Assessment of Micromobility Infrastructure from the Perspective of Electromobility Development

Abstract

The aim of this article is to assess micromobility infrastructure from the perspective of the development of electromobility in Poland. The research problem was formulated in the form of a question: To what extent does the development of micromobility infrastructure contribute to changes in the electromobility process? In conceptual terms, point and linear transport infrastructure and means of transport adapted to a given infrastructure were identified. For the purposes of infrastructure research, models relating to point and linear micromobility infrastructure were used. The methodological basis was the adoption of five criteria for the design and evaluation of bicycle infrastructure, on the basis of which a theoretical model of sustainable micromobility development was created. In Poland, there is considerable interest in personal transportation devices. This is due to the high availability of PTMs, mainly because they do not require much parking space (point infrastructure) and provide relatively cheap travel compared to traveling by car, and they also speed up the first and last kilometers of the journey. In recent years, Poland has seen significant growth and development regarding linear infrastructure.

1. Introduction

The ever-increasing need for mobility and the dynamic development of cities have led to an increase in the number of journeys. Economic development and urban sprawl have increased the activity of residents in terms of car travel in urban areas, which is the main cause of traffic congestion. One solution to this phenomenon is to relieve road infrastructure from excessive congestion while providing the possibility of traveling short distances without having to cover the distance that separates us from public transport stops. The solution to this problem may be a shared mobility system, i.e., traveling using means of transport used by many users. These can be cars, bicycles, or scooters rented by the minute, hour, or for a longer period. In terms of urban mobility, car travel dominates in Poland, which is why other forms of mobility, such as walking, traveling on personal transport devices (PTD), cycling, or public transport, need to be balanced.

Companies offering shared scooters and bicycles are becoming an integral part of urban life. A report by Research And Markets estimates that the global number of bicycles in sharing systems may increase from 23 million at the end of 2022 to as many as 35 million by 2027, with more than 70 percent of that market located in Asia, led by China. In China, the number of bicycle rides in the capital city of Beijing alone has risen by 187 percent. This rebound in the transport sector shows how micromobility can become a key resource for communities. Although cyclists may still be reluctant to use public transport, electric scooters and bicycles can change the way people approach public life and the new social normal. The number of shared scooters worldwide is expected to grow at a rate of 13.4 percent over the same period, from 1.6 million at the end of 2022 to 3 million by 2027. McKinsey estimates that the average cost of an electric scooter is $400, and the investment pays off after just 114 days.

The European Parliament has adopted a resolution on developing an EU strategy for cycling transport, obliging the European Commission to take action to double the number of kilometers traveled by bicycle in Europe by 2030. One of the key issues is the financing of public transport and micromobility systems. The European Commission supports the development of urban infrastructure and shared mobility by allocating 86 billion euros to projects related to electric scooters and car sharing, of which Poland is entitled to use 17 percent. For Polish local governments, it may also prove crucial that Poland has just received 5 billion euros from the RePowerEU program, which is part of the National Recovery Plan. By 2030, most European cities will take control of micromobility infrastructure in the form of mobility hubs, charging points, and designated parking areas. In Europe, shared scooters are available in 850 cities, with the highest number in Germany (152 locations). App-based bicycle and e-bike rental services are available in over 180 European cities and continue to grow. Scooter rentals are offered in more than 130 cities. In Poland, there are 109 such services operating in major cities like Warsaw, Gdansk, and the Upper Silesian metropolitan area. After Poland, the highest numbers are found in Italy (95) and France (79).

Shared micromobility is an urban transport model that involves the short-term rental of small vehicles such as electric scooters, bicycles, and electric mopeds. In this model, users can rent bicycles and scooters for short distances using a mobile app or terminals available in the city. Shared micromobility is becoming increasingly popular in large cities as an alternative form of transport that can be more environmentally friendly and efficient than traditional means of transport. Their small size and ability to navigate narrow streets where public transport cannot reach makes travel easier for people. Micromobility vehicles are beneficial for the environment because they do not produce significant noise and have minimal carbon footprint. The development of transport infrastructure should take into account the need to seek alternatives to car use in order to diversify and balance forms of urban mobility. This implies the creation of a mobility model that will promote the integration of, among other things, bicycle and scooter traffic in the city. Personal transportation devices may become part of the urban mobility structure, which is why it is necessary to explore the social and spatial determinants of their use in the city.

The aim of this article is to assess micromobility infrastructure from the perspective of electromobility development in a selected area. The research problem was formulated as the following question: To what extent does the development of micromobility infrastructure contribute to changes in the process of electromobility? During the analysis of source materials, gaps were identified in the assessment of micromobility infrastructure for the purposes of electromobility development at the national, regional, and city levels. The research process involved an evaluation of micromobility infrastructure in the context of electromobility development in Poland. The research methods applied include the assessment of existing point and linear infrastructure for micromobility, as well as the presentation of a new theoretical model for sustainable micromobility development.

2. Literature Review

The latest EU regulations and global technological trends in line with the idea of sustainable transport pose new challenges in the field of electromobility. As an EU member state, Poland promotes the development of low-emission transport, and the development of electromobility contributes to changes in the field of micromobility. The text addresses the issue and analysis of sustainable development and electromobility literature in the context of barriers and benefits. The point of reference for micromobility is electromobility and the environmental awareness of its users.

2.1. Sustainable Development of Transport Infrastructure

A characteristic feature of the Polish transport market is the growing dominance of road passenger and freight transport. The increase in traffic volume forces the government to address current problems concerning not only quality, but also the progressive degradation and wear of the road network surface [1]. In the absence of such guidelines, road sector institutions focus on specific road infrastructure needs without paying sufficient attention to strategic prioritization [2]. As a result, the lack of a uniform hierarchy of investment projects across the country may lead to overinvestment in certain regions and underinvestment in others [3,4]. As a result, the lack of a uniform hierarchy of investment projects across the country may lead to overinvestment in certain regions and underinvestment in others [5]. From an environmental perspective, it should be clearly stated that the transport sector is currently a very energy-intensive sector of the economy and also a significant source of emissions in the EU [6,7]. Sustainable transport can be understood as the result of sustainable transport development [8,9]. The functioning of an integrated, efficient, and effective transport system should take into account relations with the environment, as well as changes taking place within it [10,11]. The concept of sustainable development is a factor that has a significant impact on the direction of transport system development [12,13,14]. The obligation to take sustainable development principles into account in sectoral and socio-economic policies and in the European Union’s activities and strategies gives this factor a particularly important role in setting the direction for socio-economic development, including in the transport sector [15,16]. In broad terms, however, sustainable transport is consistently treated in the integrated approach convention. A sustainable transport system therefore means that the transport of people and goods is carried out in a way that simultaneously takes into account and reconciles environmental, social, and economic criteria [17].

Among the characteristics of sustainable transport, one stands out in particular. Sustainable transport does not pose a threat to public health or ecosystems, while at the same time satisfying the need for mobility [18]. The definition of sustainable development also implies that transport should consume renewable resources at a rate that allows them to be replenished, and non-renewable resources at a rate that allows them to be replaced by renewable substitutes. All projects related to the planning, shaping, and organization of transport, as well as other areas of activity such as spatial planning of transport infrastructure, which lead to the fulfillment of the above conditions, have the characteristics of sustainable development [19]. Figure 1 characterizes the features of sustainable transport.

