On 22 February (14:00-17:00 CET) the European Commission organised a workshop (videoconference) on the recently started impact assessment for the initiative on Multimodal Digital Mobility Services (MDMS). The workshop was well attended with over 270 participants representing a large variety of public and private stakeholders from across the EU and beyond.

1. Overview of the study and summary of the Inception Impact Assessment feedback

At the beginning of the workshop, the study supporting the Impact Assessment of the initiative on MDMS was introduced, and the objectives of the workshop were outlined.

This section of the meeting ended with a poll where the attendants were asked on “What would be the impact of a significant increase of MDMS use on 1) Comfort/ease of booking tickets? 2) Travel time? 3) Travel costs? 4) Modal shift?”

– for 1) Comfort/ease of booking tickets?, 94% of respondents indicated a positive/somewhat positive impact;- for 2) Travel time?, 72% indicated a positive/somewhat positive impact and 19% no impact;

– for 3) Travel costs, 59% indicated a positive/somewhat positive impact and 24% no impact; for 4) Modal shift,80% indicated a positive/somewhat positive impact and 13% no impact.

An overview of the feedback received during the Inception Impact Assessment (IIA) open consultation period was also presented.

2. Presentation of the problem, drivers and root causes

The problem drivers under discussion and the underlying root causes were presented. The current draft problem drivers are:

  • Driver A: Lack of willingness to cooperate between MDMS and transport operators.
  • Driver B: Commercial and technical challenges to establish viable, scalable and high-quality MDMS.
  • Driver C: Lack of commercial incentives to help improve the performance of the transport system through effective multimodality.
  • These problem drivers lead to the main problem of “Limited use of digital mobility services to improve the performance of the transport system through effective multimodality”.

Attendants were asked to vote on which of these three problem drivers they identified as hindering the enhanced use of MDMS. Attendants could vote on more than one problem driver, and could also select an “other” option.

The policy objectives of the intervention, which are connected to the problem and the different problem drivers were also presented. These are:

  • General objective: Unleash the potential of MDMS to improve the performance of the transport system by developing an effective multimodality offering
  • Specific objective 1: Enhance cooperation and fair competition between MDMS platforms and transport operators.
  • Specific objective 2: Facilitate the re-sell and integration of all mobility offers in MDMS, including through-tickets and journey continuation by tackling commercial and technical challenges
  • Specific objective 3: Facilitate the re-sell and integration of all mobility offers in MDMS, including through-tickets and journey continuation by tackling commercial and technical challenges

In the next portion of the meeting, poll results were presented and discussed, along with a general discussion of the problem definition and policy objectives for the intervention.

Regarding the poll results, 60% of attendants voted for driver A, 59% for driver B, 38% for driver C and 23% for “other”. As part of this poll, attendants were also able to highlight matters that they felt were important. These included:

  • Regulation vs. innovation
  • Need to protect the interest of the public transport operators – there is a need indeed to differentiate between local v. long-distance context
  • Liability
  • Lack of standards
  • Infrastructure/lack of physical offer – this is a matter that this initiative will not cover

Finally, a discussion took place on the upcoming engagement activities, with a detailed presentation of the different tools that will be used: targeted surveys, stakeholders interviews, case studies and other upcoming workshops.

Source: European Commission