Transition Planning Towards a Sustainable Urban Mobility Ecosystem

Abstract

In this chapter we aim to provide pragmatic recommendations and exemplary concrete transition measures for consultants and ecosystem stakeholders to get valuable practice proven cornerstones and hints for successfully achieving their individually designed mobility vision. Hereby we describe the transition planning as a systemic and systematic approach designed as a pragmatic process with essential key methods from the status quo (2020) of all existing states towards a desired common future vision of AV in ITS to be achieved in 2030. For this purpose we visualised a ‘Big Picture’ of transition management work packages and a roadmap as a ‘common thread’, conceptional guide and orientation for all stakeholders of the transition. This roadmap of multifaceted recommendations is structured into phases which are systematically building on one another, outlining the transition from the status quo with no automated minibuses (AM) via the milestones: AM, AM System, AM in MaaS, AM in MaaS/ITS to the future mobility Vision 2030 (Chap. 18). These recommendations are the basis for individual operational measures which have to be documented in an implementation plan. Finally, a general transition plan is suggested consisting of all scenarios, steps and planning results of the transition concept. This should serve all stakeholders as an orientation guide as well as a strategic and operational basis for the entire mobility transition.

1 Introduction

It is of course not sufficient to describe a desirable mobility future with AVs as mobility game changer (AV in MaaS/ITS) (see Chap. 18). A status quo state as a starting basis has to be considered as well and transition planning to understand how to realise and shape a future sustainable mobility ecosystem. This transformation has also to consider a high complexity of multifaceted challenges in a volatile, uncertain, complex ambiguous (VUCA) mobility environment.

To meet all these goals and framework conditions, a systemic and systematic approach to provide a clear structure and process for the stakeholders of the transition, especially providing strategic guidance to be manageable for the transition managers, has accordingly to be followed. Furthermore, the transition planning must be operationally feasible and deployable for the operational actors in a way that detailed goals and concrete pragmatic recommendations and roadmap-guided measures must be provided. Finally, all these transition deliverables must be compiled into an agile (incremental-iterative) comprehensive transition plan that ensures learning loops on strategic as well as on operational transition management level. A special focus must be set on the mindset and cultural issues of the transition in form of an explicit ‘soft fact change management’ since the transition of the mobility ecosystem requires a complex and disruptive paradigmatic change for all stakeholders of the transition together with accompanying and enabling management measures and roles like enablers, promoters, accelerators, multiplicators, change management board, etc.

Considering the goals, the giving framework and the mentioned guiding principles, the transition approach in this chapter will thus first explain the purpose and goals of the transition (Sect. 19.2). In the third section, the design (Big Picture) of the transition management concept will be developed. After a description of the status quo states and the future vision (Sect. 19.4), the transition steps from the status quo to the future vision will finally be explained in Sect. 19.6.

The methodology for this transition concept has been developed and elaborated by experts from academia (e.g. Pforzheim University, CentraleSupélec), industry (e.g. Siemens AG) and transport organisations (PTOs) of the involved pilot sites (Geneva, Luxembourg, Copenhagen, Lyon).

2 Purpose and Goals of the Transition

The transition planning towards a sustainable urban mobility ecosystem is following a generic process in three phases: (1) analysis of the status quo of all relevant scenarios, (2) definition of a future vision to be achieved and (3) design of the transition from status quo states to achieve the defined future vision (see Fig. 19.1). This procedure ensures that the transition design is based on the balanced integration of both transitional forces: the ‘status quo push’ effect and the ‘future vision pull’ effect.

Fig. 19.1

Generic phases of transition planning

Purpose of the transition is finally to generate and suggest pragmatic recommendations and concrete transition measures for consultants and mobility B2B customers or ecosystem owners to get proven, structured and valuable cornerstones and hints for successfully achieving their individually designed vision starting from their individual status quo position.

Goal of this transition approach is to provide a pragmatic process and methods for achieving the desired common future vision of AV in ITS. This is based on a validated, detailed and consolidated understanding of the status quo and conducted in systematically designed and efficiently manageable process steps.

The following illustrations and descriptions are partially excerpts from the documentation of the work results from chapter D9.3 of the AVENUE project (roadmap for cost viable AV in MaaS business (Fournier, 2022)).

3 Design (Big Picture) of the Transition Management Concept

The following overview represents a ‘Big Picture’ of all identified possible scenarios as levels (vertical dimension) and development steps (horizontal dimension) of the transition management concept from the status quo to the vision of AVs in an ITS. This is regarded as a systemic ‘work package map’ and a ‘common thread’ and thus as the systemic and orientational task basis for all partners to collaboratively contribute to this concept with defined deliverables (see Fig. 19.2). The so defined and structured work packages (in total regarded as a ‘work breakdown structure’) can be put in a sequence (as prioritised actions) for systematic elaborations.

Fig. 19.2

Transition from status quo to AVs in ITS

Regarding the status quo analysis in generic phase 1 (see Figs. 19.1 and 19.2: step 1), the status quo considered has been identified, described, analysed, summarised and compared each, and cases are built for why a scenario of automated vehicles (AVs) in a Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS)/Intelligent Transport Service (ITS) environment is preferable to a pure laissez-faire strategy resulting in the development of robotaxis for individual transport. A laissez-faire strategy means no changes in governance are planned and new players enjoy a high level of autonomy, e.g. for creating an own proprietary ecosystem which could compete with public transport or enable congestion costs. In an evolutionary logic of scenarios, both—an existing scenario 1 and scenario 2—could be a preliminary stage of scenario 3, which would be a preliminary stage of a future vision itself. These activities are collectively represented in step 1 of the detailed overview of the transition management concept (see Fig. 19.2).

Focusing generic phase 2 (see Figs. 19.1 and 19.2: step 8), the vision of AVENUE for a medium-term horizon (2030) of future public transportation has been discussed and defined (see details in Chap. 18). The aim hereby is to integrate automated minibuses into all citizen transportation systems available in a city. A central issue in this vision is the mobility needs of citizens which must be satisfied in an optimal way: an abundant service offer portfolio with a high variety of private and public mobility modalities should be provided and combined to one individualised intermodal trip. Automated minibuses play a central and critical role in this model (a) as a feeder for the other means of transport and (b) as a mobility gap filler for the entire transport system. Public as well as private transport operators (PTOs) are forming an enhanced public-private partnership (PPP) to utilise and synergise their multifaceted complementarity in this MaaS vision. The application of advanced self-learning systems (e.g. based on human and/or artificial intelligence) could in a further stage let this visionary MaaS concept become a self-learning ITS. This disruptive transport system innovation could create best human centric transportation, optimised and balanced private and public value and raised acceptance by citizens. This task of future vision generation is represented in step 8 of the detailed overview of the transition management concept (see Fig. 19.2).

In generic phase 3 (see Figs. 19.1 and 19.2: steps 2–7), the essential building blocks for the systematic development of a comprehensive transition plan are represented. The elaboration of each building block has been conducted on every scenario level of the three identified scenarios (scenarios 1–3) for AV to ITS which avoids a not desired laissez-faire situation (scenario 4).

• The focus of step 2 is to identify the main critical success factors as well as the main obstacles of the transition of AV in ITS for each scenario (mid- or long-term relevance), from their status quos to the common future vision. This knowledge is of high importance for putting special attention on these factors at further elaborations of the transition concept. These factors include all facets of the comprehensive (business, technical, social, environmental and governance related) transition concept and thus also the main aspects of a stakeholder-focused change management.

• Step 3 aims to identify and characterise all stakeholders relevant for the transition towards the future vision of AV in ITS represented by a variety of structural designs of stakeholder maps from different perspectives (e.g. promoters, opponents, catalysts, multipliers) as well as characterisation tables.

• In step 4 the goals and strategies as well as business models of AV in ITS are defined for the transition of each scenario (mid- or long-term relevance), aiming at the achievement of the common future vision. These are based on the success factors and obstacles previously identified in step 2.

• Step 5 focuses on the identification or derivation of strategic and operational recommendations and their translation or refinement into concrete measures for action of AV in ITS for the transition of each scenario (mid- or long-term relevance).

