Replacing private car travel with fleets of shared vehicles cuts emissions, decreases congestion and frees public space, writes Francisco Furtad

Furtado, Francisco

LSE Research Online

Simulating	shared	mobility	in	HelsinkiNew	types	of	ride-sharing	services	offered	by	companies	like	Uber,	Lyft	and	Cabify	have	been	gaining	ground	inrecent	years,	especially	in	urban	areas.	The	conflation	of	technology,	both	within	and	outside	of	the	transportsector,	with	evolving	societal	trends	around	the	production	and	consumption	of	services	has	been	faster	thananticipated	by	many	authorities	and	has	outpaced	the	speed	of	regulatory	adjustments.The	International	Transport	Forum	at	the	OECD	has	been	looking	at	the	potential	of	new	shared	urban	mobilitysolutions	leveraged	by	digital	connectivity.	In	our	studies	we	simulate	replacing	motorised	road	trips	(private	car,bus	and	taxi)	with	two	types	of	on-demand	and	dynamically	dispatched	services	–	shared	taxis	and	taxi-buses.We	develop	an	agent-based	model	that	reproduces	the	entire	personal	mobility	and	the	interactions	betweenusers	and	the	new	shared	services	over	the	course	of	one	working	day	for	an	urban	region.	The	model	outputsinclude	a	wide	array	of	indicators	measuring	the	impacts	on	accessibility,	metro/rail	ridership,	required	parkingspace,	congestion	and	CO2	emissions,	plus	these	new	transportation	modes’	performance	regarding	servicequality,	productive	efficiency	and	cost	competitiveness.Table	1.	Shared	mobility	services	testedOur	previous	simulations	applied	to	the	Lisbon	case	study	(ITF	2016;	2017)	provided	extremely	promising	results.However,	results	from	one	city	are	never	fully	and	directly	transferable	to	another	location	and	the	ITF	set	out	totest	the	transferability	of	the	model	to	other	regions	around	the	world.	The	Shared	Mobility	Simulations	forHelsinki	report	is	the	first	that	examines	a	different	case	study	–	there	are	additional	forthcoming	studies	onAuckland,	Dublin	and	Lyon.	The	results	will	be	used	by	the	Helsinki	region	in	its	long-term	land	use,	housing	andtransport	planning	process.	The	main	aim	of	the	plan	is	to	decrease	emissions	drastically	by	the	year	2030.LSE Business Review: Simulating shared mobility in Helsinki Page 1 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-11-14Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/11/14/simulating-shared-mobility-in-helsinki/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/Different	scenarios	were	tested.	These	included	the	full	replacement	(100	per	cent)	of	all	car	and	bus	trips	or	thepartial	adoption	of	the	new	shared	services	by	targeting	specific	trips	and	users	(e.g.	only	the	20	per	cent	of	cartrips	more	likely	to	shift	to	shared	mobility	are	replaced).	The	current	rail-based	services	(rail,	metro	and	tram)were	kept	operating	in	all	cases.	In	fact,	shared	taxis	and	taxi-buses	can	be	employed	to	provide	first/last	mileconnections	to	heavy	capacity	public	transport.	We	found	out	that	for	the	Helsinki	Metropolitan	Area	the	bestresults	for	emissions	and	congestion	are	obtained	when	all	car	trips	are	replaced	and	buses	are	kept.	In	thisscenario:CO2	emissions	from	passenger	transport	would	fall	34	per	cent;Congestion	would	be	reduced	by	37	per	cent;Much	of	the	space	currently	used	for	car	parking	could	be	used	for	other	purposes;Metro	and	rail	passenger-km	increase	by	16	per	cent;All	car	travel	could	be	provided	with	a	fleet	around	4	per	cent	of	the	current	number	of	private	vehicles.Figure	1.	CO2	emission	and	congestion	decrease	from	current	caseShared	mobility	also	means	fewer	transfers,	less	waiting	and	shorter	travel	times	compared	to	traditional	publictransport.	The	improved	quality	of	the	service	could	attract	car	users	that	currently	do	not	use	public	transport	andfoster	a	shift	away	from	individual	car	travel.	The	Helsinki	study	confirms	the	initial	results	for	Lisbon	that	sharedmobility	improves	access	to	jobs	(and	public	services)	notably	for	citizens	in	areas	with	few	such	offers.	Sharedmobility	services	thus	can	play	an	important	role	in	creating	more	equitable	access	to	opportunities	for	citizens.Figure	2.	Accessibility	to	employment	compared	to	baseline	(100%	car	and	buses	replaced)LSE Business Review: Simulating shared mobility in Helsinki Page 2 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-11-14Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/11/14/simulating-shared-mobility-in-helsinki/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/Furthermore,	the	Helsinki	study	confirms	that	shared	mobility	can	be	highly	effective	feeder	services	for	high-capacity	public	transport	systems.	