How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities?
2. Autonomous and Connected Vehicles
2.1. The Potential to Impact Transport Futures
2.2. The Current State of Development
2.3. Barriers to Overcome
- Technology is still lacking; despite serious progress more breakthroughs are necessary for supporting such an unparalleled mobility paradigm shift. CAVs need to go beyond correctly detecting and identifying objects in typical transport scenarios; they need to able to anticipate their behaviour even under the most complicated and unexpected circumstances.
- Despite some initial efforts to address it, legislation could be a barrier; road traffic regulations, liability allocation and enforcement strategies need to incorporate the use of CAVs.
- The implementation of CAVs, will not be straightforward, predictable, unproblematic or without risks; there is a wide spectrum of social dilemmas that may arise from such an untested, disruptive and robust intervention [14,16]. Motor vehicles will need to operate responsibly and replicate or do better than the human decision-making process; but some decisions are more than just a mechanical application of traffic laws and plotting a safe path .
- Ethics is an issue that has not been resolved. Even when it becomes possible to programme decision-making based on moral principles into machines, will self-interest or the public good prevail? CAVs will sometimes have to choose between two evils, such as running over pedestrians or sacrificing themselves and their passengers to save the pedestrians  and there is not yet a clear pathway of what is the ‘right’ option.
- Situational awareness, connection and engagement need to be guaranteed for users. The passive human role when ‘driving’ CAVs may not allow users to build an appropriate mental model of the situation that is essential for the recovery of system failure  and may also lead to disengagement and discontent .
- CAVs cannot properly function in today’s road network; they need a friendlier road transport infrastructure that provides them with an environment fit for their use. A lot more capital investment is necessary at this end.
- Mixed traffic situations, where CAVs share road space with partially automated and conventional man-driven vehicles could create more problems than the ones they are going to solve. There needs to be a plan of how to address the transition from human-led to machine-led vehicles.
- There is a risk of creating a two- or even a three-speed world; countries and cities’ progress in developing and introducing CAV technology may come at different rates and times. This will create imbalance, confusion and disharmony when transport’s definitive role is about integration and interoperability.
- Business models for supporting the CAVs adoption process and the need for synergies with (or incorporating) other transport initiatives are not clear yet.
3.1. Electric Cars
3.2. Electric Buses
3.3. Neighborhood Electric Cars
3.4. Electric Two-Wheelers
3.5. Electromobility as a Mechanism for Tranforming Transport and Cities
4. Bus Rapid Transit
4.1. The Elements Differentiating Bus Rapid Transit
- State-of-the-art vehicles, including in some cases massive bi-articulated buses, which characterise BRT’s image and identity, but also play according to  a strong role in achieving measurable performance success.
- Stops, stations, terminals and corridors approximating the standards of rail-like infrastructure.
- A variety of rights-of-way including dedicated lanes on mixed traffic streets, special BRT busways completely segregated from road traffic and bus priority in signalised intersections. BRT routes can run nearly anywhere including abandoned rail lines, highway medians and city streets .
- Pre-board fare collection, for speeding up services and providing a robust funding mechanism for the system’s long-term fiscal viability.
- The use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), for enhancing customer convenience, speed, reliability, integration, and safety.
- Frequent all-day services that need to operate at least for 16 hours per day with peak headways of 10 minutes or less .
- Brand identity, entailing of perceptual constructs substantiated by the strategic deployment, placement, and management of communication elements that allow people to distinguish the superior qualities of a BRT system. These include visual and nominal identifiers (e.g., system name and logo), a color palette and long-term strategic marketing and advertising plans .
4.2. Origins and Worldwide Applications
4.3. Problems and Challenges
- Rushed implementation; transitioning to BRT needs time and careful planning including incremental implementation.
- Tight financial planning (i.e., absence of operational subsidies).
- Extremely high vehicle occupancy levels that in some cases reach six to seven standees per m2 which adversely impact user experience.
- Infrastructure maintenance issues; state-of-the-art bus infrastructure is more expensive and more difficult to sustain.
- Inability to absorb extra travel demand due to a saturated system that lacks the capacity to expand further.
- Difficulties with implementing and regulating fare collection.
- Inefficient communication especially during disruptions caused by road works.
- Lack of integration with feeder modes like walking or cycling.
- The belief shared by many policymakers that BRT, despite its merits, is still a second-tier solution when compared to metro or light rail schemes.
- Failure to brand and operate BRT as a significant upgrade from conventional buses (i.e., not providing essential infrastructure and rights-of-priority, equivalent to a BRT standard is a recipe for failure).
