sustainability

Article Small and Light Electric Vehicles: An Analysis of Feasible Transport Impacts and Opportunities for Improved Urban Land Use

Amelie Ewert 1,* , Mascha Brost 1, Christine Eisenmann 2 and Sylvia Stieler 3 1 German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Vehicle Concepts, Pfaffenwaldring 38–40, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany; [email protected] 2 German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Transport Research, Rudower Chaussee 72, 12489 Berlin, Germany; [email protected] 3 IMU Institut, Hasenbergstraße 49, 70176 Stuttgart, Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +49-711-6862-354

 Received: 31 July 2020; Accepted: 23 September 2020; Published: 1 October 2020 

Abstract: Improvements in battery technology have resulted in small and light electric vehicles (LEVs) appearing on the market in Europe since 2011—however, their market share is still comparatively low. Low energy requirements and small size can potentially contribute to sustainable mobility in terms of climate protection and reduced local emissions. Our study evaluates how three-wheeled and four-wheeled vehicles, categorised as L-Class according to Regulation (EU) No 168/2013, can contribute to more efficient use of space in urban areas. Evaluations of expert interviews, an extensive literature research, and analyses of the German national household travel survey (MiD) serve as the basis of the study. First, the substitution potential of trips through LEVs is explored using MiD data. Our findings show that between 17% and 49% of trips made and 6% to 30% of the distance covered by private trips can theoretically be substituted by LEVs. Thus, reorganisation of current land use offers potential and additionally, LEVs are an attractive and sustainable addition to other means of transport and contribute to achieving the climate protection goals of the transport sector. Due to the fact that technology application is restricted by travel behaviour and political support, our study discusses possible support by public bodies towards sustainable mobility. Here, the promotion of LEVs in combination with restrictive measures for is necessary.

Keywords: LEV; light electric vehicles; urban land use; urban mobility; small electric vehicles

1. Introduction Cities today face problems resulting from increased mobility needs, which are often still tied to private ownership and auto-centric transport infrastructures that have grown historically. This situation is compounded by urbanisation and population growth in many cities. Therefore, cities struggle with bad air quality, high noise emissions [1], a lack of space, and structures with low attractiveness for public spaces. Land used for transport infrastructure takes up a considerable proportion of the total area. For example, in large German cities, an average of 12% of land area is used for transport; in terms of residential areas, this figure is as high as 25% [2]. Furthermore, transport is accountable for a high proportion (25% in EU-28 2017 (including international aviation)) of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [3,4], 72% of which is due to road transport [5]. The European Commission estimates urban mobility to be responsible for 40% of all European road transport CO2 emissions, which shows the importance of sustainable urban transport for climate protection [6]. In view of the Paris Climate Agreement 2015 to limit global warming to 1.5 ◦C, a significant transformation of the transport sector is required.

Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098; doi:10.3390/su12198098 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 2 of 17

Different social transformation processes can be observed regarding social developments and mobility patterns, as well as the choice of mode and vehicle type. In connection with digitalisation, user-oriented and demand-oriented mobility services (e.g., car sharing) are becoming more popular in cities. A wide range of mobility services take into account the megatrend of individualisation, and push the necessity of car ownership, especially within the younger generation, into the background [7–9]. At the same time, owning a private car is still an important status symbol within the population, which is evident by the high share of car users in the modal split and the increasing motorisation rate in Europe [10,11]. Contrary to the current climate debate, figures from new registrations show that there is a trend towards large and heavy vehicles, such as sports utility vehicles (SUVs) [12,13]. Their negative contribution to climate protection appears to play a subordinate role in the purchasing decision, whereas comfortably getting in and out of the vehicle and a high level of safety for passengers seem to be the more important criteria. A key element in urban mobility planning for many cities today is promoting ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable mobility options. Light electric vehicles (LEVs) below the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) M1-category can be an element in sustainable mobility concepts within urban and rural areas, if they replace conventionally sized passenger cars. Category M1 comprises vehicles that are designed and constructed for the carriage of passengers, with up to eight seats in addition to the driver’s seat. Conventionally sized passenger cars usually belong to class M1 and are hereinafter referred to as “cars” in distinction to LEVs. LEVs require less energy and resources for production and operation than cars and occupy less space in stationary and flowing traffic. These characteristics make it worthwhile to investigate their use in urban areas in particular, as available space is scarce and strict regulations have been introduced to improve air quality (e.g., diesel bans) in some cities. LEVs are also well suited for mobility needs and the traffic situation in cities, characterised by low speeds and short trips. As a contribution to attractive urban neighbourhoods, LEVs offer potential for mobility chains that include local public transport (PT) and active modes such as walking and cycling. They can be integrated into modern PT concepts and sharing concepts or enable individual mobility. This could help to manage routes for which public transport is not suitable due to very low demand. LEVs may also be attractive for trips requiring the movement of heavy objects or where users are physically restricted. However, implementing LEVs as a mobility option requires rethinking in society and politics. Whereas great effort is being made in research on topics such as alternative power trains, automated driving, and lightweight technologies for passenger cars in order to achieve climate protection targets, the vehicle itself remains mostly unaffected by existing concepts. The fundamentally different LEV concept currently receives little scientific attention. While LEVs have already reached a considerable market share in Asia, LEV sales in Europe are still very low [14]. In this respect, there are hardly any studies with a global perspective in relation to potential market penetration [15]. Research topics that have received more focus include: safety of LEVs [16–22], user requirements [23–25], and more rarely, cost optimisation [26,27]. In addition, several research vehicles are being developed, such as the Safe Light Regional Vehicle (SLRV) from the German Aerospace Center, the CityCar from the MIT Media Lab, and a vehicle for the older generation in the EU-funded SilverStream project [28]. Furthermore, since 2011, large original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) have produced different concept studies which, in most cases, do not reach series production. In terms of automation, startup company StreetDrone has developed a research vehicle for connected and automated driving [29]. Automated concepts, such as the EZ-POD [30], can be important in the long term; however, vehicles that can be used in the medium and short term are highly relevant for a rapid transformation to more climate-friendly transport. Given that LEVs are not widespread in terms of sales and research activities, our study examines the extent to which, and by what means, these vehicles can be used. Possible effects on transport through the implementation of LEVs in Germany are examined. In the following sections, an analysis of the general traffic potential is highlighted, showing the maximum substitutable potential of trips Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 3 of 17 and mileage using data from the national household travel survey “Mobility in Germany (MiD)” 2017. Subsequently, possible optimisation of land use in urban areas is discussed, combined with the opportunities and advantages that come with the use of LEVs in this regard. In principle, LEVs are suitable for driving in both urban and rural areas. Depending on the area of application, vehicle requirements can vary, e.g., with regard to trip length or desired maximum speed. Finally, recommendations for action and framework conditions resulting from expert interviews are put forward. For this study, the existing literature and statistics were analysed, complemented by interviews with experts from industry and research.

