Micromobility in its modern form was born in the late 1990s and early 2000s as publicly-funded and procured bikeshare implemented by cities, predominantly in Europe. The first docked systems were in Portsmouth, Rennes, Oslo, Vienna, and Lyon and typically featured integration with transit smart cards and docked bikeshare stations. Since then, over 1000 docked bikeshare systems have proliferated around the world, with the largest systems in Asia and Europe.
Cities Shift from Customer to Regulator
Enter dockless bikes in 2016, followed by dockless scooters in 2017 — and the entire ecosystem of micromobility was altered. Venture-backed companies, not cities, were leading the development of dockless bike and scooter systems around the world. Cities, which had previously sought public investment for micromobility (in the form of docked bikeshare systems), shifted into regulators, no longer customers of these systems.
E-bikes in Milan
As cities from Stockholm to Milan grappled with the rapid proliferation of electric scooters, it became evident that effective management, alongside funding, was paramount to harnessing the full potential of micromobility. Policies that manage dockless micromobility, in particular parking, became crucial for ensuring that these innovative systems were being managed in a way that did not spark public outcry from citizens. Cities were able to restore order with effective policies, and data platforms to manage programs, so that modern dockless micromobility operators were allowed to continue to operate.
Incentivizing Micromobility as a Key Component of Public Transportation
The challenge for most micromobility companies (and in fact any company that delivers transportation-as-a-service — from airlines to Uber and Lyft), is that they struggle to deliver these services profitably. Nearly every major airline at some point in time has filed for bankruptcy in order to restructure. The micromobility operator landscape has thinned significantly, and only a few players remain in the US and Europe.
In order to achieve the societal benefits that micromobility has the potential to provide, in addition to regulating micromobility, cities should consider subsidizing these services. Modern, privatized micromobility, similar to the docked bikeshare systems that cities actively purchased in the 1990s to 2000s, offers an additional alternative for citizens to get around without a car. When combined with high frequency transit and other shared services, micromobility has the potential to reduce vehicle ownership, transportation emissions, and congestion.
In regions such as Milan, where micromobility programs are thriving, initiatives like incentivizing responsible parking behavior and allocating resources to underserved communities demonstrate a commitment to fostering inclusive mobility solutions. By ensuring that micromobility infrastructure is accessible to all residents, regardless of socioeconomic status, cities can promote social equity and enhance overall transportation accessibility.
For example, Prague, Ostrava and Brno in the Czech Republic have a trips-based subsidies program. In particular, the city of Brno subsidizes with 0,8€ per trip up to 2 trips per day of 30 minutes on bike sharing per user, dedicating EUR 2 million per year in the first pilot year and EUR 2.4 million this year to the highly successful project. Other Italian cities, such as Venice and Florence, provide vehicle-based subsidies to a single operator, with a 20 Euro public subsidy per vehicle per operational month.
Coming Full Circle: Public and Private Sector Collaboration
Collaboration between public agencies, private operators, and community stakeholders is essential for the delivery of sustainable micromobility programs. By engaging in dialogue and co-creating solutions, cities can develop policies that strike the right balance between innovation and regulation. Agencies such as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in the San Francisco Bay Area exemplify the power of partnerships in fostering a holistic approach to urban mobility, where micromobility is seamlessly integrated into broader transit networks.
Moreover, funding mechanisms for micromobility can be aligned with performance-based metrics and outcomes. By tying funding to measures such as ridership levels, compliance with parking regulations, and vehicle availability, cities can incentivize operators to prioritize responsible behavior and deliver high-quality services to users. This approach not only ensures accountability but also maximizes the return on investment for public funds allocated to micromobility initiatives.
As cities worldwide navigate the complexities of micromobility integration, it is imperative to view funding and management as two sides of the same coin. While robust policies for managing parking and other challenges are critical, financial investment is necessary to support the growth of micromobility long term. By embracing innovation while prioritizing responsible governance, cities can unlock the transformative potential of micromobility and create more vibrant, livable urban environments for all.