• The task of step 6 is to design an implementation plan, integrating the previously elaborated operational strategies and measures in steps 4 and 5, as well as their prioritisation and timely assignment as a transition roadmap for each scenario (mid- or long-term relevance).

• Step 7 is regarding the compilation of all results of steps 2–6 towards a comprehensive, systemic concept of a transition plan(s) of each scenario (mid- or long-term relevance). As already mentioned in the evolutionary scenario logic in phase 1, the transition plans of scenario1 as well as of scenario 2 are oriented to the future vision of AV in ITS, but pragmatically aiming to prepare and achieve scenario 3 as mid-term transition plans. Scenario 3 as preliminary stage of AV in ITS as the future vision is adapting these previous stages focusing on the achievement of AV in ITS as a long-term transition plan towards the future vision.

4 Description of the Scenarios, the Status Quo (Step 1) and the Future Vision (Step 8)

By 2050, almost 68% of the world’s population is expected to live in cities, indicating that urban areas will continue to experience rapid growth (Khor et al., 2022). Therefore, it is essential for metropolitan areas in particular, but also for connecting these areas with rural regions, to develop and use new forms of mobility as a complement to existing transport systems. One recent example for this is the rentable e-scooters that can now be used in most cities.

Conventional transport systems are made up of a mix of public and private transport. Local public transport is a vital economic and location factor, particularly in conurbations, but also in numerous medium-sized and small towns. From an environmental perspective, there is a strong interest in expanding and enhancing local public transport by decreasing the traffic volume from private vehicles while at the same time lowering environmental pollution through improved journey timing and further expansion of local public transport. It also offers a wide range of transportation options in the urban environment. Except for some local special forms such as cable cars, the commonly used forms of public transport throughout the world are buses, trams, metros and trains.

However, with a share of up to 70%, private cars are used far more frequently. In Germany, for instance, the share of total mobility in 2017 amounted to 43% as a driver and 14% as a passenger, which shows that 57% of approximately 3.2 billion total passenger kilometres per day were travelled by car (Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport 2019). Additionally, there exist private-sector mobility systems, like taxi and ride-hailing, regional and suburban rail, car and bicycle sharing, or the previously mentioned e-scooters.

Within the AVENUE project, the boundaries of automated driving representing different nested levels of mobility action fields are divided as shown in the diagram below (see Fig. 19.3). The first and most condensed level includes only the vehicle and the related minibus ecosystem (electric, automated, connected and rideshared). The mobility system level includes additionally the integration in the MaaS system to provide a seamless journey and a more resilient, convenient and flexible on-demand and door-to-door public transport system. The urban mobility system level builds up on an even higher level, including the beforementioned vehicle and mobility system levels. Here the effects of AV in MaaS are shown by a reduction of negative externalities as indicated in Chap. 14. The last and most inclusive level is the society. On this level, SDG 11, ‘Sustainable cities and communities’, is finally measurable. This shows the impact of AV in MaaS on cities, making them livable and more inclusive and actively working towards climate change mitigation.

Fig. 19.3

System boundaries (Nemoto, 2022)

4.1 Scenario 1 (at Generic Phase 1 or Step 1): AVs Without MaaS

The status quo of AVs, especially automated minibuses within the project, is explained in detail in previous chapters of this book (Chaps. 2, 3, and 11), regarding the trial use cases, international pilots, in-vehicle services (Chap. 5) and out-of-vehicle services (application or panel for information services, ticketing etc.), integration in public transport and much more. The main objective of the whole AVENUE project was to test and present this status quo and to identify what can be possible in future mobility scenarios. That’s why the description of different topics and details continues naturally throughout all deliverables of the project, e.g. ‘vehicle-to-platform interfaces’ or the reports from the pilot sites. The main part, however, has been regarded in the assessments for social impact, environmental impact and especially economic impact. The economic impact describes how the direct and indirect costs of the status quo are distributed. However, a meaningful summary is not feasible in a short form that makes sense, which is why the reader is referred to the economic impact chapters.

4.2 Scenario 2 (at Generic Phase 1 or Step 1): MaaS Without AVs

Considering the current state of transport options, it can be observed that mobility in cities has been transformed by mobility services such as carsharing, ridesharing and on-demand services. These provide flexibility, convenience and customisation while helping to reduce the number of private vehicles and increase the use of mobility service providers. Hence, a multimodal transport infrastructure, which refers to the parallel use of different means of transport, is in place already. The emphasis is on making the serial use of different modes of transport on one route efficient and attractive. It is already a possibility right now to use different means of transport in every city, but it is in many cases not very intuitive to change and switch between them. Because of changes in travel behaviour and customer demand, new players are entering the market besides the traditional transport providers. This presents new challenges for public infrastructure and public transport services regarding planning, design, operation, regulation and financing. To enable citizens to use these different modes of transport and mobility offers in combination, and thus providing them with optimised route planning tailored to their needs, the MaaS concept is being adopted in a growing number of cities. This concept provides users with access to various means of transport with different mobility offers, which can be chosen, booked and paid for using an app. MaaS marks a shift away from a transport model where individuals travel by private vehicle to a model where individuals can choose between different travel service providers to create the optimal seamless itinerary.

In consequence, mobility is no longer viewed as a ‘commodity’, since owning a vehicle is no longer required to move around, but as a service where the journey is purchased. It is believed that the travel behaviour of citizens is shifting, and as a result the use of private vehicles could decrease. MaaS is made up of two components:

• 1. The mobility modes and mobility service providers like bike-sharing, scooter-sharing, ride-hailing, micro-transit and carsharing in addition to the existing transport modes (tramway, bus, train etc.).

• 2. A mobility platform where all mobility forms and mobility service providers are integrated, and the user can map out his routes and obtain the travel costs to then book the route and pay the mobility providers. This mobility platform will be provided to the user as an app.

Given the global trend of urbanisation, MaaS is projected to grow at a gigantic rate (Araghi et al., 2020). In certain cities, the first MaaS are already in operation, including companies and start-ups with promising concepts, such as the ‘Whim’ app (Whim online) or ‘Trafi’ platform (Trafi online), both with millions of users worldwide. In addition to examples like these, there are now also normal public transport providers such as Ruter AS in Norway, who already offer a functioning MaaS in Oslo and beyond, although without AVs so far (Ruter, 2019).

4.3 Scenario 3 (at Generic Phase 1 or Step 1): AVs in MaaS

To our knowledge, there is currently no MaaS that includes AVs. Even in AVENUE, this is only a vision for the year 2030, but it is far from being a reality. As mentioned above, a variety of MaaS environments exist worldwide in which AVs can be included. For this to happen, they must first be recognised and accepted as one of the reasonable building blocks of modern mobility. Therefore, the AVENUE vision for a future mobility of a MaaS with AVs is presented in detail in Chap. 18.

4.4 Scenario 4 (at Generic Phase 1 or Step 1): Robotaxis Without MaaS

This section details the status quo of development and testing phases of existing robotaxi players. A robotaxi is an automated taxi that can be hired by up to two passengers for individual trips.

As the population will continue to move to urban areas in the future, mobility in these areas will also undergo changes. The development and use of automated vehicles through robotaxis appears to be a realistic future scenario. A study on ‘Urban mobility and autonomous driving in 2035’ by Deloitte identifies five possible developments resulting from the use of automated driving services. Firstly, automated driving services could become the primary mode of transportation, with one in three journeys made by citizens in urban regions being made by automated driving services. In addition, the use of automated vehicles could result in a price war since they could be up to 25% cheaper compared to current public transport and private vehicles (Deloitte, 2019). Furthermore, the market potential of automated vehicles is very considerable. The Deloitte study estimates a sales volume of up to 16.7 billion euros per year. Nonetheless, this is also dependent on the business model of the providers and on future regulations. Still, it is expected that the use of automated vehicles will decrease the number of private vehicles in cities, but that the use of driving services will increase traffic volumes in total. In consequence, up to 40% more vehicles can be on the road simultaneously during peak times. With higher traffic volume, the risk of congestion rises, and the average speed in cities declines (Deloitte, 2019).