The European Union has a significant impact on the financing of transport infrastructure. By setting priorities in program documents and through special programs and financial instruments within the framework of transport and cohesion policy, it supports the activities of individual member states, thereby striving for the sustainable development of the European space [20,21]. One example of such an instrument is the Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T) program [22,23]. EU financial support for priority transport projects and projects of common interest, which may be provided from various sources and in varying amounts depending on the type of project and its financing arrangements, is granted on condition that the Member State is also directly involved in the implementation of the project [24]. This means that it must accumulate its own financial resources necessary for this purpose, which in a country such as Poland usually constitute 15–20% of the total eligible costs of the project. However, as a rule, the total costs of the investment are much higher, and all additional costs, such as the acquisition of land for construction, obtaining the necessary permits, etc., must be covered by the beneficiary country [25]. The EU has a significant impact on the development of transport infrastructure through its co-financing. The Transport White Paper, updated in 2011, confirms and further emphasizes the need to take action to ensure more sustainable transport development [26]. It is extremely important to take into account all aspects of sustainable development, including emissions, noise, land use, and biodiversity, and to base the planned measures on a long-term vision of the mobility of people and goods, in line with the idea of balancing the entire transport sector [27]. To achieve these objectives, it is necessary to make the right investment decisions and take complementary measures at Community level, as well as at national and regional level in the member states. In practice, more financial resources should be allocated to innovative transport solutions, such as: modern logistics and IT systems to reduce the transport intensity of production and distribution of goods, electronic and satellite traffic control, environmentally friendly and unconventional solutions in the field of infrastructure investment, intensification of public transport, and innovative technologies [28].

Urban transport in Poland, as in the rest of Europe, is dominated by private car traffic, which means that city centers are not only congested, but also affected by environmental pollution from harmful emissions and excessive noise [29]. Intelligent traffic management systems are designed to ensure the smooth flow of traffic in cities, on highways, and on national roads [30]. They also allow for the optimal use of existing transport infrastructure. In simple terms, the concept of smart cities involves investments aimed at sustainable economic growth and improving the quality of life of residents [31]. The most important thing is that they are to be achieved not only through the development of infrastructure in the broad sense (transport, telecommunications), but also through the involvement of the city’s residents in the life of the agglomeration, which is one of the most important goals [32]. According to Austrian research, the smart city model distinguishes six areas that are largely identical to the dimensions of sustainable development, including two that concern considerations such as [33]:

• smart mobility—transport and ICT, i.e., smart transport networks; integrated transport and logistics systems, mainly using clean energy [34],
• smart environment—sustainable use of natural resources, i.e., striving to increase the use of renewable energy sources; controls power grids, water supply systems, street lighting, performs ongoing measurement, control, and monitoring of pollution, renovates buildings to reduce their energy consumption [35].

Communication and mobility are areas where cities benefit most from smart solutions, including the installation of an increasing number of fast charging points for electric cars.

2.2. Electromobility

Electromobility is a concept that, in terms of technological development, marks changes in the communications and transport sector, both globally, in Europe, and in Poland [36]. This process is driven by technological progress, growing environmental, climate, energy, and spatial awareness, and the influence of economic factors, leading to many changes [37]. Electromobility is one of the most important trends in the Industry 4.0 concept and aligns with the principles of sustainable transport [38]. It can be defined as a road transport system based on electric vehicles, in which energy is supplied by a power source located outside the vehicle [39]. The promotion of electromobility in Poland could become a catalyst for the Polish energy sector and the Polish economy, leading to a higher level of industrial development [40]. The analysis shows that in order to meet the challenges facing the Polish economy through the development of electromobility, it is necessary to achieve an adequate level of market saturation with electric vehicles [41]. The popularization of alternative fuel vehicles over the last decade is one of the few groundbreaking changes in the automotive market since its inception, influencing significant changes in its structure and redefining the balance of power and connections between global automotive corporations and entities in the energy sector. The development of technical, legal, and economic solutions has created space for the development of electromobility and, with it, the market for alternative fuels [42].

Electromobility poses a challenge for transport policy, and its growing popularity is a response to environmental pollution issues and is linked to sustainable development efforts [43]. This technology brings environmentally friendly and quiet vehicles to the roads. They are an alternative form of propulsion that is expected to have a positive impact on the climate and the environment. The level of development of electromobility in transport depends on the technical culture of a given country and public awareness. Public awareness also plays a crucial role in implementing legal frameworks governing the design, production, distribution, and operation of electric vehicles. The main reasons for promoting the development of electric vehicles are: environmental protection, diversification of energy sources used in the automotive industry, and improvement of road safety [44].

Electromobility is a technological transformation that is supported by a number of measures related to the identification of environmental problems, social and economic concerns, technological development, and the policies of the government of a given country. On 27 October 2022, the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, and the European Parliament reached an agreement on CO₂ emission reduction targets for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles [45]. It sets an ambitious goal of achieving zero-emission road mobility as early as 2035 by reducing exhaust emissions from cars by 100% compared to 2021 [46]. In practice, this means that from 2035, only alternative fuel vehicles—electric or hydrogen—will be eligible for registration in all European Union countries. The first of the approved changes from the Fit for 55 package, which envisages a comprehensive change in the European Union’s which represents a significant signal of determination to implement it, especially in the context of the United Nations Climate Change Conference COP27, which will take place on 6–18 November 2022 [47]. Delivery vehicles are usually subject to the same EU climate policy objectives as passenger cars. Under the European Green Deal (2019), a set of policy initiatives aimed at making the EU climate neutral by 2050, only zero-emission delivery vehicles will be eligible for registration from 2035 [48]. At the same time, according to forecasts contained in the Strategy for Sustainable and Smart Mobility to 2030 (2020), there will be at least 30 million zero-emission vehicles on European roads, including 80,000 zero-emission trucks [49]. To meet environmental goals and ensure energy independence, these vehicles should use new engines, more environmentally friendly fuels, and intelligent transport systems [50]. However, the widespread use of electric vehicles raises several challenges governed by specific EU regulations. The most important of these include increased demand for batteries needed for electric vehicles and the issue of their recycling (Regulation 2023/1542), the availability of adequate alternative fuel infrastructure (Regulation 2023/1804), ensuring that electric vehicles can participate in the process of integrating renewable energy sources into the smart grid system (Directive 2023/2413), and the further implementation and development of the trans-European transport network TEN-T (Regulation 2024/1679) [51].

The transition to electric transport means that road infrastructure, housing development plans, and urban space must be modernized. On an individual level, it affects the organization of users’ daily lives, creating new information needs and prompting changes in habits and behaviors related to, among other things, vehicle maintenance, managing the household budget allocated to transportation, and travel planning [52]. Electromobility affects the power sector because, in order to provide charging capabilities for electric vehicles, the grid must be modernized and investments made in new systems and technologies. The dynamic development of electromobility brings many benefits, including lower vehicle operating costs, reduced exhaust emissions, and less noise pollution. The success of the electric revolution in the automotive industry depends on the balanced development of all the necessary technological resources: vehicles, but also the key charging network infrastructure.

In order to stimulate demand for electric vehicles, so-called soft support instruments have been provided for, such as free parking in city centers, the possibility of using bus lanes, and access to restricted traffic zones in city centers. In addition, the 2024 National Framework for Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Development Policy includes plans to support the replacement of public transport fleets and fleets belonging to transport service providers with zero-emission vehicles through four financial support programs [53]. The first of these is “Green Public Transport”—a program launched in 2021 to subsidize the purchase of environmentally friendly public transport. It provides subsidies of up to 80% of eligible costs for the purchase of electric buses and trolleybuses, and up to 90% for hydrogen buses [54]. “My Electrician” (from 2024, “My Electrician 2.0”) is a program that supports the purchase and leasing of battery electric vehicles. It is planned to run until 2025 or until funds are exhausted [55]. The “My Electrician” program offers subsidies for electric cars, with the available amounts depending on the type of beneficiary. Private individuals can receive 18,750 PLN, while holders of the Large Family Card or businesses can receive 27,000 PLN or 40,000 PLN, provided that the vehicle price does not exceed 225,000 PLN. An additional bonus of 10,000 PLN is available for scrapping an old car. The rules for continuing the program in future periods have not yet been defined. The beneficiaries of the program may be natural persons, entrepreneurs, local government units, associations, foundations, cooperatives, and individual farmers. The third program is a financial support plan for the purchase of new heavy vehicles, for which applications will be accepted on an ongoing basis in 2024–2028 or until funds are exhausted. A new support program has also been announced, dedicated to the purchase of M1 category electric vehicles with no more than eight seats in addition to the driver’s seat. Individuals and sole proprietors will be eligible to participate in this program. Among the main barriers to electromobility mentioned by local governments are: high purchase costs of electric vehicles, lack of access to fast charging infrastructure, and a lengthy investment process.