4.4. Solutions for a BRT-Infused Future
5.1. Hyperloop Definition
5.2. Opportunities and Challenges
5.3. Current Development and Future Promise
6. Shared Use Mobility
- Provide a wider range of mobility choices.
- Deliver first- and last-mile solutions to help riders connect with other forms of transport.
- Reduce traffic congestion, vehicle km travelled and CO2 emissions.
- Lessen parking pressures and free up land for new uses.
- Create independence for those who cannot afford buying or running their own private vehicle.
- Increase efficiency, flexibility and convenience.
- Cut down transportation costs for individuals and households.
- Help drivers to share trip costs or earn extra income by utilising excess vehicle capacity.
- Establish an ethos of sharing resources on as-needed basis within communities.
7.1. Current Practice
7.2. Potential Benefits
7.3. Barriers and Challenges that Need to Addressed
7.4. The Future of Mobility-As-A-Service
8. Discussion and Conclusions
Conflicts of Interest
|ACV||Autonomous and connected vehicle|
|ADAS||Advanced driver assistance systems|
|BEV||Battery electric vehicle|
|BRT||Bus rapid transit|
|CAV||Connected and autonomous vehicle|
|HGV||Heavy goods vehicle|
|ICT||Information and communication technologies|
|IoT||Internet of things|
|NEV||Neighbourhood electric vehicle|
|PHEV||Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle|
|RES||Renewable energy sources|
|SUM||Shared use mobility|
|TNS||Transportation network companies|
- Kourtit, K.; Nijkamp, P. Smart cities in the innovation age. Innov. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res. 2012, 25, 93–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Debnath, A.K.; Chin, H.C.; Haque, M.M.; Yuen, B. A methodological framework for benchmarking smart transport cities. Cities 2014, 37, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Lawry, M.; Mirza, A.; Wang, Y.W.; Sundaram, D. Efficient transportation-does the future lie in vehicle technologies or in transportation systems? In International Conference on Future Network Systems and Security; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 126–138. [Google Scholar]
- Alessandrini, A.; Campagna, A.; Delle Site, P.; Filippi, F.; Persia, L. Automated vehicles and the rethinking of mobility and cities. Transp. Res. Procedia 2015, 5, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mwasilu, F.; Justo, J.J.; Kim, E.K.; Do, T.D.; Jung, J.W. Electric vehicles and smart grid interaction: A review on vehicle to grid and renewable energy sources integration. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 34, 501–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Currie, G.; Delbosc, A. Understanding bus rapid transit route ridership drivers: An empirical study of Australian BRT systems. Transp. Policy 2011, 18, 755–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chowdhury, M.; Dey, K. Intelligent transportation systems-a frontier for breaking boundaries of traditional academic engineering disciplines. IEEE Intell. Transp. Syst. Mag. 2016, 8, 4–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Vine, S.; Polak, J. Introduction to special issue: New directions in shared-mobility research. Transportation 2015, 42, 407–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamargianni, M.; Matyas, M.; Li, W.; Schafer, A. Feasibility Study for “Mobility as a Service” Concept in London. 2015. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279957542_Feasibility_Study_for_Mobility_as_a_Service_concept_in_London (accessed on 29 November 2017).
- Fagnant, D.J.; Kockelman, K. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2015, 77, 167–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Vine, S.; Zolfaghari, A.; Polak, J. Autonomous cars: The tension between occupant experience and intersection capacity. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2015, 52, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talebpour, A.; Mahmassani, H.S. Influence of connected and autonomous vehicles on traffic flow stability and throughput. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2016, 71, 143–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bansal, P.; Kockelman, K.M. Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 95, 49–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikitas, A. Automated Cars: A Critical Review of the Potential Advantages and Disadvantages of Driverless Technologies. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Smart Urban Mobility, Edinburgh, UK, 1–4 November 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Nikitas, A.; Nikitas, G. Social Dilemmas in Vehicle Automation. In Proceedings of the 2015 Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) Annual International Conference, Special Transport Geography Research Group session in The Spaces of Road Transport Automation, Exeter, UK, 1–4 September 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Nikitas, A.; Tchouamou Njoya, E.; Dani, S. Examining the Myths around Autonomous Cars: What Does the Future Hold? In Proceedings of the 4th Smart Urban Policy Futures Workshop, London, UK, 13–14 July 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Frey, C.B.; Osborne, M.A. The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2017, 114, 254–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, A.; Anderson, J. AI, Robotics, and the Future of Jobs; Pew Research Center: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Milakis, D.; Van Arem, B.; Van Wee, B. Policy and society related implications of automated driving: A review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2017, 21, 324–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Victor, T.; Rothoff, M.; Coelingh, E.; Ödblom, A.; Burgdorf, K. When autonomous vehicles are introduced on a larger scale in the road transport system: The Drive Me project. In Automated Driving; Watzenig, D., Horn, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 541–546. [Google Scholar]
