad frågan faktiskt är .2015, på ITS World Congress i Bordeaux fullkomligt exploderade begreppet Mobility as a Service. Vi som arbetat med forskningsfrågan, och knappt hade hunnit sätta ett namn på det, blev tagna på sängen. Från att behöva lägga mycket tid på att beskriva fenomenet, roller och hitta intressenter, var kombinerad mobilitet plötsligt på allas läppar – mycket beroende på att Finland under sin ordförandeperiod valde att lyfta fram kombinerad mobilitet som en av landets stora, framtida exporttjänster. Finlands jättemonter i Bordeaux var målad med just den affärsmodell som föreslagits av Hans och Olle i förstudien 2011. ERTICO bildade MaaS Alliance och fordonsindustrin började på allvar prata om mobilitetstjänster som något även de skulle erbjuda i framtiden.Finlands roll i att lyfta fram kombinerad mobilitet skall inte underskattas. Sverige och Finland hade samarbetat kring frågan under flera år. När drivkraften för oss i Sverige var ett hållbart transportsystem, så var det i vårt grannland i öster snarare en vision av att hitta ett nytt NOKIA och ett nytt GSM som var drivkraften. Målsättning med företag, export och arbetstillfällen var tydligare där än i Sverige och förmodligen ett av skälen till att Finland, ända upp på ministernivå, drev frågan så hårt.Vi i Sverige fick också en insikt i hur Finland hade nått så långt på så kort tid. ITS Finland samlade tidigt intressenter från näringsliv och offentlig sektor i en informell sammanslutning av aktörer som ’ville kombinerad mobilitet’. Deras så kallade ’MaaS-öl’ på en särskild restaurang i Helsingfors har beskrivits för mig av många som en av de viktigare anledningarna till att kombinerad mobilitet tog fart i Finland. En möjlighet att träffas över organisationsgränser och skapa nya idéer under otvungna förhållanden. En idé som vi tog med oss in i KOMPIS och blev grunden till Kompis MeetUps.Flertalet förstudier, konsultrapporter och konferenser senare – 2016, tog regeringens samverkansgrupp för Nästa Generations Resor och Transporter, på initiativ av Ulrika Bokeberg på Västra Götalandsregionen, beslut om att en färdplan för kombinerad mobilitet skulle tas fram för Sverige. Uppdraget gick till Drive Sweden och Anna Pernestål. Anna samlade en kärngrupp med representanter från Kungliga tekniska högskolan, KTH (Anna Kramers), Västra Götalandsregionen (Göran Smith), Samtrafiken (Adam Laurell) och RISE (som jag fick äran att representera) vilken utvecklade och förankrade den första versionen av Färdplanen för Kombinerad mobilitet i Sverige. 2017 fick vi av samma grupp en förfrågan att starta ett samverkansprojekt för att stötta realiserandet av färdplanen. Ett uppdrag som jag, tillsammans med Anna och på senare tid, Steven Sarasini, med stor respekt och entusiasm tog på oss att leda. Detta projekt blev Kombinerad Mobilitet - imPlementering I Sverige (KOMPIS).