2.3. Micromobility

In cities, many residents use private cars. One of the reasons for this is the inconvenience of traveling, usually on foot, long distances to the nearest public transport stop and then to their destination. Public transport, which is inherently geared towards mass transport, uses large vehicles that are unable to reach every part of the city. The urban transport system needs to be supplemented with additional forms of passenger transport. This also applies to small loads and parcels, which are delivered to their final recipients by delivery trucks in the last kilometer of transport. This possibility is provided by micromobility, which offers alternative transport using bicycles, scooters, mopeds, and small light cars [56]. Micromobility was associated with the use of so-called PMDs, i.e., lightweight vehicles designed to assist in traveling short distances, which in transport also most often constituted the first or last leg of the journey in order to reach the destination faster [57]. These devices were often used to assist people with disabilities and limited mobility. PMDs, including MMDs, are means of transport, usually for one or two people, which can quickly reach hard-to-reach places while allowing users to admire the charms of the city [58]. This facilitates the transport of light loads and produces less carbon dioxide. The issue of micromobility is important and timely, as the number of passenger cars and delivery vehicles in cities is constantly growing, leading to congestion and environmental nuisance (noise, deteriorating air quality, lack of parking spaces) [59]. All this disrupts the necessary balance between the social, economic, and ecological systems, thus contradicting the idea of sustainable development. Micromobility transport modes can be classified into various categories, the most important of which are [60]:

• legal conditions,
• drive type,
• installed engine power,
• speed,
• range,
• curb weight,
• number of passengers,
• intended use,
• access to transport infrastructure,
• design categories.

H. Dediu distinguishes five categories of micromobility, which he associates with the average distances traveled, average speeds, and curb weight (

Table 1. Categories of micromobility according to H. Dediu.

Category	Average Distance [km]	Average Speed [km/h]	Maximum Curb Weight [kg]
Scooter/bicycle	3.22	10	25
Electric bike	6.44	19	50
Moped	11.27	34	100
Lightweight qued	22.54	68	200
Heavy qued	-	97	500

) [61].

The number of micromobility vehicles in Poland is steadily increasing. Personal transportation devices (PTDs) are very popular, especially among the younger generation. This is facilitated by the development of new drive and IT technologies, availability, and thus high popularity among users of this mode of transport. Micromobility vehicles are characterized by a variety of designs and technologies [62]. They can be used to transport people and light loads. Their design draws inspiration from, among other things, velocipedes—running bikes, bicycles, classic bikes, tricycles, and similar slow-moving transport solutions. Microcars are most commonly used for navigating congested urban streets or as a second or third household vehicle. They also serve as delivery, transport, or municipal service vehicles. They are most popular as cars for driving on congested streets in large urban agglomerations and as a second or third car in the family. They are also used as delivery vehicles, transport vehicles, or municipal service vehicles.

Micromobility is increasingly shaping urban areas and is certainly not a temporary trend [63]. Micromobility measures can be an alternative to passenger car transport and thus complement public transport. The ever-growing popularity of micromobility is due to many factors, the most important of which, along with barriers, are listed in

Table 2. Factors contributing to the development of micromobility and barriers to its growth.

Factors Influencing the Development of Micromobility	Barriers to Micromobility
- reducing travel time to the final destination, - flexibility of movement, - promoting a healthy lifestyle, - concern for the environment, - support from local governments, - obstacles for passenger cars, - business model, - economic factors.	- legislation failing to keep pace with advances in transport, - lack of adequate infrastructure for micromobility, - shortcomings in micromobility management, - user mentality, - the cult of the private car, - the fall and winter seasons, - business models, - the growing number of elderly people, - threats to the safety of people on the move.

[64]. In addition to stimulating factors, micromobility is also affected by inhibiting factors, commonly referred to as barriers complicating its development [65].

Micromobility reduces the time needed to reach the final destination, as it offers a suitable means of transport that allows the first and last kilometers to be covered more quickly. This means of transport can be available almost at the place of residence of the person starting the journey, as well as at the final destination, where public transport does not reach. The micromobility service is flexible, available on demand almost anywhere and at any time [66].

People who use micromobility means of transport, especially non-motorized (muscle-powered) ones, contribute to the conservation of natural resources, do not emit harmful substances into the atmosphere, and thus lead a healthy lifestyle through constant movement. A very important factor is the possibility of supporting micromobility by local governments.

One barrier is the lack of infrastructure in urban areas that is suitable for micromobility, which should ensure smooth and fast access from the outskirts of cities to their centers without causing difficulties or hazards for pedestrians and other road users [67]. The infrastructure should also provide storage and charging facilities for micromobility devices, which are currently lacking. When designing new roads and sidewalks, parking spaces for cars are usually taken into account, while micromobility solutions are overlooked. If the construction of safe parking spaces for micromobility devices were treated as standard, interest in using new transport solutions would increase. One typical parking space can accommodate 10 personal transport devices. There are shortcomings in micromobility management in cities.

Poland is introducing so-called Hubs as a concept in urban infrastructure, offering specially designated and clearly marked areas (hotspots) with the necessary technical equipment (e.g., charging infrastructure), which serve as parking hubs for various types of shared vehicles, from micromobility to cars. They can bring together bicycles, electric scooters, mopeds, and cars rented by the minute, offered by various operators [68]. The concept assumes that such hubs, most often located in office clusters, near public facilities, in residential areas, or at transport hubs, will increase the accessibility and predictability of shared transport, while also introducing an element of spatial order. As a result, micromobility users will gain a wider choice of mobility services, which may encourage some of them to give up traveling by private car.

Scooters and bicycles have become one of the most popular micromobility transport options, frequently used by city residents as they facilitate the fastest and easiest journey to their destination. Electric scooters have now become a popular form of shared transport in cities. They are used as an alternative to cycling or walking. They usually have an electric motor that allows them to reach an average speed of 25 km/h, while the actual range of the devices is from 10 to 20, or even 40 km, depending on the battery capacity and operating conditions of the scooters. Recently, a coalition called Micromobility For Europe (MMfE) was formed [69]. It aims to ensure that “shared micromobility service providers jointly manage the transformation of urban mobility in Europe” (MMfE 2021) [69]. The coalition consists of the following companies: Bird, Bolt, Dott, Free Now, Lime, Tier, Voi, and Wind. The role of shared mobility in the broader phenomenon influences the sustainability of urban transport systems. Among the analyzed cities in Poland with county rights, the most popular shared mobility service is city bikes, which have reached 40 out of 63 cities. Scooters are the least popular, and cars are not much better. Electric scooters have appeared in 57.1% of the cities analyzed, i.e., in 36 centers. Analysis of “smart,” sustainable, and green development have become slogans that are easy to promote, but practice shows that there are difficulties in their effective implementation. The establishment of this type of coalition demonstrates that operators are aware of the problems associated with the expansion of their services, as well as their openness and willingness to participate in the development of regulations.

3. Materials and Methods

The implementation of micromobility in selected urban areas depends on the availability of transport infrastructure adapted to the needs of micromobility. Conceptually, we identify point and line transport infrastructure and means of transport adapted to the given infrastructure. For the purposes of the study, micromobility infrastructure was recorded in the form of three structured elements, i.e.,

$$\mathit{M}\mathit{I}=〈\mathit{L}\mathit{I},\mathit{P}\mathit{I},\mathit{M}\mathit{T}〉$$

(1)

where

• $\mathit{M}\mathit{I}$—micromobility infrastructure;
• $\mathit{L}\mathit{I}$—linear micromobility infrastructure;
• $\mathit{P}\mathit{I}$—point micromobility infrastructure;
• $\mathit{M}\mathit{T}$—means of transport.