2. Definition of LEVs The term light or LEV is currently not clearly defined and covers a wide array of different vehicles ranging from micro mobiles, such as eScooters, through to light four-wheeled vehicles. For this analysis, the focus is on LEVs with three and four wheels. According to European classification, these categories relate to L2e, L5e, L6e, and L7e (EU Regulation No 168/2013).

3. Materials and Methods The content of our study was derived using three methods. First, an analysis was conducted of the substitution potential of LEVs using data from the “Mobility in Germany (MiD)” survey. Second, land use and potential savings through LEVs were analysed using literature research and analyses of existing data. Third, a discussion on framework conditions and recommendations for action was derived from expert interviews.

3.1. Quantitative Analysis: National Household Travel Survey “Mobility in Germany” The usage potential was analysed using data from the “Mobility in Germany (MiD)” survey. The MiD is a nationwide and representative household travel survey of the German residential population. The MiD is a one-day survey with each participant reporting their mobility on a given day—namely, the survey day. The survey was conducted between May 2016 and September 2017. A total of around 316,000 individuals from 156,000 households participated and reported 961,000 trips on their respective survey days. A comprehensive overview of the survey design, sample characteristics, and survey results can be found in the MiD Outcomes Report [31]. In order to estimate the feasible transport impacts and user potential of LEVs in passenger transport in Germany, the following analyses were examined on the basis of the MiD 2017 dataset. First, the share of passenger transport trips and mileage that could be covered by LEVs was analysed. Second, the type of trips for which LEVs could be used was examined. For the analysis, we selected three characteristic LEVs that represent different L-categories according to Regulation (EU) No 168/2013. We analysed which of the reported trips in the MiD survey these LEVs models can be used for. LEVs on the market are mostly developed and produced by startups and suppliers for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). There are also small and medium sized companies that are well-known in the market segment such as Swiss firm KYBURZ, which produces LEVs for the Swiss Postal Service and other postal service providers around the globe. LEVs manufactured by OEMs, in contrast, are not widely seen on the market. In terms of passenger transport, the Twizy by Renault is the most famous LEV, and Renault is the only OEM with a series product (as of 2019). In addition, Toyota offers the iRoad and COMS models for car sharing services. Since 2017, several OEMs such as Seat, Honda, Toyota, and Citroen have published studies on LEVs. Although the models evaluated in this study [32] comprise a wide range of vehicles, the analysis was limited to three characteristic LEV models with diverse vehicle characteristics: the EVT Trike (L3e), the Aixam eCity Pack (L6e), and the Microlino from Microlino AG (L7e). The vehicle characteristics, as shown in Table1, were compared with corresponding data for each individual trip chain in the MiD. Only if all aspects and LEV model characteristics were applicable was it assumed that an LEV could be used on this trip chain. We took into consideration the following aspects: SustainabilitySustainabilitySustainability 20 2020 20, 20,1 12,2, 1,x 2x FOR, FORx FOR PEER PEER PEER REVIEW REVIEW REVIEW 44 of of4 17 of17 17

