IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v131y2020icp35-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance

Author

Listed:
  • Pangbourne, Kate
  • Mladenović, Miloš N.
  • Stead, Dominic
  • Milakis, Dimitris

Abstract

In this paper we focus on the development of a new service model for accessing transport, namely Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and present one of the first critical analyses of the rhetoric surrounding the concept. One central assumption of one prevalent MaaS conceptualization is that transport services are bundled into service packages for monthly payment, as in the telecommunication or media service sectors. Various other forms of MaaS are being developed but all tend to offer door-to-door multi-modal mobility services, brokered via digital platforms connecting users and service operators. By drawing on literature concerned with socio-technical transitions, we address two multi-layered questions. First, to what extent can the MaaS promises (to citizens and cities) be delivered, and what are the unanticipated societal implications that could arise from a wholesale adoption of MaaS in relation to key issues such as wellbeing, emissions and social inclusion? Second, what are de facto challenges for urban governance if the packaged services model of MaaS is widely adopted, and what are the recommended responses? To address these questions, we begin by considering the evolution of intelligent transport systems that underpin the current vision of MaaS and highlight how the new business model could provide a mechanism to make MaaS truly disruptive. We then identify a set of plausible unanticipated societal effects that have implications for urban planning and transport governance. This is followed by a critical assessment of the persuasive rhetoric around MaaS that makes grand promises about efficiency, choice and freedom. Our conclusion is that the range of possible unanticipated consequences carries risks that require public intervention (i.e. steering) for reasons of both efficiency and equity.

