1、THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0Changing gear in the journey toward sustainable mobility2024CONTENTFOREWORD 4EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 61.EXAMINATION OF CURRENT STATE OF MOBILITY SYSTEMS 102.DEEP DIVES ON MOBILITY SOLUTIONS 182.1 Climate Change Mitigation Policies in Transport 182.2 The City 0f Proximity Concept

2、 242.3 Dimensioning Public Transport 282.4 New Mobility Services:Micromobility,Shared&On-demand 312.5 Mobility as a Service 352.6 Autonomous Mobility 422.7 Mobility Demand Management 472.8 The Mobility Funding Equation 533.CONCLUSIONS&RECOMMENDATIONS 602ARTHUR D.LITTLEPOLISFRANCOIS-JOSEPH VAN AUDENH

3、OVEManaging Partner,Head of Travel&Transportation Practice,BrusselsARSNE RUHLMANNManager,Travel&Transportation Practice,ParisDR.PHILIPP SEIDELPrincipal,Automotive,Travel&Transportation,Sustainability Practices,MunichALEXANDER HENSLERManager,Travel&Transportation Practice,FrankfurtDR.SABINE REIMPrinc

4、ipal,Travel&Transportation Practice,BostonRICK EAGARPartner Emeritus,Innovation Practice,LondonACHRAF JOUMAAPartner,Travel&Transportation Practice,RiyadhMICKAL TAUVELPartner,Head of Mobility Segment,ParisVADIM PANARINPrincipal,CIS markets,Brussels&CIS countriesMICHAEL ZINTELManaging Partner,Travel&T

5、ransportation Practice,FrankfurtJEROME CARLIERPrincipal,Travel&Transportation Practice,BrusselsHANS ARBYSenior Advisor,Arthur D.Little;Senior Researcher,RISE and City of GothenburgMARCUS BEARDPartner,Travel&Transportation and Performance Practices,CambridgeDANIEL CHOWPrincipal,Travel&Transportation

6、Practice,Singapore AUTHORSKAREN VANCLUYSENSecretary GeneralIVO CRDirector,Policy and ProjectsPEDRO GOMESCluster Lead,Clean Vehicles&Air QualityMELINA ZAROUKACluster Lead,AccessANDRIA LOPEZ AZEVEDOCluster Lead,Active Travel&HealthPEDRO HOMEM DE GOUVEASenior Policy Advisor,Safety&Security;Cluster Lead

7、,Governance&IntegrationLAURA BABOCluster Lead,Traffic EfficiencyMARKO STANECProject CoordinatorALONSO DAVILA GRAFProject Manager3FORE WORDWe live in uncertain and unpredictable times,yet looking into the future remains a key component of leadership.What trends and challenges are affecting the evolut

8、ion of our mobility systems?What new solutions should we be aware of,and which ones are actually able to deliver on their promises?How can public and private sector initiatives come together and mutually reinforce each other?What will change the game in the years to come?This Report is the fifth in

9、a series of comprehensive reports on the future of mobility since Arthur D.Little(ADL)originally set up its Future of Mobility Lab in 2010.It aims to shed light on what key stakeholders transport authorities at local,regional,and national levels;public and private mobility services providers;transpo

10、rt sector suppliers;and investors should do to shift gear and accelerate the transition toward more sustainable,resilient,safe,inclusive,efficient,and human-centric mobility systems(hereafter referred to as“virtuous mobility systems”).The primary audience for this study includes mobility leaders and

11、 decision makers from around the globe,including political decision makers,C-level executives,and management,as well as policy advisors.Given the breadth of our target audience,it is anticipated that some content may be familiar to certain readers while serving as new information to others.This dive

12、rsity of knowledge is intentional,as the study aims to provide a holistic view of the critical components necessary for a virtuous mobility future.It also seeks to uncover common blind spots,encouraging a broader perspective that transcends familiar viewpoints.4REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0For

13、this edition,we joined forces with POLIS,Europes leading network of local and regional authorities advancing sustainable mobility through transport innovation.Over the past months,we talked to many global private and public sector stakeholders,engaged with POLIS members in focus groups,launched a wo

14、rldwide survey to collect insights from leaders in the mobility world,drew conclusions,and formulated recommendations.The study adopts a 360-degree perspective on mobility matters,from local to supra-regional levels.After taking stock of current mobility performance and trends,we dive more deeply in

15、to eight solutions currently at the forefront,aiming to demystify and critically evaluate them.We also reflect on their likely overall impact if they were collectively implemented and identify 10 game changers that we believe are critical for mobility systems players to shift gear and accelerate pro

16、gress.We hope you enjoy reading the Report and that it will be informative for your further mobility endeavors.Sincerely,Francois-Joseph Van Audenhove Karen Vancluysen Managing Partner,Secretary General Head of Travel&Transportation POLIS Arthur D.Little ARTHUR D.LITTLE5E XECUTIVE SUMMARYProgress to

17、ward the goal of more sustainable,resilient,safe,inclusive,efficient,and human-centric mobility systems in our cities has been slower than was expected a decade ago.While there has been some progress in the growth of public transport(PT)and active mobility(walking and cycling)and new mobility device

18、s and shared mobility services have been introduced over the last 15 years the growth of these modes has been less than 10%globally,and individual cars still represent 70%of passenger-km(pax-km)in urban areas and 90%in rural areas.On a worldwide basis,transport still accounts for around 25%-40%of na

19、tional carbon dioxide(CO2)emissions,the only sector with a steady increase since 1990.On a more optimistic note,ADLs latest“Future of Automotive Mobility”global end-user study1 found that between 42%and 72%of inhabitants in large cities of more than 250,000 persons would“perhaps”be willing to give u

20、p at least one of their cars if sufficient mobility alternatives were made available to them.Of course,there is often a significant gap between declared intention and actually taking action.1 Parkin,Richard,and Phillip Seidel.“Future of Automotive Mobility,2024.”Arthur D.Little,forthcoming 2024(base

21、d on survey conducted in Q4 2023).Over the last decades,the convergence of global trends has led to the development of new mobility services and business models with the promise of improving our mobility systems.These include personal mobility devices(e.g.,e-scooters and other micromobility devices)

22、,shared mobility models,and autonomous mobility,as well as active mobility and the need for more integrated mobility services and information.To explore the impact of these trends,the challenges hindering their progress,and recommendations for overcoming them,the study undertook eight deep dives int

23、o promising solutions,including concepts,policies,and services(see Figure A).Beginning with mobility visions and policies,there are still difficulties in adopting long-term,adequately integrated policies to secure real progress on climate change mitigation and the move toward net zero is still chall

24、enging.Mitigating climate changes impact requires a more joined-up policy approach,whereby electrification is complemented by a modal shift away from the private car to more sustainable modes as well as by transport demand reduction.Figure A.Eight solutions reviewed as part of studySource:Arthur D.L

25、ittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 7.Eight solutions reviewed as part of studySmart mobility(technology as enabler)Mobility fundingMobility supplyMobility demandmanagementMobility vision&policies&system-level governanceNew mobility(micro,shared&on-demand)“City of proximity”concept Dimensioning of mas

26、s transitMobility funding equationClimate change mitigation policiesMobility demand management measuresMaaS Autonomous mobility6REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0Reshaping mobility behaviors also requires reshaping public spaces away from a century of car-centric transport policies and urban plannin

27、g.Overall,the concept of the“city of proximity”has great potential to contribute to sustainable mobility.Going forward,city authorities should pursue efforts to deploy the concept but at a larger scale,with possible adaptations to cater to how digitalization has changed citizens needs for proximity,

28、and with a stronger emphasis on measuring systemic impacts.Looking at mobility supply,authorities should become smarter with transport mode allocation through the development of multimodal transport masterplans that prioritize transport services according to their performance and affordability,inclu

29、ding supporting the development of mass transit in its key role as the“backbone”of sustainable mobility as well as encouraging complementarity with other sustainable modes where these can be more efficient,convenient,and equitable.Authorities need to cultivate new mobility as part of the menu and fo

30、ster partnerships with new mobility service providers(MSPs),rather than merely seek to regulate them.This also means that new MSPs need to take a greater interest in improving the ecosystem to maximize success and improve their economic and environmental viability.In terms of smart mobility,mobility

31、 as a service(MaaS)needs to offer more added value functionalities beyond merely serving as an“umbrella”app for existing services.In the long run,we expect the benefits of autonomous mobility are not realized through individual automated vehicles,but rather through connected and mostly shared vehicl

32、es in smart traffic systems.In the meantime,the focus should be more on feasible use cases and applications,such as automated bus rapid transit(BRT)systems and automated bus driving in depots,rather than going directly to the moonshot of autonomous vehicles(AVs)in mixed traffic.Mobility demand manag

33、ement(MDM)is crucial to enabling modal shift away from private cars.We identified some“sweet spots”among many possible demand management measures,including urban vehicle access regulations,specific infrastructure initiatives like intermodal mobility hubs,personal travel management measures such as s

34、mart parking solutions and MaaS apps,and marketing strategies that promote sustainable mobility.THE SOLUTIONS NECESSARY FOR A TRANSFORMATIVE SHIFT ARE ALREADY WITHIN OUR GRASPFinally,all measures mentioned above need significant additional mobility financing.Closing the funding gap will require more

35、 effective revenue management(e.g.,through fare policies and subscription models),improving the attractiveness of public transport,and diversifying to secure new funding sources.On the expenditure side,transport authorities will need to better maximize the cost-effectiveness of capital investments a

36、nd improve operational efficiency.Our analysis leads us to conclude that,with comprehensive implementation,appropriate funding,and robust governance at the system level,the high-impact solutions we have reviewed could potentially double the global share of sustainable mobility from approximately 30%

37、to 60%of pax-km within the next decade.However,none of the individual solutions has an impact of more than around 15%,so there are no shortcuts.The solutions necessary for a transformative shift toward a more virtuous mobility future are already within our grasp.However,while the potential for trans

38、formation is evident,the real challenge lies in putting them into action.We identified 10 game changers that we believe are critical for mobility systems players to accelerate the transition(see Table 1).Making change happen will demand political and organizational capacity as well as courage to cha

39、nge direction and determination to keep a steady course.Increased collaboration among public and private stakeholders within the extended mobility ecosystem is key.Transport authorities in cities and regions,in particular,play a crucial role in accelerating the shift.ARTHUR D.LITTLE7Table 1.Game cha

40、ngers for more virtuous mobilitySource:Arthur D.LittleTable 1.Game changers for more virtuous mobility10 GAME CHANGERS Mobility vision&policies1Combine“framing”and“enabling”measures for system-level mobility managementLocal and regional authorities need to move beyond their foundational framing acti