The forecasts of this and other studies reveal a large market potential for established mobility companies as well as for newly created start-ups globally. The most important, or at least most recognised, companies with respect to the development of automated vehicles are Cruise, Waymo, EasyMile and Mobileye.

4.5 The Future Vision 2030 (at Generic Phase 2 or Step 8): Automated Vehicles (AV) Within MaaS and ITS

The vision of the AVENUE project for future public transportation in an urban environment integrates both personal transportation and public transportation in mass transit. This vision of future mobility is outlined using the citizen-centred approach. In this vision, the citizens’ mobility needs are depicted with the possibility of using an automated minibus combined with other modes of transport, depending on the citizens’ preferences. In this regard, the AVs enable the first and last mile travel serving as mobility gap fillers for seamless transport. Furthermore, AVs are intended to compensate in the event of private and public transport failures (disruptions, accidents, etc.). This is expected to reduce the negative externalities and thereby make public transport more attractive for citizens (see details in Chap. 18 and Fournier et al., 2023). This includes automated vehicles in addition to the established means of transportation like bus, train, cab, carsharing, bicycle and others. This necessitates factors such as the interoperability of hardware and software devices providing standardised interfaces (APIs), coordination and management software, as well as management services provided by service aggregators and other intermediaries (see details in Chap. 18 and Fournier et al., 2023).

5 Description of the Transition Steps from the Status Quo to the Future Vision

Following the logic of the Big Picture of the transition management concept (see Fig. 19.2) representing the systematic development of a comprehensive transition plan conducted for each of the three identified scenarios (scenarios 1–3) for AV to ITS, the essential building blocks for a transition (generic phase 3 or steps 2–7) are represented in this section and illustrated by typical examples.

5.1 Identification of Success Factors and Obstacles (Step 2)

Deploying automated minibuses in all environments, both in city and rural areas, requires the technology to be able to handle all safety-related scenarios as well as to be effective, smart, connected and fully implemented within an ITS infrastructure. The technical obstacles and success factors are, e.g. related to the automated driving ecosystem, automated technologies, open data, open platforms and open API. More detailed elaborations on technical success factors and obstacles can be found in Chaps. 11 and 19 (limitations) of this book.

One key issue for AVs is the level 4 of automation (see Chap. 11) where safety drivers are not necessary any more in the automated vehicle to enable savings in salaries. This is relevant for the economic performance of the PTO. Business with automated minibuses is not profitable yet due to high driving-related personnel costs (see Chap. 12). The non-integration of automated minibuses with other means of transport within a MaaS would further reduce the attractivity for passengers. Another obstacle is the comparatively slow digital transformation of companies in many EU countries. Further details and issues on economic success factors are elaborated in Chaps. 12 and 19 (limitations) of this book.

Regarding the automated driving technology and connectivity-related demand, the predictive, adaptive and information sharing through vehicle communication with infrastructure and other vehicles improves driving performance and energy consumption. On the other hand, a highly connected vehicle means more data processing within and outside the vehicle, which may outweigh the sustainability of interconnected vehicles. If the automated minibuses are well utilised in terms of mileage and regularly used by passengers, they will present great advantages over individual vehicles from an environmental point of view. The suggested automated minibuses in a MaaS/ITS on contrary wants to satisfy the best citizen needs and the general interest in leveraging positive externalities and lowering negative externalities. Enabling positive externalities are possible due to the use of data, intermodality and interoperability. Further environmental issues are discussed in Chaps. 13, 14 and 19 (limitations) of this book.

An important social success factor is the high level of goodwill among potential users and a high level of satisfaction among users that can be translated into a high level of willingness to use the automated minibus (again). Most important factors for the social acceptance are the (perceived) need for improvement of the current situation and whether the proposed alternative service fulfils this need for improvement. Some critical points however encompass the highly sensitive issues of handling user data and data security and the ethical questions that constantly accompany automated driving. If automated minibuses could be a real ‘game changer’ making public and private transports individual and providing a real alternative to individual privately owned vehicles, it has the potential to increase effectiveness and flexibility for the users and increase the choice for the passenger, following general interest at the same time. Another alternative in the sense of an obstacle for automated minibuses in MaaS/ITS could be robotaxi which could satisfy best individual mobility needs without changing the means of transport but at the same time lower and privatise positive externalities and increase negative externalities through additional traffic and space. This is not serving general interest. A more detailed discussion on social issues is conducted in Chaps. 15 and 19 (limitations) of this book.

Like raised above, the beforementioned limitations are all influenced by the chosen governance. The governance for automated minibus and its ecosystem (especially regulations and standardisation for data, data security and privacy, technical interoperability, coopetition [cooperate to compete] of stakeholders, licensing on regional and national levels) is thus a central issue to enable automated minibuses’ technical ecosystem and the integration of automated minibuses in MaaS or ITS. Coopetition means when competition coexists with cooperation to use complementary resources cooperatively. In this sense the governance is crucial to balance the interests of stakeholders of an ecosystem (Fournier et al., 2023). However, there’s currently a lack of standards for open APIs and unaligned technical standards existing that might trigger coordination issues. More issues and details on this governance topic are discussed in Chaps. 16 and 19 (limitations) of this book.

5.2 Identification and Characterisation of Stakeholders (Step 3)

For the transition of the scenarios from status quo to the future vision, it is precondition to identify, characterise and analyse the stakeholders and especially the key actors involved in testing and deploying automated minibuses for public transport within MaaS and ITS in European cities. The task hereby is to construct a strategic overview of the expectations, needs and impacts of the stakeholders and the connections between them. For a general overview of the stakeholders for the transition from status quo states to achieve the defined future vision, their characterisation and analysis, we refer to the general elaborations in the specific chapter (see Fig. 19.1 and Chap. 9: Final stakeholder Analysis and Stakeholder Strategies) within this book, comprising not only stakeholders of the status quo states and the future vision but also stakeholders which are relevant for the focused transition process.

The following discussion additionally focuses the characterisations of the main selected stakeholders of scenario 3 (AV in MaaS, see Fig. 19.2) due to the special relevance for the transition towards the future vision (AV in MaaS/ITS):

The stakeholder group of manufacturers and software developers is focused on developing and advancing the required technologies for the automated minibuses following the detailed work from Chap. 9 (Nemoto et al., 2021).

This is because software providers are directly involved in both the MaaS system and AVs, providing platforms that permit the operation and optimisation of automated mobility services, overseeing both scheduled and on-demand services. These cloud-based platforms act as an intermediary between the mobility providers and customers; therefore, they have a major influence on the overall project. In addition, it is very important to develop a trustworthy system where users take advantage of the rides in automated vehicles to pursue other activities without having to focus on the road. This generates added value for the user, which is what the project seeks to accomplish. Nevertheless, a close collaboration with other stakeholders, the public transport operators (PTOs), is also needed. Since the PTOs must operate these new services already during the transitional phase, a high level of involvement is required from them, particularly at the beginning. The PTOs are commissioned by the municipality, making them one of the stakeholders with a great amount of influence on the project. This is the case because the municipality is responsible not only for commissioning the PTOs but also for the requirements for the public transport system and for the requirements for the registration of the automated minibuses. They are equally charged with urban planning. Urban planners concentrate on decreasing urban space for private transport and preparing infrastructure for transformation by assisting the PTOs. In this way, these stakeholders define the rules of the game for the project launch (Nemoto et al., 2021). However, since the city administration is also subject to the national government and the European Commission, it is mainly the European Commission and the national government that shape the scope of action for the city government and consequently also for the PTOs (Nemoto et al., 2021). The European Commission can impose regulations and thereby support or obstruct the development of the technology. National governments can step in and impact the project through regulations, incentives and rules (Nemoto et al., 2021).