Suggested Citation

  • Pangbourne, Kate & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Stead, Dominic & Milakis, Dimitris, 2020. "Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 35-49.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:131:y:2020:i:c:p:35-49
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856418309601
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jokinen, Jani-Pekka & Sihvola, Teemu & Mladenovic, Milos N., 2019. "Policy lessons from the flexible transport service pilot Kutsuplus in the Helsinki Capital Region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 123-133.
    2. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Stocker, Adam & Mundler, Marie, 2017. "Online and App-Based Carpooling in France: Analyzing Users and Practices—A Study of BlaBlaCar," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3s40x2x2, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    3. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    4. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    5. Geels, Frank W., 2012. "A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 471-482.
    6. Clewlow, Regina R. & Mishra, Gouri S., 2017. "Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt82w2z91j, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    7. Alexander Paulsson & Jens Hylander & Robert Hrelja, 2017. "One for all, or all for oneself? Governance cultures in regional public transport planning," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(12), pages 2293-2308, December.
    8. Fleura Bardhi & Giana M. Eckhardt, 2012. "Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(4), pages 881-898.
    9. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    10. Sheila Jasanoff, 2007. "Technologies of humility," Nature, Nature, vol. 450(7166), pages 33-33, November.
    11. Ray Quay, 2010. "Anticipatory Governance," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(4), pages 496-511.
    12. Docherty, Iain & Marsden, Greg & Anable, Jillian, 2018. "The governance of smart mobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 114-125.
    13. Whitmarsh, Lorraine, 2012. "How useful is the Multi-Level Perspective for transport and sustainability research?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 483-487.
    14. Hensher, David A., 2017. "Future bus transport contracts under a mobility as a service (MaaS) regime in the digital age: Are they likely to change?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 86-96.
    15. Michael Howlett, 2009. "Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(1), pages 73-89, February.
    16. Corinne Mulley, 2017. "Mobility as a Services (MaaS) – does it have critical mass?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 247-251, May.
    17. Nihan Akyelken & David Banister & Moshe Givoni, 2018. "The Sustainability of Shared Mobility in London: The Dilemma for Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    18. Smith, Göran & Sochor, Jana & Karlsson, I.C. MariAnne, 2018. "Mobility as a Service: Development scenarios and implications for public transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 592-599.
    19. Peraphan Jittrapirom & Valeria Caiati & Anna-Maria Feneri & Shima Ebrahimigharehbaghi & María J. Alonso González & Jishnu Narayan, 2017. "Mobility as a Service: A Critical Review of Definitions, Assessments of Schemes, and Key Challenges," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 13-25.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hirschhorn, Fabio & Paulsson, Alexander & Sørensen, Claus H. & Veeneman, Wijnand, 2019. "Public transport regimes and mobility as a service: Governance approaches in Amsterdam, Birmingham, and Helsinki," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 178-191.
    2. Lyons, Glenn & Hammond, Paul & Mackay, Kate, 2019. "The importance of user perspective in the evolution of MaaS," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 22-36.
    3. Lyons, Glenn & Hammond, Paul & Mackay, Kate, 2020. "Reprint of: The importance of user perspective in the evolution of MaaS," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 20-34.
    4. Lopez-Carreiro, Iria & Monzon, Andres & Lopez, Elena & Lopez-Lambas, Maria Eugenia, 2020. "Urban mobility in the digital era: An exploration of travellers' expectations of MaaS mobile-technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Caiati, Valeria & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry, 2020. "Bundling, pricing schemes and extra features preferences for mobility as a service: Sequential portfolio choice experiment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 123-148.
    6. Smith, Göran & Sochor, Jana & Karlsson, I.C. MariAnne, 2020. "Intermediary MaaS Integrators: A case study on hopes and fears," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 163-177.
    7. Storme, Tom & De Vos, Jonas & De Paepe, Leen & Witlox, Frank, 2020. "Limitations to the car-substitution effect of MaaS. Findings from a Belgian pilot study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 196-205.
    8. Rodrigo Gandia & Fabio Antonialli & Isabelle Nicolaï & Joel Sugano & Julia Oliveira & Izabela Oliveira, 2021. "Casual Carpooling: A Strategy to Support Implementation of Mobility-as-a-Service in a Developing Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Becker, Henrik & Balac, Milos & Ciari, Francesco & Axhausen, Kay W., 2020. "Assessing the welfare impacts of Shared Mobility and Mobility as a Service (MaaS)," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 228-243.
    10. Reck, Daniel J. & Hensher, David A. & Ho, Chinh Q., 2020. "MaaS bundle design," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 485-501.
    11. Athena Roumboutsos & Ioanna Pagoni & Athena Tsirimpa & Amalia Polydoropoulou, 2021. "An Ecosystem Innovation Framework: Assessing Mobility as a Service in Budapest," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, March.
    12. Nihit Goyal & Michael Howlett, 2018. "Technology and Instrument Constituencies as Agents of Innovation: Sustainability Transitions and the Governance of Urban Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, May.
    13. Merkert, Rico & Bushell, James & Beck, Matthew J., 2020. "Collaboration as a service (CaaS) to fully integrate public transportation – Lessons from long distance travel to reimagine mobility as a service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 267-282.
    14. Alexandros Nikitas & Kalliopi Michalakopoulou & Eric Tchouamou Njoya & Dimitris Karampatzakis, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence, Transport and the Smart City: Definitions and Dimensions of a New Mobility Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    15. Ruhrort, Lisa, 2020. "Reassessing the Role of Shared Mobility Services in a Transport Transition: Can They Contribute the Rise of an Alternative Socio-Technical Regime of Mobility?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(19), pages 1-1.
    16. Benjamin Maas, 2022. "Literature Review of Mobility as a Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-28, July.
    17. Lopez-Carreiro, Iria & Monzon, Andres & Lopez-Lambas, Maria E., 2021. "Comparison of the willingness to adopt MaaS in Madrid (Spain) and Randstad (The Netherlands) metropolitan areas," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 275-294.
    18. Sebastian Kussl & Andreas Wald, 2022. "Smart Mobility and its Implications for Road Infrastructure Provision: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    19. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    20. Sunio, Varsolo & Gaspay, Sandy & Guillen, Marie Danielle & Mariano, Patricia & Mora, Regina, 2019. "Analysis of the public transport modernization via system reconfiguration: The ongoing case in the Philippines," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-19.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:131:y:2020:i:c:p:35-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.