41、vities,such as putting in place a forward-looking mobility vision and suitable regulatory frameworks and policies,toward enabling activities(i.e.,steering and orchestrating roadmaps to facilitate the implementation of solutions that necessitate a multi-stakeholder approach to foster acceleration tow

42、ard achieving system-level sustainable policy objectives)2Adopt a more joined-up set of policies to secure progress on climate change mitigation policies“toward net zero”Accelerate implementation of electrification strategyComplement it with other net zero levers:modal shift and transport demand red

43、uction to ensure that the overall impacts are maximized(“modal transition”)and not limited to climate benefits alone3Reshape public spaces away from a century of car-centric transport policiesProgressively implement the“city of proximity”concept with larger scope,differentiated functions and a stron

44、ger emphasis on measuring systemic impactsMobility supply4Develop a multimodal transport masterplan to better allocate transport modes,considering performance and affordability;invest in improved infrastructure for public transport,active and shared mobilityFocus on developing public transport as th

45、e backbone of sustainable mobility whenever traffic density justifies investments,including further development of existing mobility hubs and creation of new onesDevelop and encourage active mobility(walking,cycling)and micromobility services for trips under 5 km in urban,suburban and rural areasEnc

46、ourage shared and on-demand motorized mobility(car or motorbike sharing,taxis and ride hailing)for occasional longer-distance travel and in lower-density areas where mass transit investment is not the most energy-and economically efficient solution5Develop partnerships between authorities and new MS

47、Ps Local and regional authorities need to cultivate new mobility as part of the menu of sustainable mobility services and foster collaboration rather than merely seek to regulate itNew MSPs need to look positively toward the“ecosystem play”together with transport authorities to maximize success and

48、ensure their economic and environmental viability 8REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLE10 GAME CHANGERS Smart mobility6Embrace innovation and technology to better address user needs and operational/system requirementsLocal and regional authorities need to steer and orchestrate roadmaps

49、to enable implementation of solutions that require a multi-stakeholder approach,ensuring user-and policy-led deployment of technology rather than technology for its own sake7Frame and enable a virtuous mobility system“powered by MaaS”and anticipate AV developmentLocal and regional authorities need t

50、o adopt a comprehensive approach to frame and enable a virtuous mobility system“powered by MaaS”and anticipate future development of autonomous technology:Taking ownership of overall roadmap for MaaS/AVs,adopting a comprehensive system-level approachActively financing and owning certain components,s

51、uch as overarching integration layers,system-level data management and MSPs regulation enforcementGetting ready for the future necessity of a“control tower”role in urban centers,which will be essential for real-time management of traffic flows and transportation assetsMaaS operators need to adapt th

52、eir offerings to provide clearer value propositions that deliver on its real promiseLocal and regional authorities,public transport operators and commercial MSPs must share information and services and work together for the greater good in an evolving open mobility ecosystemMobility demand managemen

53、t8Bring about large-scale mobility behavior change through the right combination of demand management measuresDevelop a comprehensive MDM strategy,considering a range of levers focusing on sweet spot measures with high impact and relatively low costsConduct effective marketing campaigns for virtuous

54、 mobility systems(mass transit,active and new mobility)with the right narratives and nudging tacticsLeverage corporates to foster sustainable mobility for their employeesMobility funding9Optimize effectiveness and efficiency of spending:value for money,money for resultPrioritize funding for the most

55、 efficient transport modes based on their usage rates and cost-effectivenessExplore(partial)public funding of new mobility in areas where they enhance the overall mobility system and address public needs but may not be commercially viableCommit to continuous improvement in management of PT operation

56、s(whether in-house or tendered)to identify new levers to optimize cost per passenger transported 10Be proactive in exploring diversification of funding sources from both users and taxpayers Local and regional authorities should coordinate policies for car regulation and development of public transpo

57、rt to optimize modal shift,ensuring social equity and optimized financing by internalizing external costs and capturing the value of public investmentExplore existing public sector loans at supranational levelContemplate financial partnerships with investors to finance long-term developmentPublic tr

58、ansport operators need to explore smart revenue management 91.E X AMINATION OF CURRENT STATE OF MOBILIT Y SYSTEMS1.1 SETTING THE SCENEWhen we first set up the Future of Mobility Lab in 2010,there was much optimism that by now we would have moved a long way toward the goal of more sustainable,resilie

59、nt,safe,efficient,and human-centric mobility systems in our cities and regions.Technological developments particularly in digitalization,connectivity,and automation promised the ability to deliver tailored,diverse,and convenient mobility solutions that would be attractive enough to prompt a major sh

60、ift away from private cars as the default mode.Fourteen years on,things havent happened the way many expected,though there has been some progress.In todays city centers,we have seen growth in public transport,active mobility(walking and cycling),and“new mobility”solutions,including shared and owned

61、micromobility devices(e-bikes and e-scooters),car sharing,ride hailing,and electric-powered personal mobility devices(PMDs).However,the bigger picture is less rosy.If we consider mass transit,walking/cycling,and shared mobility modes as collectively“sustainable,”over the 15 years leading up to 2023,

62、the share of these modes(in terms of trips)has only grown from 57%to around 65%globally,while the remaining 35%of trips are still made by private car.And if we look at pax-km instead of trips,we see that private cars still represent about 70%in urban areas and 90%in rural areas(see Figure 1),with st

63、rong discrepancies between Europe and Southeast Asia that have a stronger share of PT in the modal split on one hand,and North America and the Middle East where private cars is even more dominant.Figure 1.Evolution of modal split(#trips)and%pax-kmNote:New mobility includes shared and micromobility(c

64、ar sharing,bike sharing,e-scooter sharing,etc.);individual motorized transport includes taxi and ride-hailing;private mobility devices are not accounted forSource:Arthur D.LittleNote:New mobility includes shared and micromobility(car sharing,bike sharing,e-scooter sharing,etc.);individual motorized

65、transport includes taxi and ride-hailing;private mobility devices are not accounted forSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 1.Evolution of modal split(#trips)and%pax-kmModal split evolution,#of tripsCities/urban areas,globalModal split,pax-kmCities/urban&rural areas,global2007201220162019Q3 20222023Individu

66、al motorized transportMass transit(public transit rail)Walking,cyclingNew mobility65%“sustainable mobility system”Cities/urban areas(2023)Rural areas(2023)43%29%28%39%31%28%2%35%32%30%3%68%26%4%2%91%4%3%2%1 0REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEIf we look at commuting to work and school,

67、it is clear that the private car is still hugely dominant.Our latest“Future of Mobility”survey of more than 16,200 respondents globally2 confirms the trend:more than 70%of citizens only use private cars for their daily commute,with only 14%never using a car(see Figure 2).Figure 2 also shows that the

68、 share of respondents who exclusively use other modes is very small,with 6%using local public transport,4%using active modes,1%using taxis,2%using car shares,and 10%selecting“other.”Moreover,the proportion of commuters who typically use modes of transportation other than private cars(including users

69、 of multiple mobility modes)ranges between 7%(for car sharing)and 17%(for local public transport).If we look at how this varies between global regions(see Figure 3),there is even more individual car usage in the US(78%),but somewhat less in China(61%).China also has more use of local public transpor

70、t,with 27%using public transport together with at least one other mode.Over the last three to five years,globally the number of individual car trips increased by 34%according to our survey,propelled especially by fast-growing economies(e.g.,India,Vietnam,Thailand,and Mexico).2“Future of Mobility Wor

71、ldwide Survey(Q4 2023).”Arthur D.Little,forthcoming,2024.In the meantime,the global use of public transport showed a small decrease of a few percentage points.The use of active modes was stable globally,although it showed an increase of more than 10%in Europe.The lack of progress in terms of modal s

72、hift toward sustainable transport modes has negative impacts on transport:-On a worldwide basis,transport still accounts for about 25%-40%of national CO2 emissions,the only sector with a steady increase since 1990,according to the International Energy Agency(IEA).-According to the International Tran

73、sport Forum,transport still leads to a large number of casualties in cities:from 0.8 fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants in Stockholm to 7.4 in Bologna and 15 in New York City,with little to no change over past years.-Despite less post-COVID traffic congestion,driven by increased working from home,le

74、vels have been growing again since 2023,and the average commuting time to work has not improved.In Europe,average time spent in traffic per year has risen from around 65 hours in 2019 to 90 hours in 2022,a rise of nearly 40%.In other words,at best we can talk of an evolution toward more sustainable

75、mobility but certainly not a revolution.Figure 2.Declared mode usage for daily commuting(work and school)Note:(1)n=16,107;by design,the study includes 11%of respondents without a drivers license;(2)includes plane,long-distance bus,rail,car rental,etc.Source:Arthur D.LittleNote:(1)n=16,107;by design,

76、the study includes 11%of respondents without a drivers license;(2)includes plane,long-distance bus,rail,car rental,etc.Source:Arthur D.LittleFigure 2.Declared mode usage for daily commuting(work and school)Question from Future of Mobility survey,20231Please indicate which mode(s)of transportation yo

77、u typically use for trips to and from home and work/school?71%6%4%10%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%15%11%6%8%1%5%2%9%86%17%10%9%7%19%Exclusive mobility optionUser of multiple mobility modes14%83%Private carLocal public transport Active modesTaxiCar shareOther2Only 14%of respondents never commute

78、by carA car is only commuting option for 71%4%exclusively use active modes for daily mobility17%are using more than 1 mode of transportation1 11.2 THE EVOLUTION OF MOBILITY PATTERNSWhile many aspects of mobility evolution can be reasonably seen as disappointing,there are positive indicators.Regardin

79、g individual car usage,a significant proportion of citizens would consider foregoing at least one private car if sufficient mobility alternatives were available.Figure 4 shows that between 27%and 50%of inhabitants in large cities of more than 250,000 would be willing to give up at least one car base

80、d on new mobility and PT services.A further 13%-31%would“perhaps”give them up.This is a high number,although clearly there is a large gap between declaring an intention and taking action.The geographical variation is also noteworthy:Asian and Middle East countries have a large share of citizens that

81、 may consider de-motorizing(e.g.,72%in China and 70%in Middle East),and this share is growing in Asia.In Europe,it accounts for about 63%and less than 50%in the US and Japan.One worrying trend is that willingness showed a decline between 2020 and 2023 in Europe and the US.There could be multiple exp

82、lanations,but it can reflect a lack of confidence on the ability of mobility system to propose alternative services.It may also reveal that some people in developed economies who were willing to give up their secondary vehicle have already done so and are not ready to abandon the primary one.Figure