Besides the actors of software development, the government and the city administration, the manufacturers of the automated minibuses are crucial stakeholders which have a great effect on the implementation of the project. As they are in charge of developing and offering mobility solutions, they have to build trust and acceptance for their vehicles among consumers, and they must secure a good market position to establish their own company in the market. To achieve these three key issues, they put their focus on the quick introduction of products into the public system, where well-designed standards can reduce the total cost per vehicle while increasing the speed of development (Nemoto et al., 2021). The drivers’ union will be involved in the implementation of the project by engaging in driver retraining and education, optimised road conditions, safety and arrangements with governments and employers’ organisations (Nemoto et al., 2021). However, drivers’ unions and environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have up to now taken a negative position towards automated minibuses, and to lessen the negative impacts on the environment and society, these stakeholders should be implicated in decision-making and discussions in a more purposeful way (Nemoto et al., 2021). The final critical stakeholders are the end users of the system. The project will only succeed if it is accepted by the users. To ensure that users alter their mobility behaviour in the future, the automated vehicles must afford the flexibility and convenience of customised mobility solutions (Nemoto et al., 2021).

Given that there are several more stakeholders, the following stakeholder groups with specific relevance in the context of transition are still enumerated for completeness: insurance companies, electricity charging infrastructure providers, energy providers, research institutes, financial services, recycling industry, emergency aids, industry lobbies, consulting companies and others.

5.3 Definition of Transition Goals, Strategies and Business Models (Step 4)

5.3.1 Transition Goals

The definition of transition goals depends on the individual status quo of the mobility ecosystem which determines the setting of the goals from this starting point to the target (next scenario level or future vision). As shown in an evolutionary logic of scenarios (see Fig. 19.2 of this chapter), an existing scenario 1 could be a preliminary stage of scenario 3, and an existing scenario 2 could be also a preliminary stage of scenario 3 which would be a preliminary stage of a future vision itself. Against the background of such a viewpoint, the identification of transition goals to the next scenario level or even future vision level requires a very individual analysis. For this reason, only a few broad categories of transition goals with some typical examples will be mentioned here:

Technological Implementation of Vehicles and Infrastructure

The possibilities for the means of transport and the AVs as well as for the AVs and the infrastructure to interact should be adjusted and increased. The achievement of level 4 vehicles and interoperability (open API) of AVs with other means of transport within a MaaS is important to leverage business benefits for the PTOs and better services for citizens.

Software and Hardware Implementation

The software-technical and hardware-technical point of view comprises a fully automatic order processing of the booking, considering the personal preference for one of the transition goals. A further goal is to inform the user about the next mobility alternative entirely automatically in the case of a change in scheduling. The data should be exchanged between the mobility providers and the means of transport as well as the administration between different AV manufacturers without any problems.

Customer-Oriented Needs

This should ensure a customer-optimised provision of seamless transport options without any waiting times. Furthermore, attention should be paid to take into account the transport needs of customers and to automatically offer a satisfactory solution in case of unforeseen events, like accidents or breakdown of transport means. The optimised transport system should reduce negative externalities.

5.3.2 Transition Strategies

Regarding the three scenarios of the transition management concept (see Fig. 19.2), the largest and most important innovation leap within the transition phase is made by the implementation of scenario 3 (AVs in MaaS—business ecosystem) especially in urban areas, where transition strategies play a central and crucial role. This is the mandatory precondition for creating the final ‘intelligence’-based innovation leap towards the future vision (AVs in ITS). In the subsequent section, the potential strategies for this scenario are described.

In the first possible transition strategy, Collaboration of an Automated Minibus Provider with a Public MaaS Business Ecosystem, the hypothesis is that the technology, solution and transition strategies of automated minibuses for public transport must be consistently aligned and integrated with the technology, solution and transition strategies of the public MaaS provider in all aspects of the service portfolio and business model modules. Therefore, the automated minibus strategies must be consequently specified and adapted with the public MaaS providers to ensure that this is a long-term perspective. In conclusion, an alignment with the strategy of the public MaaS business ecosystem orchestrator can be very beneficial in the event of success but can also entail a high risk in case of failure (Antonialli et al., 2021).

The second possible transition strategy describes the Collaboration of an Automated Minibus Provider with a Private MaaS Business Ecosystem. For this strategy, the hypothesis is that the technology, solution and transition strategies of automated minibuses must be systematically aligned and integrated with the technology, solution and transition strategies of the private MaaS provider in all aspects of the service portfolio and the business model modules. This illustrates that the solution strategies are consequently specified and adapted to those of the private MaaS provider to ensure that this is a long-term perspective. In summary, aligning the strategy of the private MaaS business ecosystem orchestrator can be very beneficial in case of success, but can also pose a high risk in case of failure (Antonialli et al., 2021).

The third possible transition strategy that is possible is the positioning of an automated minibus provider against other competitor automated minibus providers which means a Competition within a Public or Private MaaS Business Ecosystem. The hypothesis here asserts that, ‘enhanced automated minibus strategies for USP and technical/business innovations as well as dedicated adaption to the strategies of an Public or Private MaaS Integrator in every facet of the offering portfolio and business model modules are necessary’ (Antonialli et al., 2021). This transition strategy concentrates primarily on the USPs in the domains of social and accessibility or in the fields of safety and security as well as on flexible and collaboration-based innovation strategies. Therefore, a strong focus on USP over the relevant competitors within the private and public MaaS business ecosystems as well as a focus on integrators’ success factors and an emphasis on the innovation strategy are feasible (Antonialli et al., 2021).

Finally, the fourth possible transition strategy is the development of an own new business ecosystem and thus fosters the Competition of the Own New (Private) MaaS Business Ecosystem with other (Private and Public) MaaS Business Ecosystems. In general, the hypothesis for this strategy is that an automated minibus provider which is currently collaborating with other automated minibus providers within the public or private MaaS sub-business ecosystem has sufficient technology and business potential and thus seeks to build his own MaaS business ecosystem. This strategy demonstrates that automated minibus strategies are an essential core for the development of an own MaaS business ecosystem as an integrating network for automated minibuses and other modalities and offerings, like infrastructure, along with innovation strategies to attain USPs. Therefore, this strategy puts emphasis on technology and business innovation to build a designated MaaS business ecosystem and simultaneously a competitive USP strategy (Antonialli et al., 2021).

All five transition strategies aim to realise the desired future scenario AV in MaaS (scenario 3) and represent alternative ways to achieve this.

5.3.3 Transition Business Models

Transition business models can be regarded as the conceptional refinement and representation of the business implementation logic of the defined transition strategies which is necessary for implementing the focused scenario 3 (AVs in MaaS). This is precondition and the basis for additional ‘intelligence’-based business model updates to achieve the future vision (AVs in ITS).

The following business models for the implementation of AVs in MaaS must be regarded.

In the general description of potential business models for scenario 3, it is assumed that the most likely future will be a customer- and citizen-centric intermodal MaaS ecosystem, where private and public MaaS providers connect different transport options into a seamless travel chain supported by AVs but not consisting of AVs only (Antonialli et al., 2021). In the following sections, the different business models for the scenario AV in MaaS are described in detail.

Firstly, the partner network is discussed; to make a business model work, close collaborations with key partners must be established which can serve various functions. In this business model, either a public or a private mobility provider or a consortium of both acts as a MaaS integrator of partners, like service providers, other public and private mobility providers and other IT infrastructure service providers. These can join the MaaS system as contributors and solution providers for the AVs in public transport (Antonialli et al., 2021). A partner network like this therefore combines the experience of many companies, but it also requires close collaboration and trust.

Collaboration of an Automated Minibus Provider with a Public MaaS Business Ecosystem can be interesting, since only in public tenders the cooperating companies can get competition. This is very favourable in a niche market or a small market segment giving them a secure position (Antonialli et al., 2021). In this business model, a collaborative strategic approach should be established with mutual alignment and integration of all business modules, where every facet of the offer portfolio is listed. Besides the solution customisation, close cooperation in the delivery and customer module, including joint solution development processes and joint marketing activities, is important for the partnership and business success (Antonialli et al., 2021). The automated minibus providers can deploy their whole solution portfolio to the public MaaS sub-business ecosystem and further reinforce their partner and niche position through specialisation. As a consequence, this is a very appealing business opportunity with long-term prospects (Antonialli et al., 2021).