Sustainability  IsIs theIsthe the 2020 batterybattery battery, 12, 8098 rara ngerangenge ofof of thethe the LEVLEV LEV sufficientsufficient sufficient forfor for thethe the distancedistance distance covered?covered? covered? 4 of 17   IfIf theIfthe the personperson person isis accompaniedisaccompanied accompanied byby by others,others, others, doesdoes does thethe the LEVLEV LEV offeroffer offer additionaladditional additional seats?seats? seats?   IsIfIf the goodsIfgoods goods battery needneed need range toto to bebe of be transported,transported, the transported, LEV suffi doesdoescient does thethe for the LEVLEV the LEV distance havehave have facilitiesfacilities facilities covered? thatthat that allowallow allow thethe the transporttransport transport ofof of suchsuch such • items?items? Ifitems? the person is accompanied by others, does the LEV offer additional seats? •  IsIs Isthethe the permissiblepermissible permissible maximumaximu maximumm m speedspeed speed ofof of thethe the LEVLEV LEV consistentconsistent consistent withwith with thethe the roadroad road infrastructureinfrastructure infrastructure thatthat that waswas was If goods need to be transported, does the LEV have facilities that allow the transport of such items? • usedusedused onon on thethe the triptrip trip chain?chain? chain? ((EstimationEstimation (Estimation basedbased based onon on thethe the averageaverage average speedspeed speed onon on thethe the longestlongest longest triptrip trip ofof of thethe the triptrip trip Is the permissible maximum speed of the LEV consistent with the road infrastructure that was used • chainchainchain)).. ). on the trip chain? (Estimation based on the average speed on the longest trip of the trip chain).   IfIf aIfa drivingadriving driving licenselicense license isis isrequiredrequired required forfor for thethe the LEV,LEV, LEV, doesdoes does thethe the surveysurvey survey participantparticipant participant havehave have thethe the apap appropriatepropriatepropriate If a driving license is required for the LEV, does the survey participant have the appropriate • drivingdrivingdriving license?license? license? driving license?   DoesDoesDoes the the the LEV LEV LEV have have have sufficient sufficient sufficient weather weather weather protection protection protection to to toenable enable enable its its its use use use even even even in in inunfavourable unfavourable unfavourable weather weather weather Does the LEV have sufficient weather protection to enable its use even in unfavourable • conditions?conditions?conditions? weather conditions? IfIf aIfa triptripa trip chainchain chain meetsmeets meets allall all ofof of thethe the aboveabove above requirements,requirements, requirements, wewe we assumeassume assume thatthat that anan an LEVLEV LEV cancan can theoreticallytheoretically theoretically bebe be usedusedusedIf forfor a for trip thosethose those chain trips.trips. trips. meets HoweHowe Howe allver,ver, ofver, the tripstrips trips above needneed need requirements, toto to covercover cover aa distancedistancea distance we assume ofof of atat at leastleast that least 80 an80 0800 LEV mm0 ,m, asas can, as shortershorter shorter theoretically triptrip trip chainschains chains be useddododo notnot fornot justifyjustify those justify thetrips.the the timetime However,time requiredrequired required trips toto to getget need get readyready ready to cover andand and startastart distancestart aa triptripa trip of withwith atwith least anan an LEVLEV 800 LEV.. m, . as shorter trip chains do not justify the time required to get ready and start a trip with an LEV. TableTableTable 1. 1. Vehicle 1.Vehicle Vehicle and and and usage usage usage characteristics characteristics characteristics of of of various various various LEV LEV LEV models,models, models, suitedsuited suited primarily primarily primarily for for for passengerpassenger passenger Tabletransporttransporttransport 1. Vehicle. . . and usage characteristics of various LEV models, suited primarily for passenger transport.

EVTEVTEVTEVT TrikeTrike Trike Trike AixamAixamAixam Aixam eCityeCity eCity PackPack PackPack MicromobilityMicromobility MicromobilityMicromobility SystemsSystems Systems Microlino MicrolinoMicrolino Microlino

