On the importance of demand consolidation in Mobility on Demand

International audienceMobility on Demand (MoD) services, like Uber and Lyft, are revolutionizing the way people move in cities around the world and are often considered a convenient alternative to public transit, since they offer higher Quality of Service (QoS-less waiting time, door-to-door service) at a cheap price. In the next decades, these advantages are expected to be further amplified by Automated MoD (AMoD), in which drivers will be replaced by automated vehicles, with a big gain in terms of cost-efficiency. MoD is usually intended as a door-to-door service. However, there has been recent interest toward consolidating, e.g., aggregating, the travel demand by limiting the number of admitted stop locations. This implies users have to walk from/to their intended origin/destination. The contribution of this paper is a systematic study the impact of consolidation on the operator cost and on user QoS. We introduce a MoD system where pickups and drop-offs can only occur in a limited subset of admitted stop locations. The density of such locations is a system parameter: the less the density, the more the user demand is consolidated. We show that, by decreasing stop density, we can increase system capacity (number of passengers we are able to serve). On the contrary, increasing it, we can improve QoS. The system is tested in AMoDSim, an open-source simulator. The code to reproduce the results presented here is available on-line. This work is a first step toward flexible mobility services that are able to autonomously re-configure themselves, favoring capacity or QoS, depending on the amount of travel demand coming from users. In other words, the services we envisage in this work shift their operational mode to any intermediate point in the range from a taxi-like door-to-door service to a bus-like service, with few served stops and more passengers on-board

Keys to effective transit strategies for commuting

Commuting poses relevant challenges to cities\u2019 transport systems. Various studies have identified transit as a tool to enhance sustainability, efficiency and quality of the commute. The scope of this paper is to present strategies that increase public transport attractiveness and positively impact its modal share, looking at some case studies and underlining key success factors and possible elements of replica to be ultimately planned in some of the contexts of the Interreg project SMART-COMMUTING. The strategies analyzed in this paper concern prices and fares, service expansion, service improvements, usage of vehicle locators and other technology, changes to the built environment. Relevant gains in transit modal share are more easily achievable when considering integrations between various strategies, thus adapting and tailoring the planning process to the specific context

Approaching delivery as a service

This paper explores the new logistics business model of Delivery as a Service, a concept aiming at a more efficient, fast and customer-oriented practice, linking IT solution development, urban logistics operations, supply chain efficiency and new business models. Delivery as a Service (DaaS) is defined as a service-oriented delivery and business processes in line with customer expectations and needs in the on-demand economy. The approach of this paper is an industry report based on evidence collected in multiple exploratory European projects integrating ambitious and strategic findings on Internet of Things, urban planning, consolidation centres, transport optimisation, and clean vehicle use. It contributes to a future scenario of urban logistics business models

The Mobility Case for Regionalism

In the discourse of local government law, the idea that a mobile populace can “vote with its feet” has long served as a justification for devolution and decentralization. Tracing to Charles Tiebout’s seminal work in public finance, the legal-structural prescription that follows is that a diversity of independent and empowered local governments can best satisfy the varied preferences of residents metaphorically shopping for bundles of public services, regulatory environment, and tax burden. This localist paradigm generally presumes that fragmented governments are competing for residents within a given metropolitan area. Contemporary patterns of mobility, however, call into question this foundational assumption. People today move between — and not just within — metropolitan regions, domestically and even internationally. This is particularly so for a subset of residents — high human-capital knowledge workers and the so-called “creative class” — that is prominently coveted in this interregional competition. These modern mobile residents tend to evaluate the policy bundles that drive their locational decisions on a regional scale, weighing the comparative merits of metropolitan areas against each other. And local governments are increasingly recognizing that they need to work together at a regional scale to compete for these residents.This Article argues that this intermetropolitan mobility provides a novel justification for regionalism that counterbalances the strong localist tendency of the traditional Tieboutian view of local governance. Contrary to the predominant assumption in the legal literature, competition for mobile residents is as much an argument for regionalism as it has been for devolution and decentralization. In an era of global cities vying for talent, the mobility case for regionalism has significant doctrinal consequences for debates in local government law and public finance, including the scope of local authority, the nature of regional equity, and the structure of metropolitan collaboration