In the third business model, Collaboration of an Automated Minibus Provider with a Private MaaS Business Ecosystem, automated minibus providers establish a close relationship with the private MaaS planner by focussing on complementary offerings or complementing the offerings of other partners through their high-level performance. This business scenario highlights that automated minibus providers can successfully apply their solution portfolio to the private MaaS business ecosystems and augment their partner and niche position through specialising on complementary offerings and high performance (Antonialli et al., 2021). This guiding cooperative and synergistic strategic approach produces a mutual alignment and integration of all business model modules, in all areas of the portfolio of offerings. Beyond solution customisation, close cooperation in the delivery and customer module, including joint solution development processes and joint marketing activities, is pertinent to partnership and business success (Antonialli et al., 2021).

In this paragraph, Competition of an Automated Minibus Provider within a Public (A) or Private (B) MaaS Business Ecosystem is evaluated. The providers for automated minibuses can deploy their portfolio to the private and public MaaS business ecosystem but simultaneously participate in competition with other solution providers by specifying USP-focused strategies in the areas of performance leadership, cost leadership etc. or business and technical innovation (Antonialli et al., 2021). This business model is distinctive in its competitive approach to other automated minibus providers, resulting in a strong emphasis on technical/business innovation and USP generation, while tightly aligning business modules in every facet of the offering portfolio. It is marked by the competitive focus, in respect to the innovation pressure, the effort to achieve the unique selling propositions and an emphasis on integration (Antonialli et al., 2021).

In the business model Competition of the Own New (Private) MaaS Business Ecosystem with other (Private and Public) MaaS Business Ecosystems, automated minibus providers are in a competitive and challenging situation to preserve their technical focus and ongoing flexibility against competitors. Moreover, this entrepreneurial behaviour is defined by permanent technical and business innovation and the strive for market success and expansion (Antonialli et al., 2021). ‘The analysis of this Business Scenario shows that strong innovative and especially USP-driven/competitive Autonomous Minibus transportation offerings have to be developed and provided to customers (Value/Delivery/Customer modules) and at the same time a clear alignment and integration of all modules with those of Public (A) or Private (B) MaaS Business Ecosystems are focused’ (Antonialli et al., 2021). Furthermore, the entire MaaS business ecosystem must concentrate on supply, technology, business innovations and USPs that exist in other MaaS. In conclusion, in this business model, the business focus, the competitive focus on new innovations or USPs and the focus on other MaaS must occur at the same time (Antonialli et al., 2021).

For a structured representation of a transition business model for scenario 3 (AVs in MaaS), an adaption of the canvas method for business models¹ shown in Fig. 19.4 as an example is useful for understanding the logic of the business model and deriving refined strategic recommendations for every module of the canvas:

Fig. 19.4

Exemplary transition business model representation for scenario 3 (AVs in MaaS)

5.4 Transition Recommendations and Measures (Step 5)

All of the subsequent recommendations relate to the implementation of AV in MaaS/ITS (scenario 3) and have to be operationalised within the previously identified and business models as far as possible.

For further identification and elaboration of transition recommendations and measures, it is inevitable to define these terms precisely to create a clear and common understanding. In this concept we regard that one or more transition recommendations could be related with one or more transition measures (n to m relationship):

Transition recommendations are defined as general (rough) suggestions for transition strategies from experts based on previous elaborations from transition planning modules (results, conclusions documented within the AVENUE work package deliverables) as well as strategic experiences by experts, derived from and aligned with the transition goals, transition strategies and transition business models.

Transition measures are operational tasks derived, refined and concretised from the transition recommendations defined above. In this context they can be defined as concretely specified and implementation focused operational tasks described by all relevant organisational attributes (unique identifier, title, description, goal, deliverable, owner, start/end time, resources, dependencies, priority etc.) necessary to start planning and implementation activities.

5.4.1 Transition Recommendations

Aiming at a comprehensive and structured identification of transition recommendations based on the discussion of previous elaborations with experts to achieve the AVENUE Vision 2030, it is useful to create a mental framework (grid) where recommendations can be assigned to. An advantage of this framework is to specify recommendations in a rather disjunctive way or to discover new ones during application discussions with experts.

The architecture of this recommendation framework is shown in Fig. 19.5. This two-dimensional grid is compiled by four additive evolution modules of future mobility (‘onion model’) as vertical dimension (attention: not identical to scenarios in Fig. 19.2) and five PESTLE or SUMP categories as horizontal dimension.

Fig. 19.5

Framework for (transition) recommendations (Abbreviations: AV: Automated Vehicles; AM: Automated Minibuses; ITS: Intelligent Transport System; MaaS: Mobility-as-a-Service; PESTLE: Political—Economic—Social—Technological—Legal—Environmental)

After a first identification and collection of transition recommendations, they are assigned to the respective fields within the designed framework. This task often requires a split, refinement and further focusing of recommendations together with the chance to identify further valuable recommendations from gaps or white spaces within the methodical grid which is aimed to be comprehensive, well-structured and consistent.

After inserting and updating the framework grid with transition recommendations, this represents a recommendation portfolio basis for prioritisation and scheduling towards a AVENUE Transition Roadmap for achieving the AVENUE Vision 2030.

5.4.2 Roadmap of Recommendations for Viable AV in MaaS Business

In the following we provide a summary of the main recommendations within a roadmap (from status quo to a vision for 2030) (see Fig. 19.6) to achieve viable AV in MaaS business (efficiency). Although Sect. 19.5.2 specified different transition strategies and business models within the AV in MaaS deployment area, the following recommendations include the entirety of these strategies and business models. They are designed to be generally applied to develop a viable AV in MaaS business solution and don’t detail out different transition strategies.

Fig. 19.6

Roadmap (overview) of the main recommendations for viable AV in MaaS business

In the deliverable at hand, this vision is analysed in detail with all the tools of a business model such as the business canvas and the SWOT analysis. However, the costs for this cannot be calculated and presented yet in detail because it is currently a vision that follows the European CCAM vision and will not become reality soon. We anticipate that the large-scale deployment of automated vehicles (AVs) will not become reality in the next 3 years, due to barriers and shortcomings in the technology, high depreciations and legal framework. Too many prerequisites must be fulfilled. It is, for example, common sense that viable AV in MaaS business is only possible if security drivers can be reduced soon in the course of time and replaced by supervisor, but this is currently neither technically nor legally possible at every location in Europe. However, both technology and legal framework are evolving very fast, and we expect that in the next 2–3 years (and at the latest in the time horizon of our Vision 2030), the majority of the issues can be resolved when following the recommendations.

Accordingly, we will present first in summary, then in overview points, a roadmap for achieving this cost-attractive vision. We do not interpret the topic of viable AV in MaaS business in the narrow sense of balance-sheet able costs, as these are currently not yet presentable, but rather in a broader sense including all cost-related factors; we understand our objective beyond the TCO (total cost of ownership) approach not only as a contribution to the consolidation of the total cost of mobility (TCM) but also as a contribution to economic efficiency—cost coverage—and profitability.

The roadmap for viable AV in MaaS business targets all the related actors in the public transportation. Specifically, at the lowest level we have the vehicle manufacturers, who should be able to develop and market at competitive prices large numbers of vehicles, creating profit for their companies. We then have the service provision companies, developing fleet management solutions, who should be able to provide their services to the public transport operators (PTOs) and public transport agencies as commercial for-profit companies. Next, we have the PTOs/PTAs that are in general funded by public funding and have as target to provide high-quality public transportation services, with as low costs as possible for the financing government or municipal authorities, taking into account social and environmental targets defined by the public authorities. Finally, we have the citizens who as users require an affordable public transportation service with a high level of service quality. Our roadmap covers each of the above actors, with different time horizons. However, as we cannot give recommendations to citizens, a few for the EU itself are included below, in addition to the others.

Roadmap: Step 1–2022–2024

R_2022–24.1 (Recommendation for OEM):

Freeze the vehicle design to a standardised model

Today vehicle manufacturers are producing permanent beta-versions of the automated minibuses, with continuous changes and medications. As result each vehicle unit is a prototype almost individually constructed, which results in very high unit costs. The manufacturer should freeze the design and implantation to a standard model and proceed so that they can next advance to chain production, bring the production cost per vehicle to a fraction of today’s price and open the way for a large number of orders by the PTOs/PTAs. Currently, there are neither economies of scale nor economies of scope in the market, which are urgently needed for cost-attractiveness.