As	in	the	Lisbon	case,	scenarios	providing	first-	and	last-mile	shared	servicesshowed	that	this	can	increase	rail	and	metro	ridership	up	to	23	per	cent.For	the	first	time,	a	focus	group	and	user	survey	complemented	this	shared	mobility	study.	The	feedback	frompotential	users	in	the	Helsinki	region	revealed	that	citizens	are	very	positive	about	shared	services	as	anadditional	tool	to	improve	mobility	in	the	Helsinki	region.	Potential	users	are	very	sensitive,	however,	to	price	andservice	quality.	Respondents	want	shared	services	to	be	available	in	the	entire	metropolitan	area,	not	just	in	thecity	centre.	Shared	services	as	feeders	for	rail	and	metro	lines	are	seen	as	highly	relevant.	In	the	survey,participants	chose	shared	mobility	services	for	63	per	cent	of	all	trips.	There	is	some	evidence,	however,	thatpublic	transport	users	in	the	Helsinki	region	are	more	willing	than	car	users	to	adopt	the	new	shared	modes.Those	aged	55	and	above	and	those	living	far	from	the	city	centre	also	tend	to	favour	shared	mobility.A	fundamental	insight	obtained	from	our	investigation	is	that	these	new	shared	mobility	solutions	need	to	beimplemented	at	a	sufficient	scale.	In	the	scenarios	we	simulated	the	minimum	number	of	car	trips	replaced	is	20per	cent.	Actually,	the	results	of	previous	ITF	reports	indicate	that	low	replacement	rates	can	lead	to	increases	incongestion.	Interestingly,	in	some	urban	areas	where	app-based	ride	services	have	been	growing	(e.g.	New	Yorkand	San	Francisco)	there	is	indeed	a	concern	that	registered	vehicle-km	and	congestion	increases	are	related	tothe	emergence	of	these	services.	The	elasticity	between	the	car	replacement	rate	and	impacts	on	congestion	andemissions	is	not	constant.	It	can	be	negative	for	very	low	car	replacement	rates,	but	for	higher	substitution	levelsthe	elasticity	becomes	positive.	One	of	the	reasons	this	happens	is	because	with	a	bigger	pool	of	users	the	trips“matching	probability”	increases	and	higher	vehicle	occupancies	along	more	direct	routes	can	be	achieved.Sufficient	scale	is	also	important	to	obtain	manageable	costs.	The	Finnish	capital	has	already	experimented	withinnovative	services	that	share	some	similarities	to	the	taxi-bus	services,	the	on-demand	buses	known	asKutsuplus.	One	of	the	reasons	this	experiment	was	abandoned	was	its	prohibitive	cost.LSE Business Review: Simulating shared mobility in Helsinki Page 3 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-11-14Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/11/14/simulating-shared-mobility-in-helsinki/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/Finally,	a	key	takeaway	from	the	Helsinki	study	is	to	target	shared	mobility	solutions	for	suburban	car	userscurrently	not	well	served	by	public	transport.	In	the	Helsinki	simulations	these	services	have	maximum	positiveimpact	when	they	are	adopted	by	private	car	users.	For	trips	within	the	city	of	Helsinki	the	public	transport	offer	isalready	robust.	There	is	also	good	service	for	some	radial	axes	connecting	the	outer	areas	to	the	city	centre.However,	in	zones	with	lower	accessibility	to	the	trunk	routes	of	the	public	transport	network	and	for	travelpatterns	that	do	not	fit	the	radial-axis	logic	private	car	is	the	preferred	option.	Focusing	on	this	shift	wouldleverage	the	most	out	of	the	added	flexibility	and	comfort	provided	by	shared	mobility,	which	combined	with	publictransport	would	deliver	a	transport	system	that	as	a	whole	is	more	sustainable.You	may	also	like:What’s	holding	back	investment	and	innovation	in	renewable	energy?♣♣♣Notes:This	blog	post	is	based	on	the	OECD	report	Shared	Mobility	Simulations	for	Helsinki,	of	which	FranciscoFurtado	is	the	principal	author.The	post	gives	the	views	of	its	authors,	not	the	position	of	LSE	Business	Review	or	the	London	School	ofEconomics.Featured	image	credit:	Helsinki	Central	railway	station,	by	Kwong	Yee	Cheng,	under	a	CC-BY-NC-SA-2.0licenceWhen	you	leave	a	comment,	you’re	agreeing	to	our	Comment	Policy.Francisco	Furtado	is	a	modeller/analyst	in	the	International	Transport	Forum	(ITF)	at	the	OECD.There	he	is	part	of	the	Shared	Mobility	team	and	was	the	main	author	of	the	Shared	MobilitySimulations	for	Helsinki	report.	He	is	a	civil	engineer	with	experience	in	the	planning	andmanagement	of	major	civil	construction	projects,	including	transport	infrastructure.	He	has	a	PhDand	Master’s	in	Transportation	Systems	from	Instituto	Superior	Técnico	in	the	MIT	Portugalprogram.		LSE Business Review: Simulating shared mobility in Helsinki Page 4 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-11-14Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2017/11/14/simulating-shared-mobility-in-helsinki/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/

Simulating shared mobility in Helsinki

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online