The specification of transport infrastructure elements and means of transport dedicated to micromobility needs is important for the following entities:

• The organizer of micromobility in a given area (e.g., a local government authority that, based on a mobility plan, organizes micromobility elements within an urban area);
• The operator or operators of the micromobility system in a given area (e.g., Veturilo—the operator of the city bike system in a specific urban area);
• The company responsible for the technical condition of the linear and point infrastructure adapted to serve micromobility.

Linear micromobility infrastructure is a road system that can be used to carry out micromobility transport tasks. We identify the following elements in the set of linear micromobility infrastructure:

$$\mathit{L}\mathit{I}=〈\mathit{C}\mathit{S},\mathit{B}\mathit{P},\mathit{C}\mathit{P},\mathit{B}\mathit{L},\mathit{P}\mathit{C},\mathit{P}\mathit{R}〉$$

(2)

where

• $\mathit{C}\mathit{S}$—set of cycle superhighway. A bicycle highway is a collision-free road intended exclusively for bicycle traffic.
• $\mathit{B}\mathit{R}$—set of bike path. A bike path is a separate lane designated for bicycle and electric scooter traffic.
• $\mathit{C}\mathit{P}$—set of cycle path. A bike path is a space separated from the roadway and sidewalk for bicycle and electric scooter traffic.
• $\mathit{B}\mathit{L}$—set of bike lane. A bicycle lane is a designated lane on the road dedicated to bicycle and electric scooter traffic.
• $\mathit{P}\mathit{C}$—set of pedestrian and cycle path. A pedestrian and bicycle path is a shared path for pedestrians and cyclists, on which cyclists must exercise particular caution and give way to pedestrians. Electric scooters are permitted.
• $\mathit{P}\mathit{R}$—set of public roads. A public road is part of the transport infrastructure that allows vehicles and pedestrians to travel.

In contrast, we identify the following elements in the collection of point micromobility infrastructure:

$$\mathit{P}\mathit{I}=〈\mathit{B}\mathit{P},\mathit{B}\mathit{S},\mathit{C}\mathit{P}\mathit{p},\mathit{C}\mathit{P}\mathit{d},\mathit{C}\mathit{S}\mathit{h}〉$$

(3)

where

• $\mathit{B}\mathit{P}$—set of bike parking;
• $\mathit{B}\mathit{S}$—set of bike stations;
• $\mathit{C}\mathit{P}\mathit{p}$—set of carsharing pick-up points;
• $\mathit{C}\mathit{P}\mathit{d}$—set of carsharing drop-off points;
• $\mathit{C}\mathit{S}\mathit{h}$—set of carsharing stations.

The identification of point and linear elements of micromobility infrastructure is important for:

• users of micromobility in a given area, who plan their trips to work, home, school, etc., based on information about the availability of infrastructure,
• companies responsible for maintaining the proper technical condition of the linear micromobility infrastructure.

Micromobility journeys are carried out using means of transport adapted to this type of activity. In this collection, we identify, among others:

$$\mathit{M}\mathit{T}=〈\mathit{S}\mathit{B},\mathit{S}\mathit{e}\mathit{B},\mathit{S}\mathit{c}\mathit{B},\mathit{S}\mathit{r}\mathit{B},\mathit{S}\mathit{e}\mathit{C},\mathit{S}\mathit{c}\mathit{V}〉$$

(4)

where

• $\mathit{S}\mathit{B}$—set of bicycles;
• $\mathit{S}\mathit{e}\mathit{B}$—set of electric bikes (e-bikes);
• $\mathit{S}\mathit{c}\mathit{B}$—set of cargo bikes;
• $\mathit{S}\mathit{r}\mathit{B}$—set of rickshaws;
• $\mathit{S}\mathit{e}\mathit{C}$—set of electric scooters (e-scooters);
• $\mathit{S}\mathit{c}\mathit{V}$—set of carsharing vehicles.

The statistical analysis of trips carried out within micromobility in a given area (e.g., city, metropolis, district, region, municipality, etc.) is based on information obtained from individual sets of transport means available in that area.

Assessment of Micromobility in Terms of Electromobility

The methodological basis was the adoption of five criteria for the design and evaluation of cycling infrastructure, namely:

$$\mathit{C}\mathit{E}=\left\{{ce}_1,{ce}_2,{ce}_3,{ce}_4,{ce}_5\right\}$$

(5)

where

• $\mathit{C}\mathit{E}$—set of evaluation criteria for bicycle infrastructure;
• ${ce}_1$—criteria of consistency;
• ${ce}_2$—criteria of directness;
• ${ce}_3$—criteria of convenience;
• ${ce}_4$—criteria of safety;
• ${ce}_5$—criteria of attractiveness.

The defined criteria were first compiled and systematized in the CROW bicycle infrastructure planning manual (Centre for Research and Contract Standardization in Civil and Traffic Engineering CROW, i.e., design Manual for Bicycle Traffic is a publication on bicycle transportation planning and engineering in the Netherlands. It is published by CROW, a non-profit agency advising Directorate-General for Public Works and Water Management formerly Ministry of Transport and Water Management (Netherlands) [70]. It is the most influential bicycle traffic planning manual, both worldwide and on cycling in the Netherlands. It was last updated in 2016. It is considered best practice.)

The number of city bikes available in Polish cities increased to over 27.4 thousand in 2024, representing a 28.2% rise compared to 2023. In Poland, there are seven bike rental operators and 79 systems in total. Among the cities with the highest supply of shared e-scooters at the end of 2023, six accounted for half of the total market offer (Figure 2).

In Warsaw, residents and tourists have access to over 10,000 shared e-scooters, which accounts for 22% of the entire Polish market. The other cities include: Gdansk (over 2400 vehicles and 10% of the market), Kraków (1600 vehicles and 7% of the market), Wroclaw (1500 vehicles and 6% of the market), Poznan (over 1000 vehicles and 4% of the market), and Szczecin (just under 1000 vehicles and 4% of the market). Large cities account for 53% of the total, while the remaining ones are cities with county rights. There are seven operators and 79 systems serving e-scooters, with a total of 23,726 vehicles available for rental.

The study was conducted in the period 2022–2023 using an indirect survey with a questionnaire technique and the CAWI (Computer-Assisted Web Interview) method. The research covered cities with county rights, where respondents were asked for their opinions on the presence of rental e-scooters in these cities and the nature of cooperation between the city and the operator in providing such services. In addition, the presence of other micromobility services was analyzed.

The e-scooter market in Poland is growing dynamically—over the past five years, it has increased by 400%. The shared e-scooter fleet has stabilized at around 90–100 thousand vehicles, which represents a decrease from 104,500 in mid-2023 to approximately 93,000 by the end of the third quarter of 2023, and about 100,000 in 2024. As for the private market, there are no official data available. Among cities with county rights, the most popular shared mobility service is city bikes, which have reached 40 out of 63 cities. Scooters are the least popular, and cars are not much better. Electric scooters have appeared in 57.1% of the cities analyzed, i.e., in 36 centers (Figure 3) [71].

No specific pattern has been identified according to which operators decide to launch a service in a given city. The sharing industry is very diverse in terms of the number of e-scooter operators. In total, there are 14 different operators in Poland, including both global and European companies (Bolt, Lime, Dott, Bird, Hive, and Blinkee.city) and Polish companies (Hulaj, Na Minuty, Volt, Quick, and Logo). Nevertheless, international entities have a clear advantage (Figure 4). The analysis shows that among the cities where shared scooters have appeared, at least one operator is still operating in 78% of them [72].

Places in urban spaces designated for parking scooters are called mobility points or hubs. In 26 out of 34 cities (76%), there was no organized system for e-scooter parking in public spaces (totems or road markings) for any operator’s services—scooters are parked “freely” in the location indicated on the app map. The most common form is road markings (6 cities). Out of 25 cities that responded to the question about the possibility of parking outside a mobility point, as many as 18 responded positively (although this does not always apply to all operators). In two cities, this is possible for an additional fee. One of the cities indicated that vehicles can be returned within a designated zone.