The Mobility Case for Regionalism

In the discourse of local government law, the idea that a mobile populace can “vote with its feet” has long served as a justification for devolution and decentralization. Tracing to Charles Tiebout’s seminal work in public finance, the legal-structural prescription that follows is that a diversity of independent and empowered local governments can best satisfy the varied preferences of residents metaphorically shopping for bundles of public services, regulatory environment, and tax burden. This localist paradigm generally presumes that fragmented governments are competing for residents within a given metropolitan area. Contemporary patterns of mobility, however, call into question this foundational assumption. People today move between — and not just within — metropolitan regions, domestically and even internationally. This is particularly so for a subset of residents — high human-capital knowledge workers and the so-called “creative class” — that is prominently coveted in this interregional competition. These modern mobile residents tend to evaluate the policy bundles that drive their locational decisions on a regional scale, weighing the comparative merits of metropolitan areas against each other. And local governments are increasingly recognizing that they need to work together at a regional scale to compete for these residents.This Article argues that this intermetropolitan mobility provides a novel justification for regionalism that counterbalances the strong localist tendency of the traditional Tieboutian view of local governance. Contrary to the predominant assumption in the legal literature, competition for mobile residents is as much an argument for regionalism as it has been for devolution and decentralization. In an era of global cities vying for talent, the mobility case for regionalism has significant doctrinal consequences for debates in local government law and public finance, including the scope of local authority, the nature of regional equity, and the structure of metropolitan collaboration

Macroeconomic Differentials and Adjustment in the Euro Area

There has recently been increased research and policy interest in the divergent macroeconomic performance in the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Understanding the underlying factors of macroeconomic differentials, the source and transmission of shocks and the adjustment process in the euro area is important to appropriate economic policy in the EMU. In a monetary union, the single monetary policy can only address common shocks. In the absence of nominal interest and exchange rates as policy instruments, to adjust to asymmetric shocks country specific shocks or idiosyncratic effects of common shocks, member countries have to resort to remaining tools of economic policy. In theory, the adjustment to asymmetric shocks and return to equilibrium can take place through four channels: a) market driven price and output adjustment; b) policy induced fiscal adjustment; c) risk-sharing against country-specific shocks through fiscal transfers and financial integration; d) labour mobility. Temporary inflation and output growth differentials are likely in a common currency area since prices and output adjustment is required to absorb shocks. In the euro area, output growth and inflation differentials are also related to the ongoing catch - up process in some of the member countries. Persistent inflation differentials can have negative effects on incomes and investment and result in divergent competitiveness and monetary conditions in the participating countries. Furthermore, inappropriate use of national fiscal policy and real exchange rate adjustment can lead to poor macroeconomic performance. The objective of this paper is to analyse macroeconomic differentials and the adjustment in the euro area so far with the aim to draw lessons and policy implications for the better functioning of the EMU and euro areaenlargement. The questions we address are the following: What do we know about macroeconomic differentials in the euro area? Are they temporary or persistent? What factors underlie them? What is the likelihood of asymmetric shocks in the euro area and what are their main transmission channels? What policy issues related to the macroeconomic adjustment in the EMU are most important at this stage? The remainder of this study is organised as follows. In Section 2 we analyse the size, evolution, persistence and underlying factors of output growth and inflation differentials. Section 3 discusses the likelihood of asymmetric shocks and their transmission across the euro area countries. In particular, we analyse trade linkages, including intra- and extra-euro area trade, financial integration and business cycle synchronisation. In Section 4 we discuss a number of policy issues related to the macroeconomic adjustment in EMU which have gained increased interest recently. We start with the role and effects of real interest rate and competitiveness differentials as adjustment channels. We discuss next policy issues related to fiscal adjustment and the impact of fiscal shocks in the euro area countries. We then discuss labour mobility as an adjustment mechanism. Finally, Section 5 summarises the main findings and draws policy implications for the EMU and the euro area enlargement.European Economic and Monetary Union, International transmission of shocks, Macroeconomic adjustment

Internal report cluster 1: Urban freight innovations and solutions for sustainable deliveries (3/4)

Technical report about sustainable urban freight solutions, part 3 of

"Making EMU Work: Some Lessons from the 1990s"

This paper investigates the lessons learned from Europe's convergence process of the 1990s. The paper challenges the conventional focus on labour market institutions and "structural rigidities" as the root cause of Europe's poor employment record. Instead, it is argued that macroeconomic demand management, particularly monetary policy, played the key role. Concentrating on Germany, the analysis shows that fiscal consolidation was accompanied by monetary tightness of an extraordinary degree and duration. This finding is of interest for the past as well as the future, for the Maastricht regime much resembles the one that produced the unsound policy mix of the 1990s: a constrained fiscal authority paired with an independent monetary authority free to impose its will on the overall outcome. The analysis thus highlights a key asymmetry in the Maastricht regime that is not unlikely to continue to inflict a deflationary bias on the system. It is argued that this policy bias may be overcome only if the ECB deliberately assumes its real role of generating domestic demand-led growth, thereby resolving Euroland's key structural problem: asymmetric monetary policy. Concerning the conventional structuralist theme, the analysis debunks the "Dutch myth" of supply-led growth through structural reform. Depicting a popular fallacy of composition, we stress that the peculiar Dutch strategy of demand-led growth does not present itself as an option for Euroland.