83、3.Declared mode usage for daily commuting(by geography)Source:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 3.Declared mode usage for daily commuting(by geography)Use of public transportUse of bicycle&walkingUse of private carIncreasedReduced49%27%27%47%61%-15%-24%-25%-11%-12%Global EuropeUSChinaMiddl

84、e East+34%+3%+2%+36%+49%21%18%8%21%23%-28%-24%-22%-25%-31%Global EuropeUSChinaMiddle East-7%-6%-14%-4%-8%24%28%14%23%25%-26%-17%-22%-24%-28%Global EuropeUSChinaMiddle East-2%11%-8%-1%-3%Question from Future of Mobility survey,2023How has your average number of trips per mode evolved over the last 3-

85、5 years?Figure 4.Willingness of citizens to forego(one of)their individual car(s)Note:Values weighted by population of markets includedSource:Arthur D.LittleNote:Values weighted by population of markets includedSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 4.Willingness of citizens to forego(one of)their individual

86、car(s)Given the new mobility and public transport services that are available today,would you consider giving up your own car?applicable to inhabitants of cities with 250k inhabitantsYes,for all cars in householdYes,but only for secondary carPerhapsNoQuestion from Future of Mobility survey,2023Given

87、 the new mobility and public transport services available today,would you consider giving up your own car?(applicable to inhabitants of cities with 250K inhabitants)29%17%22%32%37%21%20%22%41%11%17%31%50%13%14%23%37%36%16%11%28%31%14%26%36%37%14%12%57%16%11%16%20202023202020232020202320202023Would c

88、onsider giving up own carWould not give up own car31%20%25%25%2023EuropeUSChinaJapanMiddle East1 2REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEThe mobility providers themselves have an interesting perception.In a 2024 survey of 211 mobility leaders3(85%European)conducted by the BVA Family,ADL,an

89、d POLIS,4 while 74%rated recent progress toward sustainable mobility as at least“fairly satisfactory,”the majority of them recognize the inability of those actions to deliver a sustainable modal shift,with 42%judging the impact on modal shift to be“poor”or“very poor”and only 4%rating the dynamics of

90、 the modal shift as“strong.”On the positive side,looking forward,73%expected modal shift to increase either“moderately”or“strongly”in the next three years,reflecting some optimism within the industry.So,while there is little satisfaction with modal shift during past years,there is a widely shared be

91、lief within mobility CxOs that this will improve significantly in the coming years.1.3 TRENDS&DEVELOPMENTSWe have seen a confluence of global trends that have been reshaping mobility systems over the last decades.Global trends-Urbanization.Approximately 55%of the worlds population live in urban area

92、s,which is expected to further rise to 68%by 2050,5 in conjunction with growing urban-rural polarization.-Digitalization.Around two-thirds of the worlds population is now online,with over 50 countries having adoption rates above 90%.6-Individualization.Data ubiquity and digitalization of services ha

93、ve enabled increasing personalization of services,fueled even more by the advent of effective AI.-Sustainability.Sustainability imperatives are now at the heart of public policy and corporate strategy,with inclusiveness and social responsibility also becoming imperatives.Issues such as emissions,air

94、 quality,noise,quality of public space,and safety are increasingly critical.3 Mobility leaders and decision makers from around the globe,including political decision makers,C-level executives,and management as well as policy and technical advisors.4“Mobility Leaders 2024 Survey.”Arthur D.Little/BVA

95、Family/POLIS,forthcoming.5“World Cities Report 2022.”United Nations Human Settlements Programme(UN-Habitat),2022.6 Kemp,Simon.“Digital 2023:Global Overview Report.”Datareportal,26 January 2023.7 Majster,Michael,et al.“Artificial Intelligence in Mobility Beyond the Hype,Where the True Value Lies.”Art

96、hur D.Little,June 2021.Behavioral trends influencing demand-“Everything as a service.”Often referred to specifically in relation to IT service provision,the broader trend away from goods to services has been ongoing for perhaps two decades.Consumers increasingly expect on-demand services such as e-c

97、ommerce,which has a huge impact on urban logistics.-Shared economy.There is continued growth in the involvement of consumers in crowd-based,peer-to-peer,collaborative,and/or community-based economies,often enabled by digitalization.-Green and healthy.Consumer awareness of the need to behave in ways

98、perceived as less environmentally damaging and better for personal health and well-being has increased,at least in developed economies.-Changing lifestyles.Consumers,especially white-collar workers,are evolving their expectations around lifestyles and quality of life(e.g.,work/life balance and flexi

99、bility).Technology/market trends influencing supply-Connectivity.Connectivity advances have continued to enable mobility service provisions,especially in relation to connected vehicles,consumer interfaces,and overall mobility system management(i.e.,the mobility system“control tower”concept).-New sou

100、rces of energy.Electrification of mobility continues to meet sustainability requirements.-AI and autonomous vehicles.Now and in the future,AI has significant potential to help solve many critical transportation and mobility challenges,improving effectiveness and efficiency and optimizing mobility pe

101、rformances at a system level.7 We will also witness continuous progress toward the availability of AVs,albeit slower than initially announced by the main developers.-Speed.There have been several attempts to develop innovative solutions to reduce travel time,make more efficient use of time while tra

102、veling,or avoid traveling altogether.1 3The convergence of these trends has been reshaping mobility systems,leading to the development of new mobility services and business models that aim to improve the sustainability,resilience,safety,efficiency,inclusiveness,and human-centricity of mobility syste

103、ms(see Figure 5).For example,the convergence of demand for“everything as a service”and the availability of rapidly improving connectivity has driven the growth of personalized mobility services,such as on-demand mobility(ride-haling,ride-pooling)and MaaS.The willingness of consumers to engage in the

104、 shared economy has enabled shared mobility models,such as car sharing or carpooling,and is expected to also enable,later on,autonomous shuttles and robotaxis.Demand for green and healthy mobility along with the availability of new energy sources creates opportunities for active mobility devices as

105、well as micromobility(e.g.,bicycle,e-scooters,e-bikes,and other micromobility sharing).Finally,the combined availability of several of those solutions fuels the need for more integrated mobility services and information.To summarize,today we see a mobility picture characterized by the increasing ava

106、ilability of new mobility solutions with a range of strong drivers both on the supply and demand sides.Yet,in terms of adoption,the progress has been significantly slower than was expected a decade ago,and modal shift away from private cars has been very limited.We are a long way from the goal of vi

107、rtuous mobility system adoption.1.4 IMPACT&UNCERTAINTIES OF EXISTING SOLUTIONSThe lack of a“strong enough”business case is a key challenge for several of the new mobility solutions(micromobility,shared mobility,and integrated mobility).This is sometimes driven by a lack of market demand but also by

108、increased regulations,which may be well justified but also incur additional costs for operators.Often,reliance on 100%private funding means the solution is not viable.In fact,the aforementioned CxO mobility survey also confirmed the perceived slow pace of progress and the lower-than-expected impact

109、of micromobility and shared mobility on mobility system performance.However,the survey also showed increasing awareness of the need for change,triggered by both climate change and a growing realization of the need for the public sector and the private sector to work together.Needless to say,there ar

110、e no easy shortcuts to overcome these challenges.But what solutions have the potential to accelerate the move toward virtuous mobility systems,and from those,which ones can actually be delivered at scale?In the remainder of this Report,we further explore the barriers,challenges,and strategies to acc

111、elerate progress.Figure 5.How trends enable new mobility solutions and business modelsSource:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 5.How trends enable new mobility solutions and business modelsShared economyGreen&healthyChanging lifestyleConnectivityNew sources of energyAISpeedSUPPLYDEMANDEver

112、ything as a serviceShared autonomous mobilityGreen mobilityMicro-mobilityPersonalizedmobility(on-demand mobility,MaaS)Disruptive modes1 4REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLETHE CONVERGENCE OF GLOBAL TRENDS HAS LED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW SERVICES AND BUSINESS MODELS RESHAPING MOBILITY

113、 SYSTEMSLooking across the full range of mobility solutions(concepts,policies,and services),we see that some have proven high-impact and others less so.We also see that some solutions are subject to more uncertainty than others in terms of how and whether they will be able to deliver an impact if th

114、ey are implemented at scale(see Figure 6).The bottom-left quadrant cites specific solutions that are fairly certain to be available,but their impact is limited relative to others,such as PMDs,digital parking services,charging infrastructure availability,and the use of augmented reality to assist the

115、 mobility journey.Other solutions,which have relatively lower impact(often due to lack of scalability)and are more uncertain technically due to lack of maturity,include urban air mobility devices,metaverse applications,the hyperloop,and tunneling(bottom-right quadrant).Looking at higher-impact solut

116、ions with lower levels of uncertainty(top-left quadrant)we see a range of“no-brainer”solutions that are key for the future,such as public transport,climate change mitigation policies,intermodal mobility hubs,active mobility,autonomous metros,intelligent transport systems(ITS),and urban logistics sol

117、utions.The major challenge of dealing with the mobility funding equation also falls under this category.The top-right quadrant(high impact,high uncertainty)is especially important to gain a perspective on and better understand where we go from here.These solutions include demand and access managemen

118、t measures,city of proximity concepts,MaaS,new mobility(micromobility,shared mobility,and on-demand mobility services),and autonomous mobility.Figure 6.Mobility solutions(concepts,policies,and services)and likely impact on modal shiftSource:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 6.Mobility solu

119、tions(concepts,policies,and services)and likely impact on modal shiftUrban air mobilityMetaverseHyperloopTunneling Personal mobility devices(e-scooter&other personal micromobility devices)Digital parking servicesAugmented realityLevel of impactLevel of uncertaintyHighHighLowLow“NO-BRAINERS”UNCERTAIN

120、 HIGH-POTENTIAL SOLUTIONSLOW-TO-MEDIUM POTENTIALUNCERTAIN LOW-POTENTIAL SOLUTIONSPotential impact on virtuous mobility if implemented at scaleProbability of this impact to effectively occurRELATIVE ASSESSMENTPublic transport(incl.bus rapid transit)Climate change mitigation policiesMobility funding e

121、quationActive mobility(walking&cycling)Intermodal mobility hubsAutonomous metro Intelligent Transport SystemUrban freight logistics measures“City of proximity”/15-minute cityMaaS(Level 4)New mobility(micro,shared,on-demand)Autonomous mobilityMobility demand management measuresDeep dive of study1 51.