Technological advancements—such as improvements in GPS, mobile payments through apps, increased battery efficiency, and the growing popularity of smartphones—have significantly influenced the development of micromobility. The increasing urban population also drives the search for new modes of transportation. For many cities around the world, micromobility has become a solution to the challenges of the first and last mile, traffic congestion, and greenhouse gas emissions. Cities such as Seattle, Los Angeles, and Madrid have temporarily banned e-scooters and required operators to remove them from the streets due to pedestrian safety concerns. In Poland, local governments have traditionally prioritized cars and drivers, which has resulted in a lack of bicycle paths and sufficiently wide roads in many cities, making it difficult for scooters and bicycles to travel safely.

Only 16.7% of cities with any documents declared that they had standards for bicycle infrastructure (including two erroneous, most outdated, other than those indicated or without proper formal authorization, and others had bicycle standards but did not declare this document). Only 22 cities declared that they had carried out Comprehensive Traffic Studies—the share of bicycles in all trips ranges from zero to 8.4%, and the increase in the share of bicycles in trips in subsequent CTSs ranges from 43% to approx. 200%. As of December 2021, 86 cities declared that they had a public bicycle system, 70 of which are financed by the municipality and 17 from another source (one city declared two different systems; this number is changing—already in 2022, a commercial operator providing bicycles appeared in four large cities). Analyses and other traffic studies have shown that the operation of public (“city”) bicycles has had little impact on the increase in bicycle traffic [72]. According to documents related to bicycle policy, 15 centers have adopted such a policy, 7 of which did so by means of a city council resolution entitled “Bicycle Policy.” In the other cities, it was adopted by means of city council resolutions under other names or by means of mayoral decrees. The actual number is difficult to verify due to substantive discrepancies. In Poland, the popularity of scooters is high and growing rapidly. Electric scooters are also popular in countries such as the United States and Turkey. However, in Europe, there is a clear gender gap—men use this form of transportation significantly more often than women. Among shared micromobility devices used for everyday activities such as shopping, commuting to work or school, and visiting friends and family, city bikes are the most popular, followed by scooters. Bicycles are also the most commonly chosen option for recreational purposes.

Parking organization was the main topic of discussion during a seminar organized by the Urban Policy Observatory. From the perspective of the municipality’s own tasks, this is important because the issue of parking or the presence of scooters in the city in general can affect the order of the space and the safety of residents. This is not only about driving too fast, but also about the risk that elderly or disabled individuals may trip over them. The invited experts were well aware of this. Nowadays, the main tool for identifying and finding parking spaces should be an app. Users who want to rent a vehicle mainly move “virtually” within a given app—the issue of the physical organization of mobility points is secondary to what the operator should provide in the app. The idea of mobility is based on freedom of movement, and in trying to organize this issue, a compromise must be found between excessive flexibility and imposing too many restrictions. It is difficult to designate such locations because there is an inconsistency between where it can be done (spatial conditions) and where it should be done, taking into account usage and traffic. Care must be taken not to undermine this form of mobility by reducing user convenience. The ability to park “anywhere” should not at the same time pose a threat to other road users.

Urban space is used not only by scooter users, but above all by those who experience the consequences of the presence of these scooters. The physical organization of parking, for example, using street furniture, helps to maintain order and aesthetics in the space. The total length of bicycle lanes and bicycle paths in Poland declared by cities is 8409.404 km, while the length of bicycle lanes is 1478.885 km. The total declared length of speed-restricted zones (“Tempo 30” or residential zones) was 5285.388 km, and contraflow lanes and contraflow bicycle lanes—402.373 km. The length of bicycle paths accounts for approximately 13.08% of the length of public roads in cities (“density”), with large cities (over 100,000 inhabitants) accounting for 20.64% and small cities (less than 20,000 inhabitants) accounting for only 7.42% (

Table 3. Declared length of bicycle infrastructure in relation to the total length of public roads in Poland [%].

Type of Infrastructure	Total Cities [%]	Large Cities [%]	Medium-Sized Cities [%]	Small Towns [%]
Bicycle path	13.08	20.64	15.86	7.42
Bicycle line	2.30	2.78	3.98	1.07
Traffic calming (30 km/h speed limit)	8.22	17.74	8.63	2.89
Counterpasses and counter-movements	0.63	2.01	0.29	0.08

) [73].

In the case of medium-sized cities, these figures are approximately 8.5% and up to 55% (13 and 84 out of 154), while for small cities approximately 20% and 45% (60 and 137 out of 307).

Publications indicate that the majority of respondents (68%) support allowing devices such as electric scooters and Segways to use bicycle infrastructure. However, 22% accept such access with certain restrictions, 6% have no opinion on the matter, and 5% are opposed to it.

The data obtained for analysis are often inconsistent with Central Statistical Office (CSO) statistics, and the percentages disclosed should be treated as estimates. As much as 70% of the length of so-called contraflow lanes and contraflow traffic, enabling two-way bicycle traffic on one-way streets, is concentrated in just five cities.

A report on micromobility was published by the Mobile City association under the title “PMD Enthusiasts”, conducted in March 2024 by the Institute for Market and Social Research.

The vast majority of Poles see micromobility as a potentially new mode of transportation that can improve the quality of life in cities and whose popularity will continue to grow. The research results are presented in Figure 5.

Respondents in Poland rated the impact of micromobility on air quality the highest, agreeing that a scooter is just as safe as a bicycle and can replace a car for the last mile of a journey. The use of micromobility evokes positive feelings among respondents, its popularity continues to grow, and it helps to reduce transport congestion.

The results of the Free Now and GBTA report titled “Ground Transportation in Europe: Adapting Travel Policies to a New Reality” are presented in Figure 6.

Europeans first became interested in using shared scooters and bicycles for business travel during the pandemic. They recognize the potential of bicycles for business trips—44% of respondents across Europe expressed interest in using shared e-scooters, with the same level of interest observed in Germany. The highest interest was recorded in Ireland, at 53%. However, the actual use of bikesharing and shared e-scooters during the most recent business trips was rated relatively low.

In large cities, bicycle lanes and other micromobility measures such as scooters account for almost 21% of the length of public roads, well above the average for all cities. In medium-sized cities, their share decreases, and in small cities, it is the lowest, which may be due to the long length of public roads in the municipality outside the city. There are significant differences in the case of traffic calming and, in particular, contraflow lanes and contraflow cycling. The latter type of solution is used almost exclusively in large cities. Costs, as well as the characteristics of the road network and examples from leading cities, indicate that the opposite should be the case. It is likely that most of the existing traffic-calmed streets have not been disclosed because municipalities do not keep such statistics. In many cases, the declared infrastructure is simply sidewalks marked as bicycle lanes (or bicycle and pedestrian lanes), which create conflicts with car traffic at intersections due to incorrect geometry, while on other sections there are conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians. The materials presented include data on the number of bicycles and scooters rented in Polish cities, as well as the road infrastructure dedicated to these types of vehicles. Despite the steady increase in the number of micromobility vehicles, there remains a visible lack of dedicated roads for them. Even a city with the best public transport system cannot provide a sufficient number of stops or ensure door-to-door passenger transport. Micromobility makes it possible to cover the long distance to the nearest public transport stop and then continue the journey to the workplace. Theoretically, this type of transport is suitable for covering distances of up to 8 km within cities, which means it could serve around 50–60% of all urban commutes in the USA, Europe, and China. In an experiment conducted in California, it was shown that an electric scooter generates approximately 126 g of CO₂ equivalent per person per kilometer over its entire lifespan, compared to 200–350 g for a car.