- UK Government. Press Release: Government Sets Out Next Steps in Establishing the UK as Global Leader in Connected and Autonomous Vehicles. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-sets-out-next-steps-in-establishing-the-uk-as-global-leader-in-connected-and-autonomous-vehicles (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- New Zealand Transport Agency. Testing Autonomous Vehicles in New Zealand. Available online: https://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicles/vehicle-types/automated-and-autonomous-vehicles/testing-autonomous-vehicles-in-new-zealand/ (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- Australian Driverless Vehicle Initiative. Available online: http://advi.org.au/ (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- European Commission. Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2016–2017: Smart, Green and Integrated Transport. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2016_2017/main/h2020-wp1617-transport_en.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- European Commission. Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2016–2017: Cross-cutting Activities (Focus Areas). Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2016_2017/main/h2020-wp1617-focus_en.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- Payre, W.; Cestac, J.; Delhomme, P. Intention to use a fully automated car: Attitudes and a priori acceptability. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2014, 27, 252–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piao, J.; McDonald, M.; Hounsell, N.; Graindorge, M.; Graindorge, T.; Malhene, N. Public views towards implementation of automated vehicles in urban areas. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 2168–2177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, P. Why ethics matters for autonomous cars. In Autonomous Driving; Maurer, M., Gerdes, J., Lenz, B., Winner, H., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 69–85. [Google Scholar]
- Bonnefon, J.F.; Shariff, A.; Rahwan, I. The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science 2016, 352, 1573–1576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Breton, R.; Bossé, É. The Cognitive Costs and Benefits of Automation; Technical Report; Defence Research and Development Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2003; pp. 1–12.
- Carr, N. The Glass Cage: Where Automation Is Taking Us, 1st ed.; W.W. Norton & Company Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Helmers, E.; Marx, P. Electric cars: Technical characteristics and environmental impacts. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2012, 24, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heinicke, M.; Wagenhaus, G. Sustainability in the car-based mobility: The case of the electric vehicle Editha. Int. J. Energy Sect. Manag. 2015, 9, 105–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bickert, S.; Kampker, A.; Greger, D. Developments of CO2-emissions and costs for small electric and combustion engine vehicles in Germany. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2015, 36, 138–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haugneland, P.; Kvisle, H.H. Norwegian electric car user experiences. Int. J. Automot. Technol. Manag. 2015, 15, 194–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holtsmark, B.; Skonhoft, A. The Norwegian support and subsidy policy of electric cars. Should it be adopted by other countries? Environ. Sci. Policy 2014, 42, 160–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kühne, R. Electric buses—An energy efficient urban transportation means. Energy 2010, 35, 4510–4513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lajunen, A. Lifecycle costs and charging requirements of electric buses with different charging methods. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 56–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmoud, M.; Garnett, R.; Ferguson, M.; Kanaroglou, P. Electric buses: A review of alternative powertrains. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 673–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miles, J.; Potter, S. Developing a viable electric bus service: The Milton Keynes demonstration project. Res. Transp. Econ. 2014, 48, 357–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cazzola, P.; Gorner, M.; Schuitmaker, R.; Maroney, E. Global EV Outlook 2017; Technical Report; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris, French, 2017; pp. 1–71. [Google Scholar]
- Del Duce, A. Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Bicycles. Available online: http://www.eurobike-show.com/eb-wAssets/daten/rahmenprogramm/pdf/LifeCycleAssessment_DelDuce_englisch.pdf (accessed on 20 November 2017).
- Kinley, R. Climate change after Paris: From turning point to transformation. Clim. Policy 2017, 17, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Millo, F.; Rolando, L.; Fuso, R.; Mallamo, F. Real CO2 emissions benefits and end user’s operating costs of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Appl. Energy 2014, 114, 563–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, L. Shades of Green: Electric Cars’ Carbon Emissions around the Globe; Technical Report; ARRB Group Limited: Vermonth South, Australia, 2013; pp. 1–28. [Google Scholar]
- Loisel, R.; Pasaoglu, G.; Thiel, C. Large-scale deployment of electric vehicles in Germany by 2030: An analysis of grid-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-grid concepts. Energy Policy 2014, 65, 432–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shirazi, Y.; Carr, E.; Knapp, L. A cost-benefit analysis of alternatively fueled buses with special considerations for V2G technology. Energy Policy 2015, 87, 591–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, T.; Nelson, J.D. Recent developments in bus rapid transit: A review of the literature. Transp. Rev. 2011, 31, 69–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BRTdata. Org. Global BRT Database. Available online: www.brtdata.org (accessed on 10 November 2017).