1 1 RangeRangeRange [km][km] [km]1 1 707070 70 7575 75 140 140140 SeatsSeatsSeats 22 2 2 22 2 22 2 GoodsGoodsGoods volumevolume volume [L] [l][l] [l] approx.approx. approx.approx. 1010 10 700700700 300 300300 MaximumMaximumMaximumMaximum speed speedspeed speed [km [km/h][km/h] [km/h]/h] 4545 45 45 4545 45 90 90 90 Driving license required yes yes yes Driving license required yes yes yes DrivingDrivingWeather licenselicense protection requiredrequired yesyes no yesyes yes yes yes WeatherWeatherWeather protectionprotection protection nonono yesyesyes yesyesyes 1 Estimated on the basis of information provided by manufacturers. 11 Estimated Estimated1 Estimated on on onthe the the basis basis basis of of information ofinformation information provided provided provided by by bymanufacturers. manufacturers. manufacturers. When evaluating this potential, four aspects need to be considered. First, it needs to be taken WhenWhenWhen evaluatingevaluating evaluating thisthis this potential,potential, potential, fourfour four aspectsaspects aspects needneed need toto to bebe be considered.considered. considered. First,First, First, itit needsitneeds needs toto to bebe be takentaken taken into account that this calculated potential would not be fully exploited in real life, because other intointointo accountaccount account thatthat that thisthis this calculatedcalculated calculated potentialpotential potential wouldwould would notnot not bebe be fullyfully fully exploitedexploited exploited inin in realreal real life,life, life, becausebecause because otherother other aspects, such as personal preferences or willingness to purchase an LEV, impact mode choice. Second, aspects,aspects,aspects, such such such as as aspersonal personal personal preferences preferences preferences or or orwillingness willingness willingness to to topurchase purchase purchase an an an LEV, LEV, LEV, impact impact impact mode mode mode choice. choice. choice. Second, Second, Second, the analysis refers to entire trip chains, not single trips. An LEV might be suitable for single trips of thethethe analysis analysis analysis refers refers refers to to toentire entire entire trip trip trip chains, chains, chains, not not not single single single trips. trips. trips. An An An LEV LEV LEV might might might be be besuitable suitable suitable for for for single single single trips trips trips of of ofa a a a multi-modal trip chain; for example, with sharing services, which is not considered here. Third, multimultimulti--modalmodal-modal trip trip trip chain; chain; chain; for for for example, example, example, wit wit withh sharing hsharing sharing services, services, services, which which which is is not isnot not considered considered considered here. here. here. Third, Third, Third, other other other other criteria could be applied for determining the theoretical suitability of vehicles for single trips or criteriacriteriacriteria could could could be be beapplied applied applied for for for determining determining determining the the the theoretical theoretical theoretical suitability suitability suitability of of ofvehicles vehicles vehicles for for for single single single trips trips trips or or orentire entire entire entire trip chains; for example, weather protection might be of secondary importance for some users. triptriptrip chains; chains; chains; for for for example, example, example, weather weather weather protection protection protection might might might be be be of of of secondary secondary secondary importance importance importance for for for so so me someme users. users. users. Fourth, it should be noted that no conclusions can be drawn from the one-day survey data of the Fourth,Fourth,Fourth, it it shoulditshould should be be benoted noted noted that that that no no no conclusions conclusions conclusions can can can be be bedrawn drawn drawn from from from the the the one one one--dayday-day survey survey survey data data data of of ofthe the the MiD MiD MiD MiD 2017 on the travel behaviour of individuals and LEV user potential over longer periods of time. 201720172017 on on on the the the travel travel travel behaviour behaviour behaviour of of of individuals individuals individuals and and and LEV LEV LEV user user user potential potential potential over over over longer longer longer periods periods periods of of of time. time. time. Consequently, no conclusions can be drawn from the MiD information about LEV user potential for Consequently,Consequently,Consequently, nono no conclusionsconclusions conclusions cancan can bebe be drawndrawn drawn fromfrom from thethe the MiDMiD MiD informationinformation information aboutabout about LEVLEV LEV useruser user potentialpotential potential forfor for single individuals from a longitudinal perspective. Overall, the analyses make it possible to quantify singlesinglesingle individuals individuals individuals from from from a a longitudinallongitudinala longitudinal perspective. perspective. perspective. Overall, Overall, Overall, the the the analyses analyses analyses make make make it it possibleitpossible possible to to toquantify quantify quantify the share of reported trip chains for which LEV are suitable according to a defined set of requirements thethethe share share share of of ofreported reported reported trip trip trip chains chains chains for for for which which which LEV LEV LEV are are are suitable suitable suitable according according according to to toa a defined defineda defined set set set of of ofrequirements requirements requirements and trip chain specifications. andandand triptrip trip chainchain chain specifications.specifications. specifications. 3.2. Potential of Rededicating Urban Spaces that are Currently Occupied by Cars 3.2.3.2.3.2. PotentialPotential Potential ofof RededicatingofRededicating Rededicating UrbanUrban Urban SpacesSpaces Spaces thatthat that areare are CurrentlyCurrently Currently OccupiedOccupied Occupied byby by CarsCars Cars In order to demonstrate the potential of optimised land use in urban areas, a mixed-method InIn order order to to demonstrate demonstrate the the potential potential of of optimised optimised land land use use in in urban urban areas, areas, a amixed mixed-method-method approachIn order was to chosen, demonstrate which combinesthe potential the of results optimised of a literature land use search, in urban statistical areas, a data mixed on-method the use approachapproach was was chosen, chosen, which which combines combines the the results results of of a litea literaturerature search, search, statistical statistical data data on on the the use use of of ofapproach urban areas,was chosen, technical which and combines statistical the data results on vehicles, of a literature and the search, results statistical from expert data on discussions. the use of urbanurban areas, areas, technical technical and and statistical statistical data data on on vehicles, vehicles, and and the the results results from from expert expert discussions. discussions. Statisticalurban areas, data technical were mainly and collected statistical from data three on vehicles, sources: and figures the provided results from by the expert German discussions. Federal StatisticalStatistical data data were were mainly mainly collected collected from from three three sources: sources: figures figures provided provided by by the the German German Federal Federal MotorStatistical Transport data were Authority mainly (Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt collected from three sources: (KBA)); figures an overview provided of dimensionsby the German of available Federal MotorMotor Transpor Transport Authorityt Authority (Kraftfahrt (Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt-Bundesamt (KBA (KBA));) )an; an overview overview of of dimensions dimensions of of available available carMotor models Transpor on thet Authority website automobiledimension.com; (Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA and)) various; an overview manufacturer of dimensions websites. of Theavailable data carcar models models on on the the website website automobiledimension.com automobiledimension.com; and; and various various manufacturer manufacturer websites. websites. The The data data analysiscar models was on complemented the website automobiledimension.com by conclusions drawn from; and expertvarious discussions manufacturer that websites. were part The of data an analysisanalysis was was complemented complemented by by conclusions conclusions drawn drawn from from expert expert discussions discussions that that were were part part of of an an exchangeanalysis was dialogue complemented “Strategiedialog by conclusions Automobilwirtschaft drawn from Baden-Württemberg expert discussions (SDA that BW)”, were a part platform of an Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 5 of 17 for institutional cooperation. An SDA BW working group “Land Use for Future Mobility” evaluated the issue of land use in several workshops with representatives from the state administration and local authorities, the and transport companies, environmental organisations, and the sciences. The potential of LEVs was presented and discussed, among many other topics, within the working group. The discussion results are summarised in a recommendation paper, which is publicly available [33]. Additionally, they serve as a basis for land use potential presented in Section 4.2.

3.3. Qualitative Analysis: Expert Interviews Recommendations for action were based on 15 expert interviews with stakeholders from industry, research, and public administration that were carried out between December 2018 and February 2019. They were partly conducted in person and partly via telephone. The interviews were guided interviews with an average length of one hour. The experts mostly consisted of vehicle manufacturers (7 interviews) but were also from federal state ministries (2), research (1), suppliers (3), and one importer of LEVs. Since the market for LEVs is very small in regard to European manufacturers, the circle of experts is also very limited. For this reason, the selection of experts was based on the available companies and, in terms of public institutions, on the geographical environment considered for the commissioned study. The selected manufacturers and suppliers range from small companies with a startup character through to OEMs. Interviewing the various stakeholders allowed a more comprehensive view to be generated. The questions covered three main content areas. The use, market potential, and manufacturing of LEVs were examined in order to derive recommendations for action. The third content area (manufacturing of LEVs) covered technical aspects such as component specifications. This last part is not considered in the presented analysis. Results of the discussions regarding recommendations for action are found in Section 4.3.

4. Results The results show different aspects of LEVs in urban areas. In general, LEVs can be deployed in various applications. Like other modes of transport, they can be used privately; for example, for commuting. Furthermore, many models offer the possibility to transport goods, which makes them also feasible for shopping trips. LEVs can also be used in last or first mile trips in conjunction with public transport. This is one option for using these vehicle concepts in sharing systems. Like most bike sharing concepts, parking spaces can be set up in the vicinity of public transport stops to ensure seamless mobility when switching from an LEV to public transport. Even though commercial transport was also analysed for the study [32], this paper only focuses on passenger transport.