R_2022–24.2 (Recommendation for OEM/PTOs/PTAs):

Intensify the use of data and AI to reach SAE level 4 and enable profitable business models for OEMs, PTOs and related service providers

The improvement of road behaviour requires solid automated recognition of different events and situations. This can only be done with the use of AI technologies. However, AI technologies require relevant data, coming from the deployment environments. Today, the vehicles produced in the European Union do not have enough data coming from European streets, thereby hindering the substitution of the safety driver by a back-office supervisor. The collection and analysis of the massively required relevant data are also hindered by the misunderstanding of the GDPR rules and restrictions by the PTOs and PTAs, who simply prohibit the mass collection and analysis of the data collected (or being able to be collected) by the deployed vehicles. In addition, the effort required by the manufactures to analyse the data is beyond their capacity, and the pavement towards profitable business models for PTOs is not realistic. Thus, from one side the public and EU authorities should provide clarifications on the GDPR overreach, reassuring the European OEMs to develop GDPR compliant AI and enable a GDPR performant AI-based ecosystem for EU CCAM mobility. GDPR compliance for AI should become mandatory for non-European competitors to ensure a symmetry in competition with home competitors.

R_2022–24.3 (Recommendation for OEM):

Clarify the business model: choose between selling vehicles and providing services

Today vehicle manufacturers have an unclear business model that is neither this of a car seller nor of a service provider. The manufacturers try to make their profit from both selling vehicles (hardware) and providing required services (from commissioning to maintenance and supervision). As a result, the overall cost to the PTO/PTA is both high as CAPEX and as OPEX making any large-scale acquisition plan extremely costly. Past experience (in the 1970s–1990s) has shown that equivalent companies (like IBM in the 1970s and 1980s) were able to dominate the market by providing a services model (software rental) and providing the hardware at cost price or even free of cost (but with long-term service and software leasing contract), whereas car companies were making their business by selling hardware only. This means vehicle manufacturers have to identify, analyse and design business strategies/opportunities and models for profitable automated minibus applications, for example, the use of existing infrastructure data to improve the behaviour of the vehicle in the street and its attractiveness.

R_2022–24.4 (Recommendation for OEM/PTOs/PTAs):

Create alliances and/or partnerships with automated minibus: ‘competitors’ in Europe (coopetition) in order to set common targets to win the European market

Automated minibuses are manufactured today in many countries around the world, from China to the USA, where the state (China) and private companies (USA) are investing billions per year. In Europe the relevant companies do not have the possibility to raise even a fraction of the USA and Chinese investments. It is more than urgent for the different manufacturers to align their efforts to provide solutions adapted to the European market, before the international players take over the European market offering lower prices. The fragmentation of the European market of vehicle manufacturers and the lack of communication and collaboration do not further allow the creation of a dynamic and sustainable business ecosystem in order to be competitive with non-European manufacturers by offering competitive prices. In order to assure supply chains for vehicle components and to avoid a market consolidation via bankruptcies, vehicle manufacturers should identify, analyse and design partnering strategies/opportunities with service providers and create new partner-oriented business models for a profitable automated minibus system. This could be interesting in particular for open API, open data and open protocols. The recommendations in this deliverable can be implemented independently, but it would be best to be considered together to optimise cost-effectiveness, where each manufacturer can specialise in the areas of its best expertise, thus reducing costs.

R_2022–24.5 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Redefine and integrate automated minibuses (shared vehicles and services providing ecological, social and cost benefits) into the sustainable urban mobility planning of cities (SUMP), defining target areas for initial large-scale deployments

With a laissez-faire strategy, the development from status quo to a mobility system with AVs could end in more individual private transport and weakening of public transport. Considering that the urban public transport mobility strategy implementation can take 10 years from the moment of its definition, PTOs and PTAs must integrate in their development/adaptation urban mobility strategic planning the use and deployment of AVs, even if the technology is not yet to the expected level. With a 10 years lead time to implementation, PTOs/PTAs need to anticipate as early as possible the future deployments and initiate the required studies to evaluate costs, define possible deployment areas and define targeted service levels.

The AVENUE environmental impact assessment shows that if the automated minibuses are well utilised in terms of mileage and regularly used by passengers, they will present great advantages over individual vehicles. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to integrate automated minibuses in the strategic planning of a MaaS/ITS ecosystem to enable positive externalities (through increased citizen choice and inclusiveness, improved fleet efficiency, saving natural resources and energy etc.) and lower external costs (ecological advantage). The governance will decide if the use of automated minibuses is environmentally friendly and sustainable or not. Therefore, a system should be created in which it is standard that vehicles and services are shared, which would also improve the ratio of costs to paying customers.

R_2022–24.6 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Strengthen the positive attitude towards a high acceptance, and initiate information campaigns and nudges towards citizens and decision-makers to present advantages, issues and changes to achieve the citizens’ intended use of public transportation, on-demand services and in particular automated minibuses in MaaS

The transition from fixed line and fixed time-table public transportation towards an on-demand and door-to-door public transportation is a major paradigm change for the passengers. If this is not well explained, it could create a negative/rejection attitude of the citizens. An important finding of the AVENUE social impact assessment is that (potential) users present a positive and receptive attitude towards the automated minibuses. Therefore, there is potential to convince others through well-targeted communication campaigns, especially in social media. It is a recognised principle of economics that increasing demand, e.g. through more customers due to a higher acceptance of shared mobility with automated minibuses, could reduce the cost per customer. However, erroneous use of automated minibus-based mobility can drastically increase operational and external costs (e.g. using the automated minibuses for very short distances or as substitute to public mass transport (tramway, trains, etc.), as it is the case when automated minibuses are used like robotaxis) and lower service quality. In this case an information campaign should be started as soon as possible to inform the citizens of the benefits of the new models of transport and the related issues. Create positive incentives towards the use of automated minibuses (nudges).

R_2022–24.7 (Recommendation for the European Union):

Propose an EU-wide standardised and common certification methodology for automated minibuses, reducing costs and promoting cross-country markets

Throughout Europe each country is setting up its own certification process and rules for automated vehicles. As a result, the same vehicle needs to be homologated under different rules in each deployment country. Although steps have been already made to simplify the process, a European-wide regulation (as is the case with traditional vehicles) will strongly promote the market, reduce the acquisition costs and allow cross-country commerce of AVs and of their components like batteries.

R_2022–24.8 (Recommendation for the European Union/PTOs/PTAs):

Ensuring symmetry in competition between public and private PTOs through avoiding closed ecosystems and respecting European laws like GDPR, DSA and DMA

We recommend open platforms, open APIs and open data which respect GDPR, DSA and DMA to avoid closed private ecosystems and enable fair competition in the mobility market. To this end, the EU has to create the regulatory and governance conditions for the PTAs to orchestrate a fair and balanced competition on the local, national and EU levels (seamless interoperability) and thus create a European mobility ecosystem which serves the general interest and promotes a European mobility industry ecosystem. The EU has to make laws which anticipate automated minibuses in MaaS/ITS and anticipate the speed of legislative processes. Once closed ecosystems are created with gatekeepers as is the case in several other European industries, it will be too late to regulate the mobility market ex post due to the already created facts and dominant positions.

Roadmap: Step 2–2024–2026

R_2024–26.1 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Define a roadmap for the design and implementation of an adequate technical urban infrastructure, integrating automated minibuses (traffic lights, charging station etc.) in it to increase the safety and the ability to get the safety driver out and the related costs

A roadmap for the design and implementation of an adequate technical infrastructure regarding battery charging, communication infrastructure/data exchange, vehicle-related services and maintenance needs to be defined and included in the sustainable urban development planning (SUMP), with an at least 10 years’ horizon. The PTAs must be coordinated with urban planning authorities to identify how the city will develop and how the required infrastructure will be installed. This planning will be required in order to secure the required funding and authorisations. The urban planning should take into account the needs of automated minibuses for accurate geolocalisation (centimetric) and identify shadow areas where additional equipment will need to be installed (e.g. RTK (real-time kinematic) positioning, roadside sensorics on traffic lights (vehicle to infrastructure, V2I; vehicle to vehicle, V2V; or vehicle to passenger, V2P)). Furthermore, cybersecurity as well as physical security of the installations should be integrated in the planning, and backup solutions as well as disaster recovery solutions should be anticipated. Automated minibuses in MaaS or better later automated minibuses in ITS should thus integrate the infrastructure as a long-term strategy to create inherent resilience of all the transport system.