The Silesian Metropolis consists of 41 interconnected cities with a growing demand for shared mobility solutions. Based on analyses of shared mobility services, such systems are becoming key tools for addressing “last-mile” connectivity gaps. Urban areas in Silesia are home to 78% of the population. In August 2023, the procedure for launching the Metropolitan Bicycle System in Silesia was completed. The system provides users with 7000 bicycles and 924 rental stations. Renting and returning a bike does not require connecting or disconnecting it from a docking station, and each bicycle is equipped with a GPS transmitter. Due to the large scale of the system and the high number of bicycles, implementation is being carried out in stages. In terms of cycling infrastructure, two key documents have been developed for the Silesian Metropolis. The first is the “Study of the Bicycle Route System”. Based on this document, a network of routes will be created to enable comfortable and safe cycling across Silesia. The second document, “Standards and Guidelines for the Design of Bicycle Infrastructure”, provides recommendations that will help standardize bicycle routes across the municipalities and cities of the Metropolis. A major issue concerns electric scooters, whose legal status was defined in 2021 through an amendment to the Road Traffic Act [74]. The integration of scooter-sharing systems allows for changes in infrastructure and contributes to achieving environmental and economic goals. Research findings indicate that scooter lanes can be safe and accessible only where traffic is well-regulated, properly separated, and supported by appropriate infrastructure to ensure safety and comfort for users. In the Upper Silesian Metropolis, a lack of dedicated bike lanes and their poor condition significantly discourage the adoption of micromobility. The metropolitan transport system is outdated, and authorities are facing decisions regarding the modernization of micromobility infrastructure [75].

Kraków, with a population of 779,000, has about 600 cars per 1000 inhabitants and ranks ninth among European cities with the highest traffic congestion. The city has introduced the possibility of combining different modes of transport by providing bike shelters located near car parks or public transport stops. One example is the Park-e-Bike system, where drivers can leave their car and rent an electric bike or electric scooter. In Kraków, the operational area of the three most popular e-scooter rental companies covers approximately 87.8 km²—about 27% of the city’s total area. The distribution of bicycle racks shows a higher concentration than that of e-scooter rental zones. The locations of e-scooter rental areas are linked to the city’s road infrastructure, including areas with a 30 km/h speed limit (Tempo 30 zones) and existing cycling paths [76].

4. Results

Research on micromobility is still rarely conducted. Existing studies focus mainly on market analysis, technical parameters, and the design solutions of personal mobility devices (PMDs), including their dimensions and safety, the possibility of treating them as part of the road transport system, legal regulations, and their use in real-world conditions. Local governments do not collect data on the coverage or distribution of scooters. Even before national-level regulations were introduced, some municipalities attempted to regulate and organize the situation in public spaces from the bottom up. Since most Polish local governments have not formalized the process of implementing micromobility, the authors undertook the development of a theoretical model for the sustainable implementation of micromobility. In the vast majority of cities, scooters operate without a formal agreement (61%) that would serve as the basis for cooperation between the operator and the city. In two cases, binding contracts were indicated, and in nine cases (21%) such cooperation takes the form of voluntary agreements. The situation in Poland reflects a global trend in which legal frameworks and models of cooperation have not kept pace with the growing popularity of electric scooters. They can also serve as an alternative for approximately 20% of public transport commutes, partially replacing bicycles and being useful for distances that residents currently cover on foot. They are becoming a means of transport for the so-called “first and last mile.” After accounting for various factors, McKinsey forecasts that by 2030 the potential value of the micromobility market will reach USD 200–300 billion in the United States, USD 30–50 billion in China, and USD 100–150 billion in Europe. The model presented in Figure 4 ensures the integration of all partners and promotes cooperation between local governments and micromobility operators. Some of the factors determining the success of micromobility depend mainly on the operators themselves, but legal and political conditions may significantly influence the pace of micromobility development.

The process of creating a theoretical model of sustainable development can be divided into seven stages:

1.

Identification of factors shaping the demand for transport services.

From a methodological point of view, the determinants shaping the demand for transport can be divided into three groups [77]:

(a)

external factors affecting the transport sector, which have a direct impact on the demand for transport services; these include five categories: energy, the economy, demographic changes, technological changes (in particular changes in ICT technologies), and social changes;

(b)

internal factors: determinants that are internal to the transport sector; these include changes in transport infrastructure, in the technologies used in vehicles, fuel or infrastructure facilities, and the factors can be defined as the economic structure of the transport system, i.e., elements of the supply side;

(c)

institutional factors, i.e., issues related to the sphere of policy-making for the development of the sector or the conditions for economic decision-making in transport activities, referred to as governance.

2.

Estimation of transport demand.

The basis for developing a transport plan and potential infrastructure investments is to estimate the factors that will influence the demand for transport services in the region in the near future:

(a)

Population size in the administrative area under study; in agricultural regions, there is a decline in population, which leads to a reduction in transport;

(b)

The size of the working-age population influences the search for solutions that deviate from the regular public transport system in favor of transport on demand and micromobility. In densely populated areas, the situation is reversed.

3.

Identification of threats to transport development.

Risks occurring in transport companies or processes may be related to:

(a)

erroneous decisions caused by false, unreliable, insufficient, and incorrect information,

(b)

negligence, ignorance, or failure to comply with regulations and designated procedures related to the required documents and the carrier’s obligations,

(c)

human factors,

(d)

technical factors,

(e)

random factors.

4.

Defining directions/visions for transport development.

Directions for the development of sustainable transport through the introduction of micromobility:

(a)

striving for rational, rather than minimum, travel time;

(b)

treating travel as an activity in its own right, rather than merely a means of satisfying a transport need that is secondary to basic activities;

(c)

increasing the share of travel on foot and by micromobility means in relation to travel by private car;

(d)

reducing the level of air and noise pollution caused by transport and, at the same time, improving the energy efficiency of transport;

(e)

increasing infrastructure capacity by introducing a pay-per-use principle;

(f)

improving the quality of urban space, e.g., by introducing Tempo 30 traffic zones.

5.

Formulation of transport policy and selection of implementation instruments for micromobility (green color).

The primary objective of transport policy is to significantly improve the quality of the transport system and expand it in accordance with the principles of sustainable development, as the quality of the transport system is one of the key factors determining the living conditions of residents and the economic development of the country and regions.

The social aspect mainly involves striving for equal access to means of transport (in order to facilitate access to workplaces, schools, services, recreation, and tourism), striving to reduce the risk of accidents to the public, and limiting the nuisance of transport for residents.

The economic aspect has two dimensions: the first is to ensure conditions for economic growth on a macroeconomic scale by removing barriers and creating new conditions for this development, and the second is on a sectoral scale—the development of transport as a sector of the economy, market protection and competition.

The spatial aspect involves coordinating spatial development and the transport system in order to limit the growth rate of generated traffic and transport performance, and locating transport facilities in accordance with the principles of rational land use and spatial order conditions.

The ecological aspect involves striving to maintain a balance between meeting human needs and ensuring human safety, and preserving the environment and its non-renewable resources, while safeguarding the interests of future generations.

6.

Implementation of transport policy.

Spatial development plans should take into account the existence of three zones related to the role of cars in the city:

-

Zone A (city center): high concentration of destinations—public transport and pedestrian traffic should play a key role, while car traffic should be kept to a minimum.

-

Zone B (intermediate): medium density of development—restriction of car traffic in favor of public transport, while maintaining adequate road capacity.

-

Zone C (outer): low density of development—no restrictions on car traffic.

Additionally, the following should be taken into account:

(a)

Creating bicycle paths to introduce micromobility, either off-road, regardless of the road layout or within the road right-of-way;

(b)

Separating lanes for bicycles and scooters on the roadway;

(c)

Separating bus and bicycle lanes or trolleybus and bicycle lanes;

(d)

Allowing two-way bicycle traffic on one-way streets with limited traffic and speed, with the possible designation of a contraflow lane for bicycles;

(e)

Introducing bicycle boxes at intersections with traffic lights;

(f)

Introducing signage for cyclists (organizational and informational);

(g)

Allowing bicycles on public transport;

(h)

Adapting transport hubs to allow bicycles to be left in a “park and ride” system;

(i)

Introducing a city bike and scooter rental system.

7.

Monitoring and evaluation of the effects of micromobility measures.

Effective micromobility management involves planning and building infrastructure, developing rules and regulations that balance the needs of various stakeholders, such as operators, local governments, manufacturers, users, pedestrians, and drivers. It is necessary to define operating areas, parking regulations, safety standards, pricing models, and data sharing requirements.