4.1. Feasible Transport Impacts and User Potentials of LEVs The indicator for the transport potential of LEVs in this analysis is a theoretical substitution potential of the number of trips and the distance travelled. Our MiD data analysis indicates that up to between 17% and 49% of trips made, and between 6% and 30% of the distance covered by private trips, can theoretically be substituted by LEVs (see Figure1). The theoretical substitution potential varies strongly between LEV models; in particular, battery range and maximum speed restrict the substitution potential. The share of trips for which LEVs are suitable was analysed with regard to modes of transport that were used by survey participants. These modes were: by foot, bicycle, private passenger transport, and public transport (PT). LEVs are particularly sustainable for replacing private car trips. Figure2 shows that LEVs compete with active modes and PT as well. LEV models with lower range and maximum speed have a particularly good substitution potential for active modes. While the EVT Trike could replace about 25% of trips by foot and more than 30% of trips by bike, those trips that are made by car only accounted for 11%. In contrast, the Microlino, which has a higher range and maximum speed, is better suited for substituting private motorised passenger transport (57%). However, this vehicle is also suitable on trips for which participants chose active modes; it could be used for 46% of trips by Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

60% EVT Trike 50%

40% eCity Pack

30% (Aixam) potential Sustainability 2020, 12, 809820% Microlino 6 of 17

Maximum substitution Maximum (Micro Mobility 10% Systems) foot and 57% of cycle trips. A major reason why LEVs could not be used on more walking or cycling 0% trips is that some of the vehicle models considered require a driving license. Not all participants who Trips Mileage [km] travelled by foot or by bicycle on the survey day have the appropriate driving license. Although trips with active modes are usually within the battery range of LEVs, no higher degree of substitutability Figure 1. Maximum substitution potential for traffic volume and transport performance (DLR, own is feasible because either a driving license is often required to use the LEV or trip chains by foot are calculations based on MiD 2017). shorterSustainability than 20 80020, 12 m., x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17 The share of trips for which LEVs are suitable was analysed with regard to modes of transport that were used by60% survey participants. These modes were: by foot, bicycle, private passenger EVT Trike transport, and public50% transport (PT). LEVs are particularly sustainable for replacing private car trips. Figure 2 shows that LEVs compete with active modes and PT as well. LEV models with lower range and maximum speed40% have a particularly good substitution potential for active modes. While the EVT eCity Pack Trike could replace about 25% of trips by foot and more than 30% of trips by bike, those trips that are 30% (Aixam) made by car onlypotential accounted for 11%. In contrast, the Microlino, which has a higher range and maximum speed, 20% is better suited for substituting private motorised passengerMicrolino transport (57%).

However, thissubstitution Maximum vehicle is also suitable on trips for which participants chose(Micro active Mobility modes; it could be 10% used for 46% of trips by foot and 57% of cycle trips. A major reason why LEVsSystems) could not be used on more walking or cycling0% trips is that some of the vehicle models considered require a driving license. Not all participants who travelledTrips by foot or by Mileage bicycle [km] on the survey day have the appropriate driving license. Although trips with active modes are usually within the battery range of LEVs, no higherFigureFigure degree 1.1. MaximumMaximum of substitutability substitutionsubstitution is potentialpotentialfeasible forforbecause tratrafficffic either volumevolume a andanddriving transporttransport license performanceperformance is often required (DLR,(DLR, ownown to use the LEVcalculationscalculations or trip chains basedbased onon by MiDMiD foot 2017).2017 are )shorter. than 800 m.

The share60% of trips for which LEVs are suitable was analysed with regard to modes of transport that were used by survey participants. These modes were: by foot, bicycle, private passenger transport, and50% public transport (PT). LEVs are particularly sustainable for replacing private car trips. EVT Trike Figure 2 shows that LEVs compete with active modes and PT as well. LEV models with lower range 40% and maximum speed have a particularly good substitution potential for active modes. While the EVT Trike could 30%replace about 25% of trips by foot and more than 30% of trips by bike, those trips that are made by car only accounted for 11%. In contrast, the Microlino, which has eCity a higher Pack range and maximum speed,20% is better suited for substituting private motorised passenger(Aixam) transport (57%). However, this vehicle is also suitable on trips for which participants chose active modes; it could be 10% used for 46%trips Substitutable of trips by foot and 57% of cycle trips. A major reason why LEVs couldMicrolino not be used on more walking0% or cycling trips is that some of the vehicle models considered require(Micro a driving Mobility license. Systems) Not all participants by who foot travelledbicycle by foot orcar by bicyclepublic on theall surveymeans of day have the appropriate driving license. Although trips with active modes aretransport usually withintransport the battery range of LEVs, no higher degree of substitutability isMeans feasible of becausetransport either a driving license is often required to use the LEV or trip chains by foot are shorter than 800 m. Figure 2. Replaceable trips depending on mode of transport of trips made (DLR, own calculations Figure 2. Replaceable trips depending on mode of transport of trips made (DLR, own calculations based on60% MiD 2017).2017).

As the figuresfigures50% presented are derived by analysing the theoretical substitution based exclusively EVT Trike on trip characteristics, such as trip chain length or number of passengers, no conclusion can be drawn 40% regarding user preferences. preferences. Hence, Hence, it itis isnot not possible possible to toassess assess the the most most probable probable modal modal shift shift with with this thisstudy. study. The Theanalysis30% analysis was carried was carried out to out provide to provide the theoretical the theoretical substitution substitution potential potential of LEVs of LEVsin order in order to be able to evaluate if more detailed studies are required. We hypothesiseeCity that therePack will be no large-scale replacement20% of active modes. If, as a scenario, fundamental changes in transport(Aixam) framework conditions were to take place and include both reducing privileges for cars and encouraging the use of 10% LEVs, LEVtrips Substitutable usage might rise. We assume that promoting the uptake of LEVs by makingMicrolino car transport more unattractive,0% e.g., with high parking costs or tolls, would not reduce active(Micro modes Mobility of transport Systems) such as walking and cycling.by foot Promotingbicycle LEVs withcar incentivespublic (e.g.,all through means of purchase subsidies) might increase the attractiveness of buying an LEV instead oftransport another formtransport of transport such as electrically Means of transport

Figure 2. Replaceable trips depending on mode of transport of trips made (DLR, own calculations based on MiD 2017).