R_2024–26.2 (Recommendation for Service Providers):

Value-added in-vehicle services (for passenger comfort, safety and security, navigation etc.) to increase the acceptance by the citizen and the attractiveness of services

Based on the local needs, regulations and target service quality, a series of passenger in-vehicle services, replacing the driver offered services, must be planned before the deployment of a full-scale, driverless public transportation service. The in-vehicle services should be able to provide easily accessible alternatives to the services offered by the bus driver, preserving the passenger privacy, and enhancing the security of the passengers in the vehicle. A way for the passenger to interact with a human assistant should be available in the vehicle. The services will need to be supported by target information campaign and clearly indicated in the vehicle.

R_2024–26.3 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs/European Union):

Plan the transition from driver-based operation to driverless operation of vehicles, from the point of view of today’s bus drivers

The suppression of the bus drivers will be seen as a threat of job losses of the current drivers. A medium- to long-term transition plan should be developed for the gradual reduction of the number of drivers and their conversion to back-office operators and intervention team operators. This plan should consider the natural departure of personnel (e.g. retirement), the lack of bus drivers and the lack of attractivity of the bus driver profession and organise the medium- to long-term re-education of the drivers to the new functions.

R_2024–26.4 (Recommendation for the European Union):

Establishment of an open legislative database to make the different European regulations more transparent and to ease the diffusion of CCAM in MaaS in the European Union

The fragmentation of European legislation in terms of deployment of CCAM vehicles is an administrative obstacle for pan-European deployment of innovative mobility services, especially for SMEs, who do not have the means to study the differences between EU countries’ legislation. A legislative database at European level (similar to the existing platforms in the USA) which brings up-to-date and real-time information about the fast-growing AV legislation on local, state and regional levels is missing, and it should be in place and operational by 2026. This could simplify the planning of all stakeholders, like vehicle manufacturers, deployers of automated minibuses, transport operators, states, municipalities etc., and encourage the diffusion of automated minibus technologies and the improvement of the transport system.

R_2024–26.5 (Recommendation for PTOs, Vehicle AV Manufacturer (OEMs), AV Service Providers):

Disclosure of the MaaS integration-relevant AV goals, offerings and needs of PTOs, OEMs and other stakeholders of the AV in MaaS ecosystem

Currently minibus manufacturers (OEMs) and AV service manufacturers to realise automation of the vehicles are facing huge troubles with businesses and offerings which are not or not adequately aligned to the needs of PTOs. Thus, OEMs create multiple own AV ecosystems which require a lot of resources but cannot be integrated into a common MaaS ecosystem and into one common citizen-centric MaaS application. As a consequence, these AVs are often applied as robotaxis which are in competition with PTOs and create potentially a weakening of the PTOs and additional traffic and congestion costs particularly in cities. Open standardised API and open data are thus necessary for the AVs to be interoperable in a MaaS ecosystem and enable cooperation with other MaaS partners. Through disclosure of technical specifications and interfaces (APIs) and long-term sourcing and contract strategy from the PTOs, a long-term strategy becomes possible for all the stakeholders of the transport ecosystem of the city. In particular, the OEM strategy and accordingly the financing of the development of AV (e.g. SAE level 4, interoperability etc.) for the PTO of the MaaS can be eased. An alternative would be governmental financing as is the case in China or strong financing companies (like US-GAFAs) which are more interested in capturing value through closed (centralised, non-federated) ecosystems.

Roadmap: Step 3–2026–2028

R_2026–28.1 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Present a plan for an integrated citizen-centric mobility ecosystem, taking into account all available/possible transport modes, in order to offer a unique integrated solution for passenger mobility needs

Different mobility modes are becoming available in cities, each with its own targets and different passenger needs. At the same time, many mobile phone applications are appearing, giving access to the different mobility modes. However, today these mobility solution modes represent competing mobility solutions, instead of complementary mobility solutions.

A plan should thus be created for seamless multimodal forms of transport, where automated minibuses play a central role as mobility gap filler, enabling spatial (e.g. area instead of line in particular in time of low demand), temporal (e.g. on-demand) and functional flexibility (door-to-public transportation network, part of the public transport network, door-to-door) similarly attractive to a private car.

R_2026–28.2 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Develop and promote mobile apps for seamless on-demand door-to-door transport and accessible to all types of citizens (inclusion)

Before the deployment of automated minibuses, aggregator apps for seamless and efficient on-demand door-to-door journeys for citizens should be developed and extensively tested, especially for passengers with special needs. All mobility modalities need to be integrated in a single app, increasing thus the mobility offer. The offer could in particular be adapted to all passengers depending on the persona (mobility for work or for leisure), weather (a passenger would probably prefer the automated minibuses in case of rain instead of bicycle) etc. and of the PRM needs and capabilities. In order to provide an integrated citizen-centric mobility ecosystem, the passenger capabilities should be integrated in the app service (e.g. we cannot propose to an 85-year-old person to complete his trip using a bicycle!) which will suggest and reserve the most adapted mobility solution.

R_2026–28.3 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Create a plan, identifying which and how data can be provided as open data for value-added services

The operation of automated minibuses in public transportation will generate large quantities of data which until now were very difficult to collect—from exact passenger trips, to road conditions (congestion, speed etc.), to passenger incidents and vehicle status. These data, if exploited correctly, will allow, e.g. service quality improvement, trip optimisation, energy consumption reduction but also optimisation of automated minibus fleets, infrastructure, city planning etc. However, in order to promote the creation of new services and new mobility models, the data should become available to third parties. A plan must be ready, defining which data can be available (preserving any possible sensible passenger privacy information) and how third parties will be able to access and use them. Detailed specifications and formats should be easily available and published so that the interested parties can start the development of analytical tools and services. This has to be regulated by the ecosystem provided by the PTA in the privacy and security concept.

R_2026–28.4 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Management concept for coopetitive public/private PTO collaborations to increase the complementarities of the means of transports and the efficient use of the fleets and of the transport system as a whole

In the long run, innovations and new mobility services will be developed from different private companies. These innovations will need to be integrated to the overall mobility offer to enable increase in efficiencies and allow a citizen-centric approach. PTAs will thus need to design a management concept for a balanced ecosystem for public/private PTO collaborations to increase the complementarities of the means of transports and the efficient use of the fleets through the use of data and of the transport system as a whole.

R_2026–28.5 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Create and align PTO and other stakeholder (e.g. service providers, OEMs etc.) business models for the transport system

Providing high-quality, low-cost, on-demand, door-to-door public transportation services will eventually have a major impact on the mobility business in the urban environment. Taxi services, private transport services and even delivery services will be highly impacted. The PTAs should clarify the perimeter of the services that will be provided by the automated minibuses, so that they would impact the existing business models of other mobility stakeholders. For example, in order to avoid competition with taxi services (including robotaxis), door-to-door services can be limited to a certain distance or time while imposing no limits to door-to-hub automated minibus-based transport.

R_2026–28.6 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs):

Define an attractive tariff system and incentives for citizens to favour seamless driverless transport

One of the key goals of the deployment of automated minibuses in door-to-door, on-demand urban mobility is to provide citizens an efficient mobility service and ‘pull’ them to abandon the use of a private car without coercive ‘push’ policy but with an attractive mobility offer (the so-called pull strategy). However, one of the key elements to this transition is the tariffing model. PTAs and PTOs should therefore create an attractive tariff system together and provide incentives for citizens to utilise the multimodal MaaS system instead of utilising privately owned cars or robotaxis. The proposed tariffs could, e.g. be compatible with the overall cost for using a private car, including parking fees, infrastructure costs, energy consumption, urban toll etc.

R_2026–28.7 (Recommendation for OEM/Service Provider/PTOs/PTAs):

Adopt and develop ecosystems based on standardised open APIs and open protocols

A key element in the development of interoperability of all the means of transport, their platforms and apps, but also of a competitive market, is the use of standardised interfaces and protocols that open the doors to innovation, marked competition, increased quality and price reductions. In order to avoid a winner-takes-it-all situation, where a major non-European company dominates the market, European manufacturers (OEMs) should propose, national authorities should adopt and PTOs, app providers etc. should use open standards for APIs and protocols.