- Nikitas, A.; Karlsson, M. A Worldwide state-of-the-art analysis for bus rapid transit: Looking for the success formula. J. Public Transp. 2015, 18, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, S.; Levinson, H.S. Vehicle selection for BRT: Issues and options. J. Public Transp. 2004, 7, 83–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jarzab, J.T.; Lightbody, J.; Maeda, E. Characteristics of bus rapid transit projects: An overview. J. Public Transp. 2002, 5, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levinson, H.S.; Zimmerman, S.; Clinger, J.; Rutherford, S.C. Bus rapid transit: An overview. J. Public Transp. 2002, 5, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hess, D.B.; Bitterman, A. Bus rapid transit identity: An overview of current “branding” practice. J. Public Transp. 2008, 11, 19–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rabinovitch, J.; Leitman, J. Urban planning in Curitiba. Sci. Am. 1996, 274, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, T.; Nelson, J.D. The perception of bus rapid transit: A passenger survey from Beijing Southern Axis Line 1. Transp. Plan. Technol. 2012, 35, 201–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathijsen, D. What does the future hold for composites in transportation markets? Reinf. Plast. 2017, 61, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anyszewski, A.; Toczycka, C. Edinburgh’s hyperloop team predicts a transport revolution. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Civ. Eng. 2017, 170, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musk, E. Hyperloop Alpha, Texas: SpaceX. 2013. Available online: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/hyperloop_alpha-20130812.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2017).
- Levy, A. Loopy Ideas Are Fine, If You’re an Entrepreneur. 2013. Available online: https://pedestrianobservations.com/2013/08/13/loopy-ideas-are-fine-if-youre-an-entrepreneur/ (accessed on 21 October 2017).
- Van Goeverden, C.D.; Milakis, D.; Janic, M. Performances of the HL (Hyperloop) Transport System. Available online: https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3A7dc4b712-f8f8-49f4-ac93-cc0003283b72 (accessed on 28 November 2017).
- Santi, P.; Ratti, C. A future of shared mobility. J. Urban Regen. Renew. 2017, 10, 328–333. [Google Scholar]
- Shaheen, S.; Cohen, A.; Zohdy, I. Shared Mobility: Current Practices and Guiding Principles; Report (No. FHWA-HOP-16-022); U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
- The Bike-sharing World Map. Available online: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid= 1UxYw9YrwT_R3SGsktJU3D-2GpMU&hl=en&ll=-25.750985884738892%2C138.1453722&z=2 (accessed on 12 November 2017).
- Nikitas, A.; Wallgren, P.; Rexfelt, O. The paradox of public acceptance of bike sharing in Gothenburg. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.-Eng. Sustain. 2016, 169, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaheen, S.A. Public Bikesharing in North America: Early Operator and User Understanding; MTI Report; Mineta Transportation Institute: San Jose, CA, USA, 2012; pp. 11–19. [Google Scholar]
- Kent, J.L.; Dowling, R. Puncturing automobility? Carsharing practices. J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 32, 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costain, C.; Ardron, C.; Habib, K.N. Synopsis of users’ behaviour of a carsharing program: A case study in Toronto. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2012, 46, 421–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaheen, S.; Sperling, D.; Wagner, C. Carsharing in Europe and North American: Past, Present, and Future. Available online: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.458.1020&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed on 15 October 2017).
- Furuhata, M.; Dessouky, M.; Ordóñez, F.; Brunet, M.E.; Wang, X.; Koenig, S. Ridesharing: The state-of-the-art and future directions. Transp. Res. Part B Meth. 2013, 57, 28–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morency, C. The ambivalence of ridesharing. Transportation 2007, 34, 239–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, N.D.; Shaheen, S.A. Ridesharing in North America: Past, present, and future. Transp. Rev. 2012, 32, 93–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teubner, T.; Flath, C.M. The economics of multi-hop ride sharing. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2015, 57, 311–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rayle, L.; Dai, D.; Chan, N.; Cervero, R.; Shaheen, S. Just a better taxi? A survey-based comparison of taxis, transit, and ridesourcing services in San Francisco. Transp. Policy 2016, 45, 168–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, X.M.; Zahiri, M.; Zhang, S. Understanding ridesplitting behavior of on-demand ride services: An ensemble learning approach. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Tech. 2017, 76, 51–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zha, L.; Yin, Y.; Yang, H. Economic analysis of ride-sourcing markets. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2016, 71, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malin, B.J.; Chandler, C. Free to work anxiously: Splintering precarity among drivers for Uber and Lyft. Commun. Cult. Crit. 2017, 10, 382–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blythe, P.T. Improving public transport ticketing through smart cards. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.-Municipal Eng. 2004, 157, 47–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lund, E. Mobility as a Service–What Is it, and which Problems could it Solve? 2017. Available online: http://en.trivector.se/fileadmin/user_upload/Traffic/Whitepapers/Mobility_as_a_Service.pdf (accessed on 19 October 2017).