122、5 MOBILITY SOLUTIONS REVIEWED IN THIS STUDYAs part of the study,we undertook eight deep dives on promising solutions(concepts,policies,or services)to demystify and critically evaluate them,draw conclusions,and formulate recommendations.We have focused on three of the“no-brainer”solutions,namely publ

123、ic transport,for which there is still an open question regarding the extent of its future development,climate change mitigation policies,due to their importance and the difficult challenges of implementing them,and the mobility funding equation,which is a critical issue underpinning and enabling the

124、 ability to bring about change.The remainder of this Report focuses on the solutions in the top-right quadrant:city of proximity,new mobility(micro,shared,and on-demand),mobility as a service,autonomous mobility,and demand and access management measures.8 This framework was first introduced in:“The

125、Future of Mobility 2.0 Imperatives to Shape Extended Mobility Ecosystems of Tomorrow.”Arthur D.Little/International Association of Public Transport(UITP),January 2014.This gives us eight solutions,which have been mapped against the five-dimensional framework we traditionally use at ADL to describe t

126、he key building blocks of a virtuous mobility system8(see Figure 7).In this framework,the mobility system is guided by vision,policies,and governance.Supply and demand are both actively managed.Smart mobility acts as an enabler for the system,and adequate funding is made available through a range of

127、 mechanisms.Figure 7.Eight solutions reviewed as part of studySource:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 7.Eight solutions reviewed as part of studySmart mobility(technology as enabler)Mobility fundingMobility supplyMobility demandmanagementMobility vision&policies&system-level governanceNew

128、 mobility(micro,shared&on-demand)“City of proximity”concept Dimensioning of mass transitMobility funding equationClimate change mitigation policiesMobility demand management measuresMaaS Autonomous mobility1 6REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLE1 72.DEEP DIVES ON MOBILIT Y SOLUTIONS2.1

129、CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION POLICIES IN TRANSPORTContextAs part of the worlds essential infrastructure,mobility systems are deeply affected by climate change.Not only do mobility systems have to mitigate their impact by reducing greenhouse gas emissions,they also need to build resilience to adapt to n

130、ew climate futures involving more extreme weather events and rising sea levels.In this chapter,we focus mainly on mitigation,although reference is also made to adaptation approaches.Inland mobility(i.e.,excluding international road,air,and maritime mobility)accounts for more than a third of global C

131、O2 emissions(according to IEA),a share that has been stable over at least the past 25 years.9 Excluding international road,air,and maritime mobility.In more than 80%of inland mobility,CO2 emissions9 are related to road transport.However,the geographical pattern is highly variable.For example,in Euro

132、pe,transport emissions have stabilized in most countries,including Germany,Spain,Italy,and the UK,while they are still increasing in countries within and beyond Europe,such as France,Poland,the US,China,India,and many others.Several countries have set transport emission-reduction targets to achieve

133、net zero by 2030,supported by legal frameworks and financial resources,but achieving the required reduction is likely to be difficult or impossible in most cases.With regard to global emission-reduction targets,such as the achievement of net zero,transport is one of the only sectors where emissions

134、have not decreased since 1990 (see Figure 8).Figure 8.Public transport CO2 emissions for passengersSource:Arthur D.Little,IEASource:Arthur D.Little,IEAFigure 8.Public transport CO2 emissions for passengersNet zero scenario3.63.63.63.73.83.94.04.04.14.13.63.94.02.40.10.820110.10.820120.10.820130.10.8

135、20140.10.920150.10.920160.11.020170.11.020180.11.020190.10.620200.10.720210.10.820220.11.020300.10.820104.44.54.64.74.95.04.55.25.24.34.74.93.55.1+1.8%CAGR-4.2%CAGRRoad(passengers)RailAviationGt,global(19902022),excl.freight1 8REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEChallengesMitigation of

136、climate change impact requires a more joined-up policy approach,whereby electrification is complemented by other key levers,in particular modal shift and transport demand reduction to ensure that the overall impacts are maximized(see Figure 9).As shown in Figure 9,an effective transport emission str

137、ategy needs to focus on three levers(in order of avoid-shift-improve).1.Transport demand reduction.Historically,the surge in car usage has been a primary contributor to increased emissions.However,the COVID-19 period demonstrated that significant changes are achievable with sufficient determination.

138、Reducing demand can be accomplished by eliminating unnecessary trips,shortening travel distances,and employing behavioral change strategies.Restrictive measures for solo car driving can also be considered where other competitive options are available to expand the vehicle occupancy rate,which has be

139、en flat for around 40 years in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD)countries(e.g.,in Europe,the vehicle occupancy rate has been 1.6 people per vehicle for many years).2.Modal shift.This is about promoting a shift to less energy-intensive mobility modes by means of push and pu

140、ll measures,away from private cars toward public mass transport,active mobility,and new mobility modes such as micromobility,shared mobility,and on-demand mobility.As individual car usage trends made clear,making progress has been difficult.3.Decarbonization through electrification.This approach aim

141、s to achieve lower CO2 emissions thanks to electricity sourced from low-carbon sources(kg CO2/kWh),as well as better energy efficiency per km traveled(kWh/km).This can be only partially achieved over the short term with better internal combustion engine(ICE)fuel efficiency and use of alternative fue

142、ls including biofuels,as long as the potential negative impacts of crop-based biofuels(land use and food price increases,among others)are minimized.These three routes to emissions reduction reveal two main difficulties impeding progress:1.There has been little real progress on transport demand reduc

143、tion,which is closely linked to economic growth and social cohesion,both of which are key political objectives.2.Current policy frameworks for transport emission mitigation tend to follow two partly conflicting paths.One path is“decarbonization only through electrification,”focusing mostly on improv

144、ement involving conversion of transport modes to renewable sources,such as cars and buses to battery electric vehicles(BEVs),trucks,trains,and planes to hydrogen,electricity,or biofuels,but with limited policies encouraging new mobility patterns.The other path is“integrated climate change mitigation

145、”involving all three levers(“avoid,”“shift,”and“improve”)to promote modal shifts away from cars.Figure 9.Climate change mitigation strategies Source:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 9.Climate change mitigation strategies Decarbonization only through electrification Modal shiftTransport de

146、mand reduction Integrated climate change mitigationDecarbonizationShift!Avoid!Improve!1 9These two policy approaches are increasingly in competition.Local and regional authorities are very sensitive to issues such as congestion and are keen to push the modal transition strategy;for example,large cit

147、ies like London,New York,Madrid,Rome,Berlin,Amsterdam,and Stockholm all want to reduce private cars in urban mobility.Apart from reducing congestion and emissions,modal shift also provides opportunities to address other unwanted outcomes such as road crash fatalities and urban sprawl.On the other ha

148、nd,national governments are more divided on the strategy to follow,sometimes strongly favoring“decarbonization only,”as cars provide significant economic benefits,in particular via tax revenues(fuel and road use taxes).Automotive may also be an important domestic industry that provides employment.Bu

149、t this is a narrow perspective;transport by private cars generates significant negative externalities,which come with an economic cost often not factored in,and the monopoly car transport holds on the space allocated to circulation and parking is blocking the emergence,consolidation,and growth of ot

150、her transport solutions,which will also generate new business and create jobs.At the global level,modal shift has hardly made any progress.Cars remain by far the preferred mode due to convenience and practicality,especially in peri-urban and rural areas.10 Bigo,Aurlien.“Les Transports Face au Dfi de

151、 la Transition Energtique.Explorations Entre Pass et Avenir,Technologie et Sobrit,Acclration et Ralentissement.”Ph.D.diss.,Institut Polytechnique de Paris,23 November 2020.Analysis,insights&conclusionsGiven the scale and number of these challenges,what are the right policies and priorities going for

152、ward to ensure that the worlds mobility systems can get on track to rapidly decrease emissions and increase climate resilience?Based on ADL research and experience gained from POLIS,we offer the following insights into what should be done:-Almost no progress has been made in recent years to reduce o

153、verall transport demand.Looking specifically at road transport demand in terms of total km traveled shows a correlation with social integration and economic development.10 Hence,while the time assigned for daily mobility has remained stable over the last decades(45 minutes to 1 hour),the distance tr

154、aveled has increased over the same period.This is due to two factors:(1)increased motorization of households due to wage growth and easier access to credit and(2)increased average car speed,in particular due to new motorways,peripheral streets,and ring roads.While road transport demand highly correl

155、ates to GDP per capita,our analysis revealed one fortunate trend:across major cities worldwide,it seems that we are now coming to a point where the annual average distance traveled per inhabitant has reached a ceiling of around 12,000 km(see Figure 10).Figure 10.Average distance traveled/inhabitant

156、in personal cars vs.GDP/capitaSource:Arthur D.Little,OECD,World BankSource:Arthur D.Little,OECD,World BankFigure 10.Average distance traveled/inhabitant in personal cars vs.GDP/capita1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 20002005 2010 2015 2020 20252.557.51012.51510K20K30K40K50KK kmGDP1970 1975 1980 1985 19

157、90 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 20255101510K20K30K40K50KK kmGDP1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 20002005 2010 2015 2020 202551015202520K40K60K80KK kmGDP1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 20002005 2010 2015 2020 2025369121510K20K30K40K50K60KK kmGDP1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 20253

158、69121510K20K30K40K50K60KK kmGDP1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 20002005 2010 2015 2020 20252468101210K20K30K40K50KK kmGDP1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 20252.557.51012.5155001K1.5K2KK kmGDPDistanceGDP/capita1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 20002005 2010 2015 2020 20255101520K40K60

159、K80K100KK kmGDP2 0REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEThe same 12,000 km ceiling is evident across most European countries.In larger countries such as the US,the ceiling is higher(around 18,000 km),but there are also signs of stabilization.If we are comfortable that neither the motoriza

160、tion rate per household nor average car speeds are expected to increase further,then in fact,a flattening curve is to be expected given a stable travel time.Policies aimed at further reducing demand for road transport and distance traveled by private cars should thus focus on reducing the need to tr

161、avel(to decrease the number of trips),shortening ride distances(to foster shorter trips),and limiting travel speed(to increase travel time)to reduce the attractiveness of road transport versus other mobility options while enhancing safety.Further progress on limiting car traffic could also be made t

162、hrough increased vehicle occupancy rates.This can be achieved by penalizing or restricting solo car driving and encouraging solutions such as carpooling or ride sourcing.While these solutions have not grown significantly over the last few years,there are good opportunities,especially in low-density

163、areas for medium-size trips,for which the additional time associated with picking up an extra passenger is acceptable.Some cities and regions have demonstrated success by applying constraints on car traffic,such as via urban tolls,limited traffic zones,higher parking fees,and fewer parking spaces.Ho

164、wever,those constraints are inefficient without proper alternatives(e.g.,better public transit networks)with both greater capacity and frequency,along with new mobility services(see Sections 2.3 and 2.4)and good active travel infrastructure.-Only limited progress is being made globally on modal shif