R_2026–28.8 (Recommendation for National and Local Authorities):

Design and establish a novel governance concept for citizen-centric automated minibuses in a MaaS to serve general interest and the creation of the required ecosystem to support economically viable deployments

The deployment of CCAM will require the creation of a local, regional or national ecosystem, where key expertise can be found. This will require a dual action from the authorities, in both the legislative and educational domains.

On the level of city or national/regional governments, it will be necessary to design, implement and supervise individual technical certification and licensing concepts for automated minibuses and their integration into MaaS according to respective regulations and selected standards. However, the required expertise, be it technical or regulatory, must be available in the local ecosystem. For this, relevant authorities will need to create technical trainings and integrate at different levels of education the required courses and programmes to create the locally needed expertise.

This implementation will enable economic efficiency and, above all, social and ecological benefits that are only possible through sensitive mobility governance. To do so, a balance between individual and general interest must be found for the stakeholders on the city level.

Roadmap: Step 4–2028–2030

R_2028–30.1 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs/European Union):

Integration of automated minibuses in low- and medium-scale areas and in MaaS/ITS to satisfy citizen needs

By 2030, and based on the strategy that was developed earlier, the first medium-scale deployments of AVs should become available in selected targeted areas with low and medium mobility demand, fully integrated to the MaaS services. The deployment should address the needs in rural and suburban areas where public transport is weak and enable flexibility which is nearly as convenient but much cheaper than a private car. The target being the integration of automated minibuses to other means of transport within a MaaS (through an app also adapted for persons with special needs) would increase the attractivity for passengers in terms of time, space, function and usability. Beyond this inclusive approach, starting in rural and suburban areas would further have the advantage to raise the level of education with a lower technical complexity.

R_2028–30.2 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs/European Union):

Increasing trust and reliability of the mobility system for the citizen by AI-based value-adding user experience

As most of the offered mobility services will be eventually based and/or make use of a AI-based real-time self-optimisation, leading to a better information situation and permanently optimised journey for citizens, it is of major importance for the PTA/PTOs to have established, first, a strategy to reply to the questions of the citizens regarding data usage and how decisions are taken and, second, a ‘disaster recovery’ strategy to reply to incidents and failures of the services, which will eventually increase the positive user experience and trust into the mobility in ITS ecosystems.

R_2028–30.3 (Recommendation for PTOs/PTAs/European Union):

Use the automated minibus in ITS to improve the flexibility, the resilience and the efficiency of the transport system as a whole

By the application of AI-based real-time self-optimisation of the entire automated minibus in MaaS ecosystem in all facets, the risk of technical failures and downtimes can be significantly reduced, which increases the cost-efficiency at the same time. This increases the attractivity for EU towards a faster market penetration of the automated minibus in MaaS/ITS concept.

5.4.3 Transition Measures

When focusing the most challenging transitions towards the Scenario 3: AVs in MaaS and the vision: AVs in ITS, numerous operational measures can be derived from the previously defined transformation recommendations with specific regard to the individual situation of the application field.

As a suggested subset of the any size portfolio of transformation measures, some typical and exemplary implementation measures have been selected, also regarding the fact that there is an n to m relationship between transition recommendations and transition measures:

• Technological implementation of vehicles and infrastructure

  By using AI, the insights derived from the journeys can help to optimise the infrastructure. Furthermore, AI can be employed to monitor vehicle utilisation and subsequently contribute to the timing of the means of transport, which in turn can result in fewer empty journeys. To guarantee optimal communication between the actors in the transport system, it is vital to expand the data network of the infrastructure, vehicles and other actors, with 4G and 5G. This data network is equally required to enable comprehensive function, communication and interaction of the sensors in the vehicles and the infrastructure with the AVs.

• Software and hardware implementation

  By integrating AI in the MaaS system, vehicle and user data can be analysed and evaluated. This allows for the recognition of mobility patterns and, as a result, the optimisation of vehicle utilisation and trip adaptation. It can even be used to modify and optimise the infrastructure to the users’ mobility needs. This translates to a reduction in journeys without passengers. With the assistance of AI in the MaaS system, route information, such as accidents, disruptions and route closures, can be communicated to the MaaS platform in real time and processed.

• Regulatory and legal conditions

  To implement the project successfully and set uniform targets, contractual coordination between all public and private mobility providers and the municipalities is needed. In addition, the adopted laws must be extendable to be applied to new technologies and developments.

• Client-oriented needs

  Using AI, the various transport options can be coordinated with each other, leading to schedule optimisation and thus to a reduction in waiting times, enabling seamless transport for the user. On top of that, the additional development of individual mobility in the form of AV on-demand buses promotes the decrease of private vehicle ownership.

5.5 Design of an Implementation Plan and a Transition Roadmap (Step 6)

The complete portfolio of transition measures is regarded as the basis for a comprehensive categorisation/structuring, pragmatic characterisation and prioritisation/scheduling in the subsequent step, regarding manifold interdependencies among the defined measures.

• The results of these activities can be displayed within an ‘implementation plan’ for scenario 3.

• An implementation plan could be structured into implementation categories like business, technical social, environmental and governmental measures. Each measure could be defined by criteria like category (human resources, process, know-how, partners, technology, etc.), measure description, criticality, time frame, cost/budget, responsibility, status, etc.

5.6 Compilation of a Comprehensive Transition Plan (Step 7)

The final transition planning step of the transition concept (represented in Fig. 19.2) for achieving the future vision (AVs in ITS) is titled as ‘transition plan’. It is described as the compilation (comprehensive, systemically structured ‘folder’ of transition steps and planning results) of all results of the previous transition steps 2–6 for each scenario (mid- or long-term relevance) for the transition from the status quo (step 1) to achieve the future Vision 2030 (step 8).

In analogy to a business or innovation plan, the ‘transition plan’ is characterised as an orientation guide and thus strategic and operational basis for all stakeholders of the mobility transition. From a scenario-based logic, it also can be divided into partial transition plans of scenario 1 as well as of scenario 2, which are both oriented in a long-term perspective to the future vision of AV in ITS. Each of these scenarios is aiming in a mid-term perspective to prepare and achieve scenario 3, a preliminary evolution stage to achieve AV in ITS as the future vision. Depending on the individual organisation of the urban mobility ecosystem transition as a strategic project, the transition plan can be managed by a dedicated overall or scenario transition-specific transition manager who is responsible for the general design and controlling of the transition plan, the iterative-incremental design and change updates, as well as adequate implementation and adherence of all transition activities to this plan.

6 Conclusion

The goal of this chapter was to develop an equal and balanced strategic and operational transition concept from the current status quo towards a successfully deployed sustainable urban mobility ecosystem (future vision). Together with all experts mentioned in the introduction, a generic eight-step transition approach following the described criteria was developed: description of the status quo for each identified scenario (step 1); description of a future vision (step 8); description of six transition steps from the status quo to the future vision; identification of success factors and obstacles (step 2); identification and characterisation of stakeholders (step 3); definition of transition goals, strategies and business models (step 4); transition recommendations and measures (step 5); design of an implementation plan and a transition roadmap (step 6); and compilation of a comprehensive transition plan (step 7). In particular, a roadmap with a timeline categorisation of recommendations for the stakeholders was designed to propose how to realise the desired future developed by the team (Vision 2030, Chap. 18). The five dimensions (technical, social, economic, environmental and governance) were used to better understand and underline the interrelationship of the proposed holistic approach.

In terms of methodology, a limitation of the described approach is however that the concrete status quos of the pilot sites were not taken into account in an adequate way. Just the status quos of vehicles (Chaps. 3 and 11) and governance (Chap. 16) were considered. In fact, the status quo as a starting point is different for each pilot site. There are further several transition plans possible to achieve the same vision. Even the goals derived from this vision must be adapted individually to the specific situation of each pilot site. These weaknesses will be addressed within the subsequent project ULTIMO (2022–2026).