As the figures presented are derived by analysing the theoretical substitution based exclusively on trip characteristics, such as trip chain length or number of passengers, no conclusion can be drawn regarding user preferences. Hence, it is not possible to assess the most probable modal shift with this study. The analysis was carried out to provide the theoretical substitution potential of LEVs in order Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 7 of 17 power assisted cycles (EPAC). This should be analysed in detail in further studies. If, in another scenario, the transport system were, in general, to stay the same, we agree with the interviewed experts in not expecting significant shifts from any type of mode to LEVs, as they have been available on the market for many years. Hence, absolute LEV numbers would probably remain low.

4.2. Optimising Urban Areas by Replacing Passenger Cars with LEVs Some of today’s problems related to cars, such as poor air quality or high noise emissions, could be solved by replacing the combustion engine with an electric drive. This can be implemented in car-sized electric vehicles (EV) as well as in LEVs. EVs have gained popularity in recent years albeit to a very low extent, when measured in absolute numbers, with market shares of 2.6% of global car sales and 1% of global car stock in 2019 [34]. Although EVs might help to address urban problems such as air quality by not emitting combustion engine related pollutants, other problems, such as scarcity of space and car-dominated cityscapes, remain unchanged. Additionally, the contribution of EVs towards mitigating global threats, such as climate change and scarce resources, is limited as long as energy and material consumption of the vehicles cannot be significantly reduced. Comparing different transport modes demonstrates the energy efficiency of LEVs as opposed to cars and the relation to other transport options such as EPACs or collective transport. EPACs are very energy efficient with 1 kWh/100 passenger kilometres [35], e-motorbikes require around 4.8 kWh/100 passenger kilometres [35], LEVs typically need 6–9 kWh/km for up to 2 passengers [32], and electric passenger cars 13–21 kWh/km for up to 5 passengers [36]. Although the energy demand of LEVs is relatively low, for sustainable operation it is important to generate the electricity for charging from renewable sources. The small amounts of energy and low charging power place relatively low requirements on the charging infrastructure. Charging at home, for example in combination with decentralized renewable energy generation, can hence be realized with comparatively little effort. Analysis of the MiD reveals that the theoretical potential of replacing car trips with LEV trips is very high, at more than 50%. This suggests it would be beneficial to evaluate possible improvements in urban areas for a scenario with high LEV use. LEVs, with their small size and low consumption, have the potential to improve the quality of life in cities through the reallocation of areas used for cars. This is explained later in this section, following a description of the present situation. The focus is on the possible optimisation of land use in Germany, which includes potential improvements for the attractiveness of public spaces and health.

4.2.1. Present Situation—Urban Structures and Vehicle Trends The aim of today’s urban and transport planning in many European cities is to create people-oriented cities, with areas being divided up in such a way that the needs of various road users are taken into account. Many cities, however, still have cityscapes that have developed over time as a result of car-centric planning, prioritising cars not only when driving, but also dedicating a significant amount of space to stationary vehicles by providing public parking space for cars. Cars are still a dominant element in most cities, especially in terms of visual and acoustic aspects, with a significant influence on the attractiveness of spaces, health, and safety [37,38]. Although there has been a paradigm shift towards urban planning that is geared towards the needs of people, there is still a discrepancy between the desire for people-oriented cites and the resistance to change established transport patterns. This is demonstrated by Hansson (2020) [39] who shows that artefacts related to the green environment and the transport modes of cycling, buses, and walking are overrepresented in visual documentation of planned transport construction projects. This implies the idea of a sustainable transport system which is not in accordance with the predictable effect of the presented projects. The reluctance to change personal behaviour towards more sustainable mobility is reflected by the global trend towards large cars, namely SUVs. In October 2019, SUV demand in Europe increased by 22% compared to the previous year, leading to the registration of nearly 500,000 SUVs, which represents Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 17 the green environment and the transport modes of cycling, buses, and walking are overrepresented in visual documentation of planned transport construction projects. This implies the idea of a sustainable transport system which is not in accordance with the predictable effect of the presented projects. The reluctance to change personal behaviour towards more sustainable mobility is reflected by Sustainabilitythe global trend2020, 12 towards, 8098 large cars, namely SUVs. In October 2019, SUV demand in Europe increased8 of 17 by 22% compared to the previous year, leading to the registration of nearly 500,000 SUVs, which represents a market share of 40%. This increase means that Europe is slowly catching up with the a market share of 40%. This increase means that Europe is slowly catching up with the USA and USA and China in terms of SUV market penetration [13]. In Germany, market share of SUVs and off- China in terms of SUV market penetration [13]. In Germany, market share of SUVs and off-road road vehicles (KBA classifies vehicles into different categories. The term “off-road vehicle” refers to vehicles (KBA classifies vehicles into different categories. The term “off-road vehicle” refers to vehicles vehicles usually described as SUVs such as the VW Tiguan or the Audi Q5) was 30% in 2019 . Demand usually described as SUVs such as the VW Tiguan or the Audi Q5) was 30% in 2019. Demand is is specifically driven by the manufacturers, which is shown by the fact that SUVs and off-road specifically driven by the manufacturers, which is shown by the fact that SUVs and off-road vehicles vehicles were the most advertised segments [40] (p. 14) based on an analysis of Nielsen Media. were the most advertised segments [40] (p. 14) based on an analysis of Nielsen Media. Around half of Around half of all segment-specific advertising expenditure by German car companies in 2018 was all segment-specific advertising expenditure by German car companies in 2018 was spent on SUVs spent on SUVs and off-road vehicles [41]. This means that the share for segment-specific advertising and off-road vehicles [41]. This means that the share for segment-specific advertising expenditure is expenditure is significantly higher than the share of vehicles in new registrations and it suggests that significantly higher than the share of vehicles in new registrations and it suggests that the demand the demand for more profitable models is being artificially pushed [41]. Overall, societal goals, such for more profitable models is being artificially pushed [41]. Overall, societal goals, such as a fair as a fair distribution of urban space and climate protection, are in conflict with business interests. distribution of urban space and climate protection, are in conflict with business interests. The average size of new vehicles is rising in Germany (see Figure 3). Not only is the growing The average size of new vehicles is rising in Germany (see Figure3). Not only is the growing share share of SUVs contributing to this development, but also the evolvement of models in different of SUVs contributing to this development, but also the evolvement of models in different segments segments over time. For example, the VW Golf, which accounted for almost one-third of compact over time. For example, the VW Golf, which accounted for almost one-third of compact class vehicle class vehicle stock in 2019 in Germany [42], had a width of 1610 mm when it was introduced in 1974 stock in 2019 in Germany [42], had a width of 1610 mm when it was introduced in 1974 [43], while the [43], while the latest version measures 1790 mm in 2020 [44]. Average length of new vehicles latest version measures 1790 mm in 2020 [44]. Average length of new vehicles increased from 4.34 m in increased from 4.34 m in 2008 to 4.44 m in 2017 while average width increased from 1.77 m in 2008 to 2008 to 4.44 m in 2017 while average width increased from 1.77 m in 2008 to 1.81 m in 2017 [45]. 1.81 m in 2017 [45].