165、t.At the country level,individual cars represent almost 80%of pax-km.In peri-urban and rural areas,the car remains by far the preferred mode for daily transportation,but only for those who can afford it,often creating what research has designated“forced car ownership,”which includes extreme vulnerab

166、ility to energy price fluctuations.11 Cozzi,Laura,et al.“As Their Sales Continue to Rise,SUVs Global CO2 Emissions Are Nearing 1 Billion Tonnes.”IEA,27 February 2023.Modal shift will improve only through a policy mix of constraints on cars and enhanced PT infrastructure and new mobility services (se

167、e Sections 2.3 and 2.4).-Good progress has been made on decarbonization through electrification.However,the journey is long.For example,vehicle propulsion has benefited both from more effective ICEs and the adoption of other clean fuels,such as gas and hydrogen.In parallel,there are ambitious goals

168、for the development of EV charging infrastructure and for incentivizing BEVs.The transition is also underway for PT emissions.On urban buses,transport authorities are benefiting from the need for tender renewal to ask operators to introduce new green fleets,while a long-term strategy has been adopte

169、d in some networks.Nevertheless,in Europe,on interurban and scholar coach services,less than 5%of the fleet is electric,mostly due to a lack of suitable offers from non-Asian vehicle OEMs,while public transit authorities(PTAs)often see public procurement as a lever to support local industry.Some iss

170、ues are limiting the impact of electrification.First,the transition is slow due to replacement cycles(often,cars have a lifetime of 10-15 years).Second,the up-front costs of shifting to EVs for households and companies are still high,and there is limited willingness to pay the premium,especially giv

171、en the uneven rollout of charging infrastructure and the perceived complexity of its use,as well as range anxiety associated with BEVs.Electric cars themselves also have an important carbon footprint due to the need to import critical raw materials used for battery production and non-repairable batt

172、eries,and some of the benefits are offset by the automotive industrys marketing preference for heavier vehicles,such as SUVs,which have reached 1 billion tons CO2 worldwide in 2023.112 1With regard to charging infrastructure,challenges also arise from the grid capacity needed to support an increasin

173、g number of BEVs.Strengthening the resilience of electricity distribution systems,promoting efficiency,and facilitating the integration of clean and renewable energy are critical.In this context,solutions like smart charging and vehicle-to-grid(V2G/V2x)technologies will be crucial.However,strategic

174、planning and collaborative efforts among public authorities,charge point operators,and grid operators are essential to address these challenges effectively.RecommendationsGiven the extent of what needs to be done,prioritizing actions and investment is critical to maximize the impact of mitigation st

175、rategies.This requires defining short-and medium-term goals per type of journey(urban,peri-urban,radial),using results-oriented approaches and constantly measuring progress.-Local and regional authorities should clarify their climate change mitigation ambition and strategy for citizens;for example:-

176、Do we want an electrification strategy only or a modal transition strategy,or a combination?-What are the ambitions and budgets that policymakers,and ultimately citizens,have agreed to?-Accelerate electrification as a key driver for decarbonization:-Incentivize electrification of private cars,compan

177、y fleets,and shared mobility,especially in areas where sustainable alternative options are defaulting.-Subsidize public transport operators(PTOs)in order to accelerate the pace of fleet electrification while concurrently growing their fleets and improving their services.PRIORITIZING ACTIONS AND INVE

178、STMENT IS CRITICAL TO MAXIMIZE THE IMPACT OF MITIGATION STRATEGIES-Introduce targeted measures to accelerate modal shift and reduce road transport demand:-Leverage the city-of-proximity concept (see Section 2.2).-Improve PT attractiveness to trigger a modal shift(e.g.,commercial speed)in suburban an

179、d peri-urban areas,where public transport competes with individual cars.-Introduce constraint-based policies to reduce the speed of motorized traffic,particularly passenger cars,and limit travel speed for car users,which will lengthen travel time,thereby reducing the attractiveness of private cars a

180、nd fostering modal shift(see Section 2.7).-Restrict solo car driving within urban areas where other competitive options are available.-Introduce targeted subsidies to support sustainable modal shift.Many possible subsidy options can be considered.Using effective KPIs such as“cost of CO2 avoidance”ca

181、n help to prioritize options.-Given the trend toward SUVs and heavy vehicles,use energy consumption(kWh/km traveled),vehicle size,and vehicle weight as additional metrics to encourage smaller personal vehicles,and avoid direct or indirect subsidization of heavier,more expensive,more dangerous,and le

182、ss energy-efficient SUVs and other higher-end hybrid and electric passenger cars.-Invest in marketing and communications tools to boost modal transition,through nudging or communicating the impacts of mobility on health.2 2REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEClimate change adaptation&re

183、silience buildingTransport infrastructures worldwide are suffering increasingly frequent and severe impacts from extreme weather events,which can have significant consequences,particularly in poorer and less developed regions.Hundreds of billions in financial losses are being attributed to flooding,

184、extreme temperatures,and high winds.In 2023,Hong Kongs modern and highly reliable metro system suffered unprecedented flooding following record rainfall that the surrounding urban drainage systems were unable to accommodate,despite existing anti-flooding design features.In January 2024,major storms

185、caused flooding in 200 subway stations in New York City,which represented nearly half the stations throughout the system.In comparison,only 88 stations were impacted by flooding in 2023.In the UK,the railways set blanket speed restrictions to mitigate the impacts of heavy rain and gale-force winds,l

186、eading to significant and frequent disruption to journeys.High summer temperatures are increasingly causing disruptions as railheads weaken or deform,a noted risk in Sweden,Canada,and China.Rolling stock is often not designed to deal with excessive summer temperatures.Hot conditions are especially d

187、ifficult for underground metros;many trains and buses lack air-conditioning.The key challenge for mobility systems is strengthening the resilience of their infrastructures,which is essential to maintaining economic and social well-being in a climate-changing world.Many transport system networks were

188、 simply not built to cope with current weather conditions.The costs to upgrade are typically billions at a national level.For example,in the UK,Network Rail has earmarked 2.8 billion over five years but recognizes that this may be the tip of the iceberg.Lisbons drainage master plan,covering the year

189、s 20162030,with a total value of investment of 250 million over 15 years,is another example of the costs associated with climate adaptation policies at a local level.1 GUSTO Project,developed by Network Rail Wales&Western in collaboration with Arthur D.Little.This project was recently awarded a Rail

190、way Innovation Award by Modern Railways.Incorporating resilience into newly built systems is also costly,and it can be difficult to decide specifically what is needed and how far to go with hardening the infrastructure.Possibilities include high-/low-temperature resilience,flood prevention,vegetatio

191、n management,overhead power line systems,ground works,sea defenses,and so on.National governments have a substantial role to play here,as usually the market will not be able to support the investments needed.The EU recently introduced the Resilience of Critical Entities directive(2022/2557),which re

192、quires all EU member states to have strategies to enhance the resilience of their critical entities.The directive,which transposes into a law across all the member states in October 2024,was pushed by the EU Commission in response to a growing set of challenges,including extreme weather,and its impa

193、ct on the lifespan of infrastructure and critical assets.Technology also plays a key role in improving operational resilience.Together with the deployment of Internet of Things sensors for asset conditions,AI provides the opportunity to manage risks dynamically,enabling better prioritization of inve

194、stment,better prediction of disruptions,and faster response.In Hong Kong,successful pilot trials have been conducted to enable better prediction of where severe climate events are most likely to cause disruption,through AI-based real-time analysis of weather data and tracking conditions.The UK has p

195、roduced a risk-based tool that provides the railway with the ability to make better decisions about setting speed restrictions to optimize the impacts of disruption with safety risk.1 2 32.2 THE CITY OF PROXIMITY CONCEPTContextThe city of proximity concept is an urban planning model that aims for mo

196、re sustainable,livable,and healthier cities,by considering the closeness of services needed.Originating from the 1970s,when it started to replace“functional modernism”(i.e.,building design should be based solely on purpose or function),the city of proximity concept has been increasing in importance,

197、especially in the last decade.In 2016,French-Columbian researcher Carlos Moreno coined a new name for the idea,the“15-minute city,”defining it as“an urban setup where locals can access all their essentials at distances that would not take them more than 15 minutes by foot or by bicycle.”The concept

198、is based around six essential social functions and four key design pillars(see Figure 11).Multiple cities worldwide started giving a time reference to their city of proximity initiatives;for example,“20-minute neighborhoods”(Portland,Melbourne,Glasgow),“5-minute walk districts”(Copenhagen),“15-minut

199、e life circle”(Shanghai),and“ville du quart dheure”(Paris).Beyond acting as a time reference,these cities aim to improve livability by ensuring the urban environment can respond to peoples needs without the burden of lengthy trips and displacements.Today,the city of proximity concept is gaining incr

200、easing traction internationally(see Figure 12):Figure 11.The 15-minute city conceptSource:Arthur D.Little,Moreno et al.,European Road Transport Research Advisory Council(ERTRAC)Source:Arthur D.Little,Moreno et al.,European Road Transport Research Advisory Council(ERTRAC)Figure 11.The 15-minute city

201、conceptCongestionQuality of lifeSafetyPollutionEducateEntertainHealthWork Life CommerceComprehensive impact on044 key pillars030201Foster mixed-use planning/social&cultural diversity within neighborhoodsDiversityFind optimal number of people per km2 to balance economic,environmental&social sustainab

202、ilityDensityReduce commuting time,its economic impact&promote close-knit communities&social interactionProximityAlign with smart city concept to enable realization of 3 previous pillarsDigitalizationFigure 12.Examples of“city of proximity”initiativesSource:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure

203、 12.Examples of“city of proximity”initiatives201220231970sZurichGroningenUtrechtMelbourneGlasgowPortland(Oregon)SingaporeCopenhagenShanghaiParis-IDFBarcelona10-minute city with barcode for diversity&increasing proximityIncreasing proximity&shifting from car-centric urban design800 m/20-minute neighb

204、orhoods(20 minutes for return walk)20-minute towns(neighborhoods)&45-minute city(i.e.,peak-hour trip)20-minute livable neighborhoods(walk or public transport)Superblock&proximity concept20-minute neighborhoodsFinger plan&5-minute walk district(Nordhavn)15-minute“life circle”for both downtown&outskir

205、tsCover most essential needs within 15-minute walk or cycleDevelop 49“mini-centers”with 15-minute accessibility to amenitiesNON-EXHAUSTIVE24REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLE-The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC)2023“AR6 Synthesis Report”considers“compact urban form”a

206、s one of the key opportunities for scaling up climate action.-In 2022,the European research and innovation hub JPI Urban Europe started the“Driving Urban Transition”program,adopting“the 15-minute city transition pathway”as one of three key levers to tackle modern urban challenges.-Also in 2022,C40 C