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Holmberg, Per-Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Mobility as a Service - MaaS : Describing the framework
- 2016
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Mobility as a Service is a quite novel term and has not a commonly agreed definition yet. In this report we use the term Combined mobility services to describe a service offering, including public transport in combination with other transport modes such as taxi, car-sharing, bike-sharing etc.The drivers for the change in how we will consume mobility are multiple, but the report discusses Societal trends such as Urbanisation ad climate change and sharing economy, Economical trends such as excess capacity and new payment systems together with technological development as enabler for the transition. New mobility services are constantly entering the market, and one of the most well-known is UBER. The limousine brokering service that, based on a technological platform have expanded around the world and also in terms of the service offering, now offering services covering the taxi-segment and now starting to offer services very close to public transport.The auto-makers are starting to grasp a possible different future, and are launching mobility services such as car-pool, free-floating car-pools and simplified car-owning schemes.Especially in the Nordic countries, the concept of MaaS is taking of, with services like Ubigo, which was piloted in Goteborg during 2014 and MaaS.fi, a Finnish MaaS-service to be started in 2016 in Finland with the goal of a global expansion. Telecom actors like Ericsson and Sonera are also active in this area. In Sweden, the public transport sector is analysing which role they should take in the MaaS-actor-ecosystem, and in Västra Götaland, a pre-commercial procurement of combined mobility services is scheduled for 2016. On a European level, the MaaS-alliance, supported by ERTICO[1], was formed during 2015 with the aim to stimulate the implementation of MaaS in Europe. EU also supports the concept by issuing a specific topic for MaaS in the 2016 H2020 mobility call.There are also a series of research-project ongoing, especially in Sweden and Finland, studying MaaS from a institutional, business and technical perspective. However, few studies are currently researching the sustainability effects of MaaS, even though initial studies indicates that MaaS, if designed bad, also can have negative environmental effects. Mobility as a Service can be designed in different ways and with different types of actors as the lead. If the public transport should be the coordinator of MaaS or a facilitating collaborator is discussed in the report. The report argues that public transport can provide a better stability of such a service (compared to a commercial MaaS operator), but also that public transport do not have the same flexibility in service offering as an external actor, and that they may attract more public transport users than car-owners to the service, in which case the environmental effects can be negative. The report also argues that if MaaS-service is subsidized (other than the services provided by PT), it can also lead to negative rebound effects, and if it is NOT subsidized, there are less reasons why public transport should organise the MaaS-service.UITP, the international organisation for public transport, have an active process for combined mobility services, CMS,(as MaaS is named in the PT sector) and promotes PT to take an active or even leading role in the establishment of this. In the report, some models are introduced for describing different types of mobility services emerging, and the most important distinction of what the report describes as MaaS, is that a Combined Mobility Service provides a subscription of some kind and possibly also a re-packaging of included services, while integrated public transport mainly gives the user the possibility to plan, book, and pay for the whole journey with several transport modes in one service (app). CMS is therefore both a business model and a technical platform which draws its profitability on the reduction of privately owned cars, whilst integrated public transport represents mainly a technical integration which mainly simplifies the shift between modes for a single trip. Both these versions are often referred as MaaS-services. The eco-system of MaaS, and different actor roles are introduced in the report, showing that there are business opportunities for Maas-operators, platform providers, mobility service providers as well as for public transport if the MaaS-service is designed in a right way. Several institutional barriers are identified in the report, which if addressed, could facilitate a faster introduction of MaaS. The Swedish transport subsidy system is discussed, where subsidizing of cars is allowed, but not the subsidizing of mobility services. The role of public transport and the importance of PT (brand) facing the customer, or if a neutral actor is better in attracting private car-owners to exchange the car for mobility services. The technical matureness of public transport is addressed, while a digitized business process (buying, paying and distributing electronic tickets) is a prerequisite for a commercial MaaS-operator to be able to include public transport in the service offering. Technically, Swedish public transport has a very good position through the work done at X2AB/Samtrafiken, but the policy issues around the possibility for third-party actors to use this, is not yet addressed, especially not on a national level.Finally several areas are identified where more research is needed to fully understand and take advantage of the possibilities with MaaS. The foremost area, where few initiatives have been identified, is the sustainability effects of MaaS. If wrongly designed, MaaS can give environmental effects of the service are negative (e.g making PT users to use more car-pools), and positive effects are gained if citizens are exchanging the owning of a car with subscription of mobility services.Other identified research areas are social factors like accessibility are effected by less car-ownership and the introduction of MaaS, how MaaS can contribute to resource efficiency, how MaaS can be supported by policy integration and other institutional issues. [1] European network for ITS deployment. www.ertico.com
|
|