4.45 1.85

4.40 1.83

4.35 1.81

4.30 1.79

Width[m] Length [m] Length 4.25 1.77

4.20 1.75 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Length [m] Width [m]

Figure 3. LengthLength and and width of new vehicle registrations in Germany [ 45].].

In Germany in 2019, large cars, such as SUVs and offoff-road-road vehicle models, had an average projected rectangularrectangular surface surface on on the the ground ground (width (width without without mirrors mirrors multiplied multiplied by length)by length of 8.6) of m 8.26and m2 anda maximum a maximum of 11.6 of m 2 11.(Rolls6 m2 Royce (Rolls Cullinan) Royce Cullinan (based on:) (based KBA, FZ11, on: KBA, manufacturer FZ11, manufacturer data). Accordingly, data). Accordingly,they take up athey particularly take up a large particularly area of the large space area available of the space in cities. available In 2019, in cities. these In vehicle 2019, typesthese vehicleconstituted types a shareconstituted of 13.3% a share of German of 13.3% passenger of German vehicle passenger stock [vehicle46]. stock [46]. Some car park operators have reacted to the popularity of of large large cars cars by by widening widening parking parking bays. bays. For example,example, thethe company company SWT SWT [47 [47] provides] provides XXL XXL parking parking bays bays in the in citythe centrecity centre of Trier of withTrier awith width a widthof 3.5 mof without 3.5 m without extra charge. extra Anothercharge. Another example example is B + B, whichis B + operatesB, which a operates multi-storey a multi car- parkstorey in thecar parkcity centre in the ofcity Stuttgart centre of with Stuttgart an XXL with parking an XXL space parking share space of over share 30% of [48 over]. 30% [48].

4.2.2. Opportunities Opportunities—Improving—Improving Urban Land Use The pressure on space in many German cities is increasing, among other things due to significantly more and larger vehicles on traffic surfaces. In addition, new vehicle solutions (e.g., electric cargo bikes and electric scooters) demand space for driving and parking. This requires a restructuring of the public space with the aim of creating efficient and sustainable transport systems, as well as improving the safety and the attractiveness of public places [33]. Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17

The pressure on space in many German cities is increasing, among other things due to significantly more and larger vehicles on traffic surfaces. In addition, new vehicle solutions (e.g., electric cargo bikes and electric scooters) demand space for driving and parking. This requires a restructuring of the public space with the aim of creating efficient and sustainable transport systems, as well as improving the safety and the attractiveness of public places [33]. SustainabilityReducing2020, 12 the, 8098 dimensions of motorised vehicles would allow urban spaces to be used 9 mor of 17e efficiently by rededicating the amount of space allocated to parking, even if the number of vehicles is keptReducing constant. the Coupled dimensions with the of motorisedobjective of vehicles reducing would the number allow of urban motorised spaces vehicles to be used in private more eownership,fficiently by this rededicating can achieve the far amount more effective of space resul allocatedts. to parking, even if the number of vehicles is keptIn constant. general, Coupled LEVs occupy with theconsiderably objective ofless reducing parking thespace number than cars. of motorised In contrast vehicles to statistical in private data ownership,on cars, information this can achieve on LEVs far is more scarce eff ective[49–51 results.] and the variety of models is large, including three- wheelIn and general, four- LEVswheel occupyvehicles. considerably Therefore, dimensions less parking of space typical than four cars.-wheeled In contrast LEVs to are statistical used instead data onof average cars, information values of on the LEVs vehicle is scarce class [ 49in– order51] and to the give variety an impression of models isof large,size. includingThe eCity three-wheelPack has a andlength four-wheel of 2780 mm vehicles. and a width Therefore, of 1500 dimensions mm, the Microlino of typical has four-wheeled a length of LEVs 2435 aremm used and a instead width of average1500 mm values, and th ofe the Renault vehicle Twizy class inhas order a length to give of 2338 an impression mm and a of width size. Theof 1381 eCity mm. Pack Differences has a length in ofsize 2780 compared mm and to a cars width are of shown 1500 mm, in Figure the Microlino 4, showing has a lengthTwizy oftogether 2435 mm with and representative a width of 1500 models mm, andof different the Renault car Twizyclasses has of asmall length cars of 2338ranging mm from and athe width Mercedes of 1381 mm. Difortwofferences through in size to compared off-road tovehicles cars are such shown as the in VW Figure Tiguan4, showing. a Twizy together with representative models of di fferent car classes of small cars ranging from the Mercedes smart fortwo through to off-road vehicles such as the VW Tiguan.