- Samsel, C.; Beutel, M.K.; Thulke, D.; Kuck, D.; Krempels, K.H. Integration of Private and Carsharing Vehicles into Intermodal Travel Systems. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279957542_Feasibility_Study_for_Mobility_as_a_Service_concept_in_London (accessed on 10 November 2017).
- Lund, E.; Kerttu, J.; Koglin, T. Drivers and Barriers for Integrated Mobility Services. 2017. Available online: http://www.k2centrum.se/sites/default/files/drivers_and_barriers_for_integrated_mobility_services_k2_working_paper_2017_3.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2017).
- Datson, J. Mobility as a Service: Exploring the Opportunity for Mobility as a Service in the UK; Transport Systems Catapult: Milton Keynes, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Goodall, W.; Dovey, T.; Bornstein, J.; Bonthron, B. The rise of mobility as a service-Reshaping how urbanites get around. Deloitte Rev. 2017, 20, 112–130. [Google Scholar]
- Karlsson, I.C.M.; Sochor, J.; Strömberg, H. Developing the ‘Service’ in Mobility as a Service experiences from a field trial of an innovative travel brokerage. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 3265–3273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foulser, B. Reimagine Places: Mobility as a Service. 2017. Available online: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/uk/pdf/2017/08/reimagine_places_maas.pdf (accessed on 17 October 2017).
- Whim Limitless Travel. Available online: https://whimapp.com (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- About Qixxit. Available online: https://www.qixxit.de/en/ (accessed on 10 October 2017).
- Burrows, A.; Bradburn, J. Journeys of the Future: Introducing Mobility as a Service. 2014. Available online: http://www.atkinsglobal.com/~/media/Files/A/Atkins-Corporate/uk-and-europe/uk-thought-leadership/reports/Journeys%20of%20the%20future_300315.pdf (accessed on 12 October 2017).
- Jittrapirom, P.; Ciati, V.; Feneri, A.M.; Ebrahimigharehbaghi, S.; Alonso-Gonzalez, M.J.; Narayan, J. Mobility as a service: A critical review of definitions, assessments of schemes, and key challenges. Urban Plan. 2017, 2, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamargianni, M.; Li, W.; Matyas, M.; Schäfer, A. A critical review of new mobility services for urban transport. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 3294–3303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sochor, J.; Karlsson, I.C.M.; Strömberg, H. Trying out mobility as a service: Experiences from a field trial and implications for understanding demand. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2014, 2542, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sochor, J.; Strömberg, H.; Karlsson, I.C.M. Implementing Mobility as a service: Challenges in integrating user, commercial, and societal perspectives. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2015, 2536, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Voege, T. Mobility as a service (MaaS): Challenges of implementation and policy required. J. Transp. Technol. 2017, 7, 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wegener, M. The future of mobility in cities: Challenges for urban modelling. Transp. Policy 2013, 29, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikitas, A.; Avineri, E.; Parkhurst, G. Older people’s attitudes to road charging: Are they distinctive and what are the implications for policy? Transp. Plan. Technol. 2011, 34, 87–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikitas, A. Understanding the Attitudes of Older People to Road Pricing. Ph.D. Thesis, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Sochor, J.; Nikitas, A. Vulnerable users’ perceptions of transport technologies. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.-Urban Des. Plan. 2016, 169, 154–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Nikitas, A.; Kougias, I.; Alyavina, E.; Njoya Tchouamou, E. How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities? Urban Sci. 2017, 1, 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci1040036
Nikitas A, Kougias I, Alyavina E, Njoya Tchouamou E. How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities? Urban Science. 2017; 1(4):36. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci1040036Chicago/Turabian Style
Nikitas, Alexandros, Ioannis Kougias, Elena Alyavina, and Eric Njoya Tchouamou. 2017. "How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities?" Urban Science 1, no. 4: 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci1040036