207、ities,a global network of mayors of the worlds leading cities created to fight the climate crisis,formed a partnership with UN-Habitat,real estate company Nrep,and Carlos Moreno and launched a new“Green and Thriving Neighborhoods program”to deliver proof of concept for 15-minute city policies.The ci

208、ty of proximity concept holds the potential to transform and enhance the utilization of urban public spaces by adopting a people-centered approach.This shift begins at the micro level,including street design and neighborhood planning,and extends its influence to broader aspects of urban and regional

209、 planning,such as land use,housing policies,environmental and climate strategies,and mobility systems.Each element,though small-scale,is interdependent and significantly impacts the larger urban framework.ChallengesAlthough the city of proximity concept is appealing to many stakeholders,it is much m

210、ore difficult to implement in some contexts than in others.For example,it may not work well in suburban areas,low-density developments,historically monofunctional neighborhoods,or in old cities with very limited space for improving street design.Moreover,it can be difficult to measure the overall ci

211、ty-wide impact of what are normally local or neighborhood initiatives.The 15-minute city concept already has image problems in some cities,like Glasgow,where it has been accused of locking in pockets of prosperity,excluding certain parts of the population,and reinforcing local areas of deprivation,a

212、rising mainly from misconceptions and conspiracy theories as to the concepts purpose.12 Index includes purchasing power,safety,healthcare,climate,cost of living,property price to income ratio,traffic commute time,and pollution.IMPLEMENTING CITY OF PROXIMITY CONCEPTS REDUCES TRANSPORT DEMAND AND FAVO

213、RABLY IMPROVE MOBILITY EXTERNALITIESThe governance of city of proximity projects is often difficult,requiring extensive coordination among various stakeholders,including city authorities,transportation companies,real estate developers,local communities,commercial operators,and others.Analysis,insigh

214、ts&conclusionsGiven the current challenges,how sure are we that these increasingly popular city of proximity initiatives are really contributing to superior mobility system performance?To help answer the question,we studied eight cities currently implementing different variations of the concept:Barc

215、elona,Groningen,Utrecht,Glasgow,Paris,Copenhagen,Singapore,and Portland.We gathered data through desktop research and interviews with representatives of urban planning and mobility authorities from several cities and engaged with a task force of academic researchers specializing in the topic.In part

216、icular,we focused on:-What results have been achieved so far,and have mobility externalities(i.e.,congestion,pollution,quality of life,and safety)improved?-What are the key components of success?-What needs to be done by different stakeholders to further improve?Overall,the analysis shows that the e

217、ight selected cities implementing the city of proximity concept are generally performing favorably in terms of mobility externalities versus averages,both locally and for the city as a whole;for example:-Quality of life.Based on an eight-criteria composite index,12 quality of life ranks“very high”fo

218、r five of the eight cities,with Barcelona and Singapore as“high”and Paris as“moderate.”2 5-Pollution.Six of the eight cities had average fine particulate levels between 5 and 11 g/m3,versus a European average of 14.9 g/m3.Paris and Barcelona were 14.7 and 17 g/m3,respectively.Air quality indicators

219、of all the cities fall in the“good”category.-Congestion.With the exception of Paris,the selected cities perform well in terms of congestion,ranking between 98th and 273rd worst in the TomTom Traffic Index ranking,with average rush hour speeds between 27 and 38 km/hr.This may be compared with other c

220、ities like London and Milan,which are ranked 1st and 4th worst,with average speeds of 14 and 17 km/hours,respectively.Paris ranked 16th with an average speed of 18 km/hr.TODAY THERE IS AN IMBALANCE IN THE RELATIVE LEVELS OF EFFORTEven the bigger cities in the selection that inevitably have greater i

221、ssues to manage reported positive results at neighborhood levels:Barcelona reported a reduction in local vehicle use of 82%following the creation of its Sant Antoni“superblock”(although neighboring streets saw an increase of 22%)and decreases of 25%and 17%in NO2 and particulate levels,respectively.P

222、aris had improved quality of life by promoting cycling,resulting in an increase of bicycle use of 54%in 20182019 and a reduction in car trips by 5%in 2020 versus 2010.Analysis of actions taken by the selected cities versus the four key pillars in Figure 11(density,diversity,proximity,and digitalizat

223、ion)shows that all four are being addressed.This seems to be a key component of success.However,today there is an imbalance in the relative levels of effort:-Priorities are shifting toward building diversity and proximity:43%of all detected actions focused on reinforcing mixed land use,and 57%aimed

224、to improve temporal proximity.-Only 15%of actions are dedicated to density,and only 12%leverage digitalization.The progress still to be made on digitalization in an urban context provides opportunities to redefine what the city of proximity concept means.If we look at the six essential social functi

225、ons of the 15-minute concept,digitalization has made them all easier to achieve remotely:-Work.Remote working has greatly increased post-COVID.For example,in the US more than 20%of the workforce will work remotely by 2025 according to Upwork.Even when employers require office attendance,it is freque

226、ntly only for part of the week(e.g.,three days instead of five).-Educate.In a 2023 Eurostat survey,30%of Internet users in the EU(age 16-74)reported taking an online course or using online learning materials in the previous three months,with an increasing trend.-Life.Although physical space to live

227、is always needed,increased working from home means that city center requirements for housing have changed.-Entertain.Remote entertainment is growing fast.For example,according to Forbes,in 2024,99%of US households subscribe to at least one or more streaming services.-Health.More than 43%of primary m

228、edical care consultations were conducted via telehealth services in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic,and the global telehealth market size is predicted to grow at 24.3%CAGR between 2024 and 2030.-E-commerce.According to Shopifys“Global E-Commerce Sales Growth Report,”annual global e-commerce sales

229、are expected to increase by more than 60%from 2021 to 2027.Eurostat reports that nearly 70%of EU citizens aged 16-74 years bought or ordered goods or services online in 2023.While the evolution of these functions may generally diminish the need to travel through cities,against this there are issues

230、such as livability,inclusivity,and well-being that also need to be considered in deciding proximity needs.Moreover,the same trends act to increase urban logistics demands,which also need to be managed and accommodated proactively.2 6REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLERecommendationsBas

231、ed on the analysis,we propose three recommendations to improve the impact of the city of proximity concept on mobility system performance:1.Improve measurement systems to better track the impact of the city of proximity on mobility externalities:-At the individual neighborhood level,monitor the pilo

232、t area and its surroundings to better understand the impacts beyond its boundaries.-Conduct 15-minute city pilots for the whole city,as opposed to just one or two neighborhoods.This will help test systemic impacts at a city level,which is important in selling the concept to citizens and businesses.-

233、Consider the potential of tactical urbanism intervention(through quick-wins).In Barcelona,for example,the city started with punctual,small-scale interventions,such as changing street design in specific blocks(the superblocks)and greening inside block patios,already showing improvements and the poten

234、tial for new social functions in those areas,then structured and framed this within the citys broader mobility and urban planning,looking into the promotion of active modes and other sustainable mobility infrastructures and promoting an urban polycentric structure.2.Make use of the concept in suburb

235、an areas by combining the ideas of city of proximity and transit-oriented development.13 This means organizing 15-minute cities more closely around existing suburban public transport hubs(if this hasnt happened yet)or,conversely,extending the public transport backbone to better serve areas with the

236、potential to build a 15-minute city,leveraging on learnings from cities that implemented city of proximity concepts,such as Groningen,Paris-Ile-de-France,Singapore,Glasgow,Utrecht,and Barcelona.13 Transit-oriented development refers to urban development that maximizes the amount of residential,busin

237、ess,and leisure space within walking distance of public transport.Moreover,exploring how new mobility services and MaaS could be developed together with urban planning and design in suburban areas might generate new possibilities for urban morphologies that could respond to different mobility needs

238、while not compromising environmental and climate ambitions.The concept can also be extended to different time-scales and areas(e.g.,“30-minute territories”).3.Embrace digitalization by developing more actively the“digital pillar”and,through this,improve digital accessibility to essentials to make th

239、e“x-minute city”easier to achieve and implement in practice;for example,this could include policies to support partial remote working,encourage e-commerce,and emphasize the digital component of social services such as health and education.While embracing digitalization,it is crucial to maintain a ha

240、rmonious balance between digital and physical realms,acknowledging that certain facets of quality of life are inherently tied to the tangible world.Green and blue infrastructure,natural environments,and social interaction are vital to our well-being.It is essential to guard against an overemphasis o

241、n digitalization that could potentially eclipse these critical components of life quality,which should be afforded greater prominence in urban spaces.Overall,the city of proximity concept is certainly a key contributor to mobility performance and is likely to remain an important aspect of urban deve

242、lopment as long as its implementation challenges are properly addressed.The city of proximity should be considered from different scales(small-scale street level to large-scale region level)and reinforce the links of urban and mobility planning,where new and improved ways of allocating and designing

243、 public space are possible.2 72.3 DIMENSIONING PUBLIC TRANSPORTContextHistorically,public transport has been developed to address congestion generated by cars in dense urban areas.Cities and regions rely on five main PT service offerings:1.Suburban rail(up to 1 million passengers/day)2.Metro(more th

244、an 100,000 passengers/day)3.Tram(20,000 passengers/day for modern trams)4.Urban bus(approximately 2,000 passengers/day)5.Bus rapid transit(15,000-80,000 passengers/day)In large urban areas,PT systems rely on both a mass transit backbone(metro,tram,and suburban rail)together with lighter solutions su

245、ch as buses.In addition,PT systems may be complemented by interurban coaches as well as more flexible solutions such as demand-responsive transit(DRT)services14 to serve low-density areas.Today globally,public transport accounts on average for 10%of km traveled at the national level,around 4%in rura

246、l areas,and 26%in large cities and urban areas.However,there are big differences in PT usage and modal share in different city contexts:-Public transport has a large modal share of more than 50%in inner cities(e.g.,Singapore,Hong Kong,Paris,and London).-In outer cities,lower density restricts PT usa

247、ge,hence the overall modal share for large cities is 25%-30%.-For commuting to and from work or school,PT usage is context-dependent.For example,the car is dominant in most medium-sized cities.In large cities,PT often has a larger share for commuting into the city(e.g.,74%for Paris)than for suburb-t

248、o-suburb commuting.14 DRT refers to an on-demand bus service operated under public authorities.Commuting is at the heart of the value provided by public transport,often accounting for a large percentage of all trips.Yet public transport still has a fairly low modal share of commuting trips.The dista