As society becomes increasingly environmentally conscious and culturally diverse, these changes are becoming more visible and relevant to the design of sustainable transport systems that take electromobility into account. Efforts to modify mobility in cities include raising public awareness of the benefits of transport changes. It is important for city authorities to be involved in creating, processing, and then communicating ideas that are developed in consultation with residents, city authorities, and mobility creators, and which are addressed to specific groups of residents and micromobility users. The proposed model is based mainly on a praxeological and economic approach. Regardless of the shape of the desired micromobility, it is worth placing it within the general concept of the new principle of mobility.

Thanks to the model presented in Figure 7, the public–private partnership would be based on a clear division of responsibilities, where the public and private sectors each contribute according to their respective domains and competencies:

-

public sector—providing access to urban space (regulated locally);

-

private sector—delivering micromobility services to residents.

Although the model is theoretical, it takes into account both external factors—which local governments cannot influence—and internal factors, such as the technology used in the construction of bicycle paths. In the case of institutional factors, the Polish government’s policies, as well as European regulations, play a role. In Polish cities, the so-called “Civic Budget” has been introduced, allowing residents to choose which types of investments should be implemented in their city. An example of such an initiative is the construction of a bicycle path in Poznan. The previously presented data show that residents of large urban agglomerations are most interested in developing mobility infrastructure such as bicycle paths, while local governments focus on creating mobility hubs near transfer points. Changes in regulations concerning electric scooters have increased the safety of micromobility users and pedestrians, who were most often involved in traffic incidents. The introduction of speed limits and the mandatory helmet requirement has effectively reduced the number of accidents. On 28 March 2024, the International Transport Forum (ITF) published a new report on micromobility safety. The report emphasized that both infrastructure and vehicle design are crucial for improving micromobility safety. Focusing solely on user behavior and vehicle safety systems must be complemented by better infrastructure and improved vehicle design, particularly in the case of electric scooters. In Poland, transport policy regarding micromobility focuses on supporting sustainable urban transport, such as shared bicycles, electric scooters, and other light vehicles. Its goals are to reduce traffic congestion and exhaust emissions while providing flexible short-distance “last-mile” transport that complements public transport. Key actions include investments in infrastructure, such as dedicated traffic lanes, and the regulation of services to increase safety and efficiency.

According to available information, the construction of 1 km of a bicycle path in Poland costs approximately 2,000,000 PLN. This amount covers both the construction of a bicycle path and a shared pedestrian–bicycle path 3.5 m wide, including earthworks, surface preparation, pavement laying, and signage. The costs of individual elements of road and sidewalk infrastructure are presented in

Table 4. Costs of individual elements of road and sidewalk infrastructure applicable to bicycle paths in Poland [PLN].

Type of Construction Work for Bicycle Path	Construction Cost [PLN]
Renovation of 1 m2 of road (5 cm asphalt overlay)	100
Construction of 1 m2 of sidewalk	600
Renovation of 1 m2 of sidewalk	500–600
Replacement of 1 m2 of sidewalk with paving blocks (without substructure)	150
Construction of 1 m2 of park alley made of asphalt (5 cm)	205
Construction of 1 m2 of park alley made of resin (8 cm)	230

, which may also serve as a reference for bicycle path construction costs.

Based on the data presented in Table 4, the cost of building a sidewalk is significantly higher than that of road renovation. The construction of a bicycle path—which often requires a more solid substructure and a wider surface than a sidewalk—will naturally generate higher overall costs.

The actual cost may vary depending on several factors:

(a)

Location: Construction in urban areas—where existing infrastructure, underground networks, or land acquisition must be considered—will be more expensive than in undeveloped areas.

(b)

Type of surface: Asphalt, concrete, paving blocks, or natural surfaces each have different prices. Asphalt is usually the cheapest but may be less durable under certain conditions.

(c)

Width and structure of the path: Wider paths intended for heavier bicycle traffic require more materials and labor. A stronger substructure, especially in difficult soil conditions, also increases costs.

(d)

Additional equipment: Lighting, vertical and horizontal signage, and small architectural elements (benches, bicycle racks, waste bins) all generate additional expenses.

(e)

Preparatory and design work: Surveying, design documentation, permits, and site preparation (e.g., tree removal, land grading) are also included in the total cost.

(f)

Terrain conditions: Construction in hilly, wet, or riverside areas can be more complex and expensive due to the need for additional earthworks, drainage, or reinforcements.

The cost of an asphalt surface, with a 10 cm-deep trench made using a bulldozer and roller, including a 10 cm subbase of crushed aggregate stabilized with cement (compacted thickness 8 cm) and 3 cm of mineral–asphalt mix, delivered, mechanically spread, and rolled, is 111.72 PLN/m². In the case of a concrete paving block surface, 6 cm thick and laid on a 5 cm sand–cement bedding (noting that bicycle paths should ideally use 8 cm paving blocks, which are about 30% more expensive), the cost amounts to 192.33 PLN/m². Even when using the thinner, more economical 6 cm paving block, this surface type remains nearly twice as expensive as asphalt on a high-quality aggregate base. This is because asphalt is a simple, machine-laid mixture, while paving blocks are unit products made using a more demanding manufacturing process and installed manually. However, depending on local conditions, the cost of bicycle path construction can vary significantly. In Poznan, the estimated cost is 650 PLN/m², which should also include the cost of route signage and a bicycle stand priced at 1250 PLN each. In Gdynia, the cost of constructing a 335 m bicycle path, including necessary road infrastructure (retaining walls, railings, embankments), was estimated at approximately 1,230,000 PLN, which equals a total cost of 3671.64 PLN/m². These examples show substantial differences resulting from terrain conditions and other influencing factors.

In practice, a city may provide an appropriate number of locations for mobility hubs, where micromobility services are concentrated—near transport nodes, key public infrastructure, municipal services, residential areas, high-demand mobility zones, and locations with weaker public transport connectivity. Operators gain access to a competitive and predictable market for shared micromobility services, generating revenue while also investing their own financial resources—stimulating the economy and creating jobs. Moreover, by clustering complementary urban services around mobility hubs, the entire concept of public–private partnership enables the design of processes based on economic efficiency and sustainability principles.

All of this leads to a paradoxical situation in which, on the one hand, Polish cities promote and implement electric scooter rental systems, while on the other hand, there is a lack of opportunities to use them. Under the current legal framework, the use of devices such as electric scooters or Segways on public roads, in residential zones, and in traffic zones is prohibited. Regardless of the chosen method of shaping micromobility, the selection of a roadmap for implementing changes is a key component of urban mobility planning. Planning micromobility in the context of global conditions requires consideration of the changing approach to transport strategy and analysis of specific strategic documents at various levels of administration. Micromobility offers a solution to the problem of the so-called first and last kilometer. When a person must walk several stops before starting their journey and then the same distance at the end, they are unlikely to plan a walk and will instead choose to use a private car or a taxi. The spread of micromobility is accompanied by numerous barriers, the most significant of which include the lack of or limited access to cycling and pedestrian infrastructure. The key factors influencing this issue are economic, social, environmental, and spatial, as illustrated in the model shown in Figure 7.

5. Discussion

In cities, many commuters use public or private transport. Micromobility could be the best way to cover the first or last mile. The question is whether local governments will find the money in their budgets to develop the infrastructure. Research shows that PMD users are more likely to be residents of large cities and people under 40 years of age.

The next question is whether it will be possible to convince the population of smaller towns and rural areas to use such environmentally friendly transport. While smaller towns are implementing micromobility solutions by building bicycle paths, rural residents are deprived of this opportunity. The third issue is the safety of micromobility users: the introduction of speed limits and mandatory helmets should contribute to increased safety. The education of PMD users remains a topic for discussion, as pedestrians are often involved in accidents and pose a threat to them.