249、nce between home and the nearest PT stop appears to be the biggest driver of usage.ChallengesThere are several challenges to increasing the share of public transport in the modal split:-There are often constraints on how and where the PT backbone infrastructure can be developed(physical integration

250、in densely built environment,costs,etc.),especially in city centers.-As cities grow radially,there is a growing need for better PT coverage in suburban and rural outskirts to provide alternative options to individual car usage for commuting.Yet,as we have seen,PT usage is highly dependent on the dis

251、tance between home/destination and the nearest stop or station,which is typically increasing as we move further away from the city center.-Public transport is not always the preferred customer choice,even when available.-Traditional PT cannot be considered as the only option for virtuous mobility.In

252、creasing usage of sustainable mobility therefore depends on intermodal and multimodal considerations as well.Analysis,insights&conclusionsWith regard to developing the backbone PT infrastructure in cities,we explored the density of metro line coverage across the 80 cities that had metro networks in

253、2023.What is striking is that there is a huge variation in the metro network line length divided by the number of inhabitants,with mainly European cities such as Paris,Munich,and Rotterdam having the greatest infrastructure density.If we consider this an indication of the metro network length that c

254、ould be theoretically added to bring cities to the same density levels,then the sky is the limit for some cities that could add hundreds of km of additional system length to their network(see Figure 13).2 8REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEIn theory,provided there is funding and polit

255、ical will,ample opportunities exist to extend the PT backbone in most cities.The Elizabeth Line in London and the Grand Paris Express in Paris are high-profile examples.Even if constraints are placed on the addition of new network length,there are substantial opportunities to improve metro capacity

256、through technology,especially via full automation using communications-based train control(CBTC)systems.Several different aspects need to be considered with regard to better suburban and rural coverage by public transport.Increasing PT traffic from suburbs to the center of urban areas is one challen

257、ge.Our analysis suggests that while the density of train stations is already high in some areas,there is much variability.For example,in Europe,Switzerland has 19.5 per 1,000 km2,Germany has 15.1,and France has 5.44.Therefore,as with metro networks,there is,in theory,still potential to build new sta

258、tions to widen rail suburb-to-center coverage.Aside from heavy infrastructure development,BRT and DRT systems can also be favorable options.The integration with other mobility modes is another key driver for increased PT usage in suburban and rural areas.This includes integration with bikes(e.g.,in

259、the Netherlands,29%of rail traffic was combined with the use of bike parking in 2023);integration with“new mobility”services,such as micromobility,shared mobility,and on-demand mobility;as well as integration with private cars through the creation of park-and-ride(P+R)schemes.Because public transpor

260、t is not always the best mobility solution on its own,one important approach to improving the adoption of sustainable mobility modes is to be smarter with transport mode allocation.This can be accomplished through the development of multimodal transport masterplans,prioritizing transport services ac

261、cording to their performance and affordability,and better fostering complementarity and usage of different services within the transport system via intermodality(“intermodal trip”)or multimodality(“multimodal life”).All prioritization strategies need to rely on a tailored analysis of the number of p

262、otential travelers as well as cost/pax-km,prioritizing the cheapest and most accessible mode to cover the maximum possible traffic and then going on to the next mode.The cheapest relevant mode will depend on various criteria,such as traffic density,traffic volume,and number of trips per class of dis

263、tance.For example,while tram or metro could be the cheapest option in euros per pax-km for the core network in large cities,bus or bus-responsive transit will be better solutions in less dense cities.Similarly,as micromobility has a higher cost per passenger than public transport in dense areas,it i

264、s better suited for complementing PT in sparsely populated areas where it is less available or as a first-and last-mile solution combined with PT but not as a core solution in the city center.Figure 13.Current metro system length(and theoretically additional system length)to reach greatest infrastru

265、cture density Source:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 13.Current metro system length(and theoretically additional system length)to reach greatest infrastructure density 2021,km;additional length to fit Top 10 km/inhab.DelhiShanghaiSo PauloMilanDubaiAthensBerlinLisbonRomeKyivAnkaraTorontoS

266、ingaporeBrusselsSaint PetersburgMinskMadridViennaGreater ParisBucharestWashingtonWarsawLondonHamburgSeoulBudapestShenzhenMontrealMoscowNew YorkRio de JaneiroStockholmGuangzhouAix-MarseilleTokyoMunichBuenos AiresCopenhagenIstanbulHelsinkiBeijingPragueBarcelonaSofiaMumbaiAmsterdamChengduLilleOsloLausa

267、nneMexico CityToulouseRotterdamDohaParis Intra-MurosLyonSystem length,kmAdditional system lengthMostly SE Asia&Latin America2 9Recognizing and accommodating the diverse needs of all users is also important,including providing paratransit options for individuals with disabilities,despite the potentia

268、lly higher cost per passenger compared to standard solutions.It is crucial to ensure that the transport system is inclusive and accessible to everyone,reflecting the commitment to serve the entire community equitably.As shown in Figure 14,in practice this means refocusing public transport as the bac

269、kbone of the virtuous mobility system whenever traffic density justifies the investments(i.e.,on longer journeys of more than,say,5 km)and encouraging the usage of active and micromobility services for trips less than 5 km.This can help increase the load factor on buses/metros at almost the same cos

270、t.In this way,bike and walking infrastructure can be a key ally for public transport in the modal transition,enlarging PT coverage by reallocating capacity in the suburbs and cutting peak hour coverage.For the same reason,the usage of shared and on-demand motorized mobility like car sharing,taxi,and

271、 ride hailing should be encouraged for longer distance travel and in lower-density areas where investment in mass transit is not justified.RecommendationsWe offer the following recommendations for transport authorities and PTOs.For local®ional authorities-Choose the right transport mode allocatio

272、n:-Upgrade the PT network with a primary focus on the backbone infrastructure and securing investment in mass transit to accompany urban development,ensuring that public transit networks can support growing populations and changing mobility patterns.-Then consider expanding surface modes(e.g.,trams,

273、buses,and BRT),focusing specifically on improving travel times and frequency.-Rely on active mobility where possible(depending on traffic,distance,and trip purpose)to enable reallocation of bus capacity outside of the city center.-Focus on trips to and from the suburbs with rail and urban transit in

274、tegration.-Consider various strategies when extending coverage beyond the city center.Expanding regular PT lines is a crucial approach but presents several challenges,including a lower pooling rate,which consequently increases the average cost per passenger across the entire network.Local and region

275、al authorities should select the most effective options to mitigate high costs per pax-km.-Develop multimodal transport master plans at city,regional,and even national levels to optimize infrastructure and transport solutions usage via system logic and increase ease of use of the various networks co

276、llectively.Figure 14.Prioritization of transport services according to performance and affordabilitySource:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 14.Prioritization of transport services according to performance and affordabilityWhere can individual cars be substituted by sustainable modes?Traff

277、ic density(pax/day/axis)DistanceMetroTramwayBus rapid transitDemand responsive transitTaxis&ride hailingE-scooter sharingSuburban railBusBike/bike sharingWalkingCar sharingMotorbike sharingBRTLog scale20K2K-20K100-2K 10 kmRelevance of mass transitMass transitActive mobilityMotorized mobilityBRT3 0RE

278、PORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLELOCAL AND REGIONAL AUTHORITIES SHOULD BE SMART WITH TRANSPORT MODE ALLOCATION CONSIDERING BOTH PERFORMANCE AND AFFORDABILITY-In that context,carefully investigate the pros and cons of subsidized DRT,shared mobility services,and private mobility devices(

279、e.g.,bikes and e-scooters).-When geographically expanding regular PT services,it is imperative to focus on enhancing the attractiveness of these services as part of the expansion strategy.-Foster integration of modes:-Prioritize integration of fares,ticketing,passenger information,bike parking,and P

280、+R.-Provide direction,guidance,and support to PTOs to open and integrate more toward new mobility solutions(see Section 2.7 on MaaS for more details on data openness and integration).For PTOs-Maintain focus on quality of service to maximize attractiveness of PT as a viable option:-Consider all aspec

281、ts of quality of service,including service robustness,punctuality,accessibility,comfort,and simplicity of the customer journey(including passenger information,ticketing),as well as travel time competitiveness versus private cars.-Enhance multimodal(physical and digital)integration and intermodality:

282、-Address pain points associated with mode switching and developing mobility hubs to facilitate seamless transitions between different modes of transport.-Allow selective usage of PT infrastructure by new MSPs.-Integrate with new mobility services within MaaS(see Section 2.5).15“European Shared Mobil

283、ity Index Annual Review 2023.”Fluctuo,May 2024.2.4 NEW MOBILITY SERVICES:MICROMOBILITY,SHARED&ON-DEMANDContextNew mobility is a diverse category that includes micromobility rental services(mostly bikes,e-bikes,or e-scooters),shared mobility rental services(car sharing and car pooling),and on-demand

284、mobility services,including ride hailing and ride sharing).It is important to distinguish between personally owned mobility devices and shared vehicles belonging to an MSP,which are the focus of our analysis in this Report.Whichever segmentation is used,the boundaries are constantly shifting as new

285、services and vehicles are introduced,such as cargo bikes,micro-cars,mono-wheels,and e-skateboards.Demand for micromobility and shared mobility continues to grow.For example,ridership in Europe increased by about 15%in 2023 versus 2022,with growth especially in sectors like bike sharing(54%for dockle

286、ss bikes and 13%for station-based bikes)and free-floating car sharing(54%),taking over the e-scooter market(growth of 3%only in 2023 while it led the market in 2019-22).15 However,the share is still very small,representing less than 3%of trips in the modal split.It is noteworthy that services repres

287、ent only a fraction of total micromobility trips and assets,with ownership gaining in popularity.For example,sharing services in France operate about 40,000 e-scooters,while an estimated 2.5 million belong to citizens.Sharing services are also often considered a gateway to ownership of personal mobi

288、lity devices.The industry landscape is evolving but in a largely predictable way.For example,the shared micromobility landscape is highly fragmented,with US-based companies playing a dominant role.Consolidation is already ongoing with multiple partnerships,mergers,and acquisitions making the headlin

289、es,such as Birds acquisition of Spin(before ultimately filing for bankruptcy)and TIERs merger with Dott.This trend is not limited to two-wheelers with ShareNow and Free2Move joining forces in the car-sharing segment.3 1MICROMOBILITY CATERS TO INTERMODAL TRIPS USE CASES,WHILE CAR SHARING CATERS TO MU

290、LTIMODAL LIFE USE CASESRide hailing and car sharing have already reached a fairly high degree of customer acceptance and are probably at the“early majority”stage.However,some two-wheeler services,especially e-scooter sharing,are still in between the early adopter and early majority stages.It could b

291、e argued that this format,used mainly by young men,may be stuck at this stage and may ultimately be replaced with other,yet-to-be-launched formats.In any case,effort is still required to extend micromobility usage to broader categories of users.Shared micromobility services benefit from a relatively

292、 high demand and willingness to pay and are often used together with public transport to cater to door-to-door use cases(recently,several micromobility providers reported that more than 25%of their trips were intermodal with public transport).There also is a demand for car-sharing and ride-hailing m

293、obility services to support multimodal life use cases,which involve using different modes for different journeys and needs,both within and outside of cities.While some ride-hailing services seem to have reached a level of profitability,car sharing today generates low yield compared to ride hailing a

294、nd micromobility,as it suffers from having a level of user willingness to pay that is not much higher than for micromobility and higher operational costs(e.g.,maintenance,insurance,parking).1616 For further considerations on the limitations of current car-sharing business models and imperatives for

295、authorities and car-sharing operators to drive success,see:Van Audenhove,Franois-Joseph,et al.“Sharing in Success How Car Sharing Can Deliver on Its Potential in an Ecosystem Play.”Arthur D.Little/movmi/Mobility Cooperative,February 2024.17“Safer Micromobility.”ITF,March 2024.ChallengesOne of the ke

296、y challenges of micromobility and shared mobility is that they are difficult to regulate compared to traditional mobility segments such as PT,cars,and bikes.Typically,micromobility and shared mobility developers and operators are entrepreneurial and technology-driven.They need,above all,to ensure fi

297、nancial viability,which often restricts their ability to prioritize societal concerns regarding the overall mobility system and urban planning.Moreover,the legacy of car domination makes new mobility regulation difficult.For example,scooters park on pavements because cars monopolize parking space,an

298、d scooters run on sidewalks because cars have a speed monopoly on roads.Car sharing and new delivery services are also constrained by the same legacy.Early on,this led transport authorities to focus too much on a“pest control”regulatory philosophy,rather than one that is strategic,proactive,and enab

299、ling for the overall mobility system,although this is already changing(see below).Another key concern is the economic viability of operators,with only a handful showing profitability.Excessive regulation increases operational complexity and cost for new mobility providers.The safety of micromobility

300、 modes is a key issue for many,although,according to data from the International Transport Forum(ITF),17 the situation is improving.The risk of casualties involving shared e-scooters in Europe is decreasing as their use grows more rapidly than injury reports.Up to 70%of total reported casualties are

301、 minor.Severe injuries account for a small fraction of total reported casualties,and fatal injuries from reported micromobility crashes constitute a relatively small percentage,up to 1%of total reported casualties.On the other hand,the overall safety of new mobility modes should always be a concern

302、and requires transport authorities to set clear boundaries to mitigate risks.3 2REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLEAnalysis,insights&conclusionsAgainst this background,we conducted research and analysis to address the key question:to what extent are micromobility and shared mobility so

303、lutions contributing to improving the mobility system?Within this framework,we aimed to assess the current impact of new mobility on modal shift,the biggest pain points for new mobility service providers today,and what needs to be done by different stakeholders to further improve their positive impa

304、ct toward more sustainable urban mobility systems.The work was based on quantitative and statistical analysis,desktop research,focus groups with mobility experts,and a primary survey of the mobility patterns of people around the world,involving some 15,600 respondents.18Trends in modal shift away fr

305、om cars were covered in Chapter 1.Looking specifically at new mobility services on willingness to forego personal car ownership,we found they do have an impact.Our regression analysis of the survey results showed that regular usage of multiple new mobility modes positively impacts readiness to give

306、up car ownership.For example,if a person uses four different new mobility modes on a regular basis(i.e.,more than two or three times a month),he or she is more likely to give up a personal car than a person using only two new mobility services.-On an individual mode level,we found that car-sharing a

307、nd ride-sharing services,as well as the use of MaaS solutions,are more likely to impact readiness to forego car ownership than other services,such as two-wheeler sharing and ride hailing;a statistically significant association between usage of the mode and readiness to abandon a private vehicle is c

308、onfirmed only for the first three modes and isnt confirmed for the last two.-This is likely due to the fact that car sharing and ride sharing both cater to the typical use cases of car users,such as doing errands,picking up goods and/or people,and traveling to and from city centers.These use cases a

309、re not well served by two-wheeler and ride-hailing services.Turning to new mobility operators pain points,these are to a large extent related to the challenges of moving from the“rapid growth”to“maturity”stages.In particular:18“Future of Mobility Worldwide Survey(Q4 2023).”Arthur D.Little,forthcomin

310、g,2024.-Raising funding is difficult.Venture capital(VC)investment has been instrumental to the rapid launch,spread,and expansion of new mobility services,though the outcomes have been mixed.High expectations,regulatory hurdles,operational challenges,and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic led to a

311、drying up of VC funds,causing investors to shift their focus.Despite some disappointments,this period underscored the significant role private investment plays in advancing sustainable mobility.Expanding the sustainable mobility offering,particularly through shared mobility and DRT in wide suburban

312、areas necessitates private investment.For investors to realize stable and substantial returns,they must exhibit reliability and a willingness to engage over the long haul.In parallel,it is imperative for local and regional authorities to develop strategies that attract these investors and provide th

313、e necessary oversight and assistance to ensure that investments are directed effectively(see Section 2.8).-Complexity and costs are growing.In 2023,the number of permitted new mobility operators and vehicles was reduced in Berlin,Rome,Brussels,and many other markets,with Paris banning shared e-scoot

314、ers altogether.At the same time,authorities are establishing rules and conditions that generate costs and constraints for mobility service providers.Issues such as parking restrictions,crime,vandalism,and difficulties with integration into broader MaaS solutions have added to the complexity and cost

315、 burden.Consequently,only a handful of operators have showed signs of profitability so far,such as Lime and Ryde in 2022.Meanwhile,Birds US branch filed for bankruptcy,Superpedestrian shut down its US operations and is exploring the sale of its EU branch,and Dott and TIER sold nextbike after their m

316、erger.Late last year,M delisted from the Nasdaq due to its low share price,and several players have laid off employees.Economic viability is therefore uncertain,and in the medium term,it may even be necessary to consider public subsidies in order to keep new mobility services as part of the menu.3 3

317、RecommendationsOur analysis confirms that usage of multiple new mobility services positively impacts readiness to give up the use of private car by default for all trips,and that micromobility,shared mobility,and on-demand mobility services have an important role to play in improving the modal split

318、 within our rmobility systems.They are especially valuable in encouraging modal shift and,with the possibility of increased service diversity,quality,and reliability,creating a virtuous circle.Transport authorities,PTOs,and new MSPs thus have a shared interest in bringing about the shift away from p

319、rivate cars.But there are some significant challenges to be overcome to ensure new mobility services can remain part of the equation.Transport authorities should cultivate new mobility as part of their menu and foster partnerships with new MSPs to ensure a positive contribution to sustainable mobili

320、ty,rather than merely seeking to regulate them:-Adopting a balanced policy toward new mobility,where supply management is complemented by demand management.In addition to improving supply of alternatives,a balanced mix of other measures,also on the demand side,is necessary to effect change.Further d

321、etails on demand management,including nudging and communications policies,are provided in Section 2.7.19 Van Audenhove,Franois-Joseph,et al.“Sharing in Success How Car Sharing Can Deliver on Its Potential in an Ecosystem Play.”Arthur D.Little/movmi/Mobility Cooperative,February 2024.-Carefully calib

322、rating support structures for different mobility options.More attention is needed to promote solutions with greater potential to shift citizens away from private cars,such as car sharing,in addition to continuing to promote bike lanes and bike sharing.-Taking a greater interest in“ecosystem plays”to

323、 maximize success and help improve the economic viability of new mobility players.Operators should position themselves as team players in the mobility ecosystem:-Integrating as much as possible with public transport and other transportation modes,both physically(intermodal mobility hubs,interchanges

324、)and digitally(MaaS).-Collaborating with transport authorities to codesign innovative support mechanisms such as micro-subsidies.These can be positioned as benefits to both sides:the operators can secure better margins,while the authorities can benefit from being able to influence how and where new

325、mobility services are provided(e.g.,low-density areas,disadvantaged user groups,and off-peak times).Figure 15 is an illustration of the application of the ecosystem play concept to car-sharing service providers,as detailed in the ADL Report published earlier this year in collaboration with movmi,a s

326、hared mobility tech company,and the Mobility Cooperative.19Figure 15.The“ecosystem play”concept applied to car-sharing service providers Source:Arthur D.LittleSource:Arthur D.LittleFigure 15.The“ecosystem play”concept applied to car-sharing service providers FeaturesStation-based Complicated custome

327、r processes:reservation,information,provisioningTarget group:(mostly)eco-orientedMostly free floatingSmartphone-basedSometimes premium carsOften focused on high-return areas competing with PTVarying degree of innovation:focus on“minimum setup”Integrated with shared mobility ecosystem“mass transit+FL

328、M”Offers services at value-adding locations,incl.areas with lower population densityCan be privately operated but publicly subsidized(e.g.,trip-based subsidies,parking)1.0 ECO-FOCUSED TRADITIONALISTS2.0 OEM-DRIVEN PLAYERS3.0 ECOSYSTEM PLAYERSMarket maturityTime194820082020+Swiss self driver cooperat

329、ive(SEFAGE)(Crayon)integrated with Moovit in 2019Eco-focused traditionalistsOEM-driven playersEcosystem playersILLUSTRATIVE3 4REPORT:THE FUTURE OF MOBILIT Y 5.0ARTHUR D.LITTLE2.5 MOBILITY AS A SERVICEContextThe MaaS concept gives consumers the ability to plan,book,pay for,and use multiple types of m

330、obility services through one or more digital channels,as an alternative to personal ownership of mobility devices.The promise of MaaS is to benefit all stakeholders:-Consumers have an improved experience through the ability to move through multiple mobility options based on preferences and circumsta

331、nces while avoiding the costs of ownership.-Cities and authorities can use MaaS to orient behavior toward more sustainable mobility patterns such as public transport,active mobility,and shared mobility while increasing accessibility and inclusiveness and optimizing flows and assets at the system lev

332、el.-MSPs have an additional channel to engage with users,giving them better access to understand customer needs,which in turn leads to reduced customer acquisition and support costs and opens up the possibility of real-time optimization of each of the mobility offerings.If implemented the right way,

333、MaaS has great potential to enhance the attractiveness of sustainable mobility options as an alternative to individual car ownership by default.In 2021,ADL examined the current state of MaaS and identified key success factors critical for surmounting existing challenges and ensuring its successful development.20 What developments have occurred since then?MaaS implementations to date have been limi