The next option is managing the emerging infrastructure, which will deteriorate over time. Will local governments take care of it? The problem is the approval of selected PMDs, their control, and supervision of these devices in operation. The organization of parking lots and hubs is also a topic of discussion, so that they can serve as transfer points. From the perspective of local governments, this is important because the issue of parking or the presence of scooters in the city can affect the order of the space and the safety of residents. Scooters are often seen on sidewalks in cities.

6. Conclusions

Micromobility, following electromobility, represents the next major trend in logistics and transportation, and consequently, it also represents a challenge for societies, local governments responsible for transport, and transport operators alike. Cities are centers of intensive exchange and interaction, shaped by the daily movements of their inhabitants. For a city to function and sustain daily life, appropriate transport connections are essential—roads, streets, pedestrian routes, bicycle paths, and public transport systems. None of these systems operate in isolation. The elements of the transport network that enable movement form a crucial component of urban infrastructure, significantly influencing the character of urban space and the overall quality of life. An analysis of direct users highlights their preferences and expectations regarding micromobility projects. However, there is still a lack of a coherent, long-term strategy, and infrastructure is often developed in an uncoordinated manner. The model presented in Figure 4 aims to support cities in developing sustainable transport systems. To achieve this, cities must begin to treat micromobility as a form of public transport—or at least as a complementary part of it.

The primary priority in European transport is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, as well as to reduce dependence on petroleum-based fuels. However, the sustainable development of urban transport based on replacing combustion engine vehicles with unconventional drive vehicles is a difficult task. In Poland, there is considerable interest in personal transportation devices, especially in large cities. This is due to the high availability of PTDs, as well as the fact that they do not require much parking space and provide relatively cheap travel compared to traveling by car, and they also speed up the first and last kilometers of the journey. The high level of interest in micromobility is stimulating market development for manufacturers, who are offering increasingly innovative, durable, and convenient solutions. However, as is often the case, legal regulations are not keeping pace with technological developments, which, in this case, is particularly important as it concerns traffic safety in the broadest sense.

Poland is an example of a market that is attractive to shared bicycle and scooter operators. Since 2018, scooters have been a permanent feature of the landscape in larger and smaller cities. The case of Poland reflects a global trend, whereby legal solutions and cooperation models in this area are not keeping pace with the boom in scooters. Even before any regulations were introduced at the national level, some centers attempted to regulate and organize the situation in public spaces from the bottom up, such as the agglomerations of Upper Silesia, the Tri-City, and Krakow. As a result of the analysis, micromobility infrastructure in Poland was assessed from the perspective of electromobility development. The research problem that the development of micromobility infrastructure contributes to changes in the electromobility process was solved. A research gap in the assessment of micromobility infrastructure for the development of electromobility in Poland was filled.

Micromobility infrastructure in Poland is insufficient relative to the growing number of users. With the continuously increasing number of scooters, the lack of designated parking areas and charging infrastructure may slow down the development of this mode of transport. The absence of dedicated lanes also creates safety risks for pedestrians. The development of micromobility infrastructure in large- and medium-sized urban agglomerations has contributed to changes in the broader process of electromobility. These developments have also influenced the perception of micromobility in major metropolitan areas, such as the Tri-City region in Pomerania and the Silesian agglomeration. There is a noticeable increase in interest in micromobility not only among users but also among local governments. For instance, in Warsaw, as many as 750 mobility hubs could potentially be established. Currently, no comprehensive research on micromobility is being conducted in Poland, even though personal mobility devices are becoming increasingly popular. Therefore, the studies presented in this article help to fill an existing research gap in this field.

Key to the development of micromobility are solutions that include not only infrastructure dedicated exclusively to this type of traffic, but also the calming of car traffic to ensure safe access to the “last kilometer” in mixed traffic, and above all, the actual and systematic prioritization of micromobility, which should have priority on key routes, lose the least time at traffic lights, and be able to travel the shortest route. Many local governments in Poland struggle with limited budgets, which makes it difficult to invest in cycling infrastructure or develop shared vehicle fleets. Cooperation with the European Union and the use of available transport project financing tools may prove helpful in this regard. In the development of micromobility, proper management by operators is becoming increasingly important. This includes the expansion of linear and point infrastructure, improving accessibility, supplementing and modifying existing systems, and adopting appropriate legal regulations. This also involves the development of safety standards, type approval (homologation) of selected devices, and the monitoring and supervision of these vehicles in operation.

Micromobility can be one of the solutions to the problem of the so-called first and last kilometer, both in the movement of people and in the transport of small goods. An example of such an application is DPD’s parcel delivery within city centers. In the advancement of micromobility, effective management plays a crucial role. This includes the expansion of dedicated infrastructure, improving accessibility; supplementing, modifying, and swiftly adopting appropriate legal regulations; and developing safety standards, type approval (homologation) for selected devices, and ensuring proper monitoring and supervision of these vehicles in operation, among other measures.

7. Limitations

In order to ensure the sustainable development of micromobility, including that intended for people outside urban areas, the measures taken so far are insufficient. It is necessary to create a hierarchical system of roads designated for micromobility means of transport and to make appropriate investments. The network of routes must be supplemented by infrastructure adapted to the needs of micromobility. Legal changes are needed to regulate micromobility traffic studies, keep records of micromobility-friendly infrastructure, and define minimum planning requirements for bicycle and scooter routes, including their hierarchy.

Micromobility faces numerous barriers, as exemplified by the recent rapid spread of electric scooters and other similar devices classified as micromobility means of transport in cities. In their analysis, the authors were unable to obtain comprehensive data on the use of micromobility in Poland. The case study method applied to selected cities does not allow for drawing definitive conclusions. The large number of micromobility operators and systems demonstrates how much potential still exists for further implementation toward sustainable mobility, which would facilitate the integration of knowledge and practices in the field of micromobility.

Apart from formal and legal issues, the key problem is the vague, wishful wording of the bicycle policies adopted by municipal councils, which lack information on micromobility. None of them indicate the current (existing) level of bicycle traffic. No city identifies specific problems (barriers, bottlenecks) that prevent or hinder the development of micromobility in a given city, and which should be solved (removed) in order to achieve the indicated goals. No policy presents specific ways to solve these problems, nor does it provide for monitoring the number of problems solved. All authorities focus on the length of the bicycle infrastructure being built, the amount of financial expenditure, or even the level of user satisfaction, often without caring about the existing infrastructure. What is striking is the lack of focus on outcomes (behavioral change, problems solved) and the emphasis on outputs (such as the number of kilometers of bicycle paths built and the amounts spent).

8. Future Research

A separate issue is relieving cities of freight transport by better utilizing the potential that suburban logistics centers could create. Future research on micromobility is incomplete and should be supplemented with its means of transport and their development, among which bicycles, scooters, and microcars should be considered as essential. These means of transport have evolved over the last two centuries, and their great diversity is the result of the growing demand for various forms of transport. Electromobility, as a consequence of the spread of electric drives in transport, has a particularly strong influence on the evolution of micromobility and thus its means of transport. Continuous research in this area is necessary, along with the adaptation of existing road traffic regulations to new forms of transport.

Legal regulations on spatial planning should specify minimum requirements for bicycle routes and other micromobility users in documents (e.g., at least one main route in each municipality, enabling travel from border to border and access to the station and center, connected to the routes of neighboring municipalities), as well as in terms of definitions (nomenclature: main and connecting routes constituting the basic system and others), and even the graphic representation of routes in documents (today, there is freedom and randomness, resulting in illegibility and, not infrequently, arbitrariness, which may manifest itself at the level of local development plans, which has not been studied).

If e-scooters are to be part of the transport system, a principle must be established on which they should operate, for example, procurement directives or policies based on public procurement law. In the future, research will continue on the development of multimodal centers—physical areas where residents can access various transport options concentrated around existing railway stations or transfer hubs. As connectivity increases, particularly in the era of smart cities, mobility centers will become crucial for the development of urban transport. This solution will also be important from the perspective of reducing transport exclusion. Through the local development of micromobility services, railway stations and bus stops can naturally evolve into municipal transport hubs of the bike and ride type.