Figure 4. Comparison of different different car and LEV dimensions.dimensions. The projected rectangular surface of a Twizy, for example, takes up only 41% of the space required The projected rectangular surface of a Twizy, for example, takes up only 41% of the space for the average car registered in Germany in 2017 [45]. Depending on their size, up to three LEVs required for the average car registered in Germany in 2017 [45]. Depending on their size, up to three could be placed in one parking bay sized for a conventional car (see Figure5). Considering that 90% of LEVs could be placed in one parking bay sized for a conventional car (see Figure 5). Considering that car drivers stated in the MiD that they were either alone in the car or had only one passenger, it can 90% of car drivers stated in the MiD that they were either alone in the car or had only one passenger, be assumed that a parking bay predominantly serves one or two persons. As LEVs usually provide it can be assumed that a parking bay predominantly serves one or two persons. As LEVs usually space for up to two persons, this means that the average number of vehicle occupants per parking bay provide space for up to two persons, this means that the average number of vehicle occupants per would not have to decrease if small LEV parking bays were to replace large car parking bays. parking bay would not have to decrease if small LEV parking bays were to replace large car parking Statistical data regarding public or private parking space in cities are insufficient for a detailed bays. analysis. Although very little data and few studies are available for a comprehensive analysis of available parking space (public and private) in cities, there are some approximations. An analysis from the German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) shows that public space is used for a significant proportion of the space allocated to residential parking (on average 33% in medium-sized and large cities) (Private parking spaces for new buildings also account for a certain amount of land used; this is, however, not considered in our study) [52]. Public parking areas, therefore, play an important role in car ownership. Replacing cars with LEVs would hence lead to considerable potential for alternative use of public space. In the following section, a qualitative analysis of potential connected to LEV use in urban areas is presented. Quantification of potentials in further studies could promote change towards sustainable use of space by revealing their full extent. However, it is also very important to test and evaluate new concepts in real-life test settings. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 10 of 17 Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

FigureFigure 5. Possibility5. Possibility to to reduce reduce space space allocated allocated to parkingto parking by by rededicating rededicating parking parking bays bays to smallerto smaller vehiclesvehicles (The (The arrangement arrangement of theof the lanes lanes for for cyclists cyclists is onlyis only intended intended to illustrateto illustrate that that space space for for active active modesmodes can can be allocatedbe allocated here here and and serves serves as aas suggestion). a suggestion). The following effects could be achieved by rededicating (reducing) space allocated to parking for Statistical data regarding public or private parking space in cities are insufficient for a detailed passenger cars in order to make it available to other forms of use: analysis. Although very little data and few studies are available for a comprehensive analysis of availableMore attractive parking publicspace spaces;(public and private) in cities, there are some approximations. An analysis • fromMore the room German for sustainableAssociation transport of the Automotive modes such Industry as walking, (VDA cycling,) shows and that PT; public space is used for • a significantReduced costs proportion for the provisionof the space of public allocated parking to residential spaces; parking (on average 33% in medium- • sized and large cities) (Private parking spaces for new buildings also account for a certain amount of Reduced effect of urban heat islands; • land used; this is, however, not considered in our study) [52]. Public parking areas, therefore, play an Possibility to deseal hard surfaces for rainwater infiltration; • important role in car ownership. Replacing cars with LEVs would hence lead to considerable Fair distribution of public space. • potential for alternative use of public space. In the following section, a qualitative analysis of potential connectedIn the following, to LEV use we in will urban discuss areas selected is presente aspectsd. Quantification of these effects. of potentials in further studies could promoteAttractiveness change andtowards more sustainable room for sustainable use of space transport by revealing modes. The their quality full extent. and attractivenessHowever, it is ofalso residentialvery important urban areas to test are and impaired evaluate by new stationary concepts and in flowingreal-life tratestffi settingsc due to. their demands on space. MotorisedThe individualfollowing effects and goods could tra beffi achievedc compete, by rededicating above all, with (reducing walking) space and cyclingallocated demands. to parking Car-orientedfor passenger cities cars prevent in order social to make interaction it available that couldto other otherwise forms of be use: promoted through more public squares, More green attractive space, outdoor public gastronomy,spaces; or playgrounds [38,53]. Areas freed up by the smaller size of LEVs More can provide room for room sustainable for active transport modes such modes as walkingsuch as walking, or cycling cycling paths,, orand can PT be; rededicated to open spacesReduced for socialcosts for interaction. the provision The of combination public parking of providing spaces; more room for active modes and improving Reduced city design effect of with urban attractive heat islands surroundings; could encourage the use of public and active transportation Possibility [37], to reinforcing deseal hard the surfaces positive for ecological rainwater eff ectsinfiltration of replacing; cars with LEVs by promoting a modal Fair shift. distribution of public space. In addition to the positive effects of rededicating parking space, LEVs may contribute to a more aestheticInand the following, people-oriented we will cityscape discuss selected by reducing aspects the of visual these dominance effects. of cars by taking up less optical space.Attractiveness The lower and height more of room the vehicles for sustainable offers less transport restricted modes. visibility; The quality for example, and attractivenesswhen walking of onresidential pavements urban alongside areason-street are impaired parking by stationary bays. Smaller and flowing vehicles traffic create due an overallto their atmospheredemands on thatspace. is moreMotorised open; individual a more pleasant and goods feeling traffic of spacecompete, (e.g., above on sidewalks); all, with walking and a more and cycling generous demands. space for Car- socialoriented participation. cities prevent Furthermore, social interaction due to their that generally could otherwisesmaller size, be LEVs promoted could through improve more safety public for vulnerablesquares, roadgreen users. space, Larger outdoor parked gastronomy cars reduce, or visibilityplaygrounds for pedestrians [38,53]. Areas crossing freed roadsup by (seethe smaller Figure6 ).size Theof inability LEVs can to provide see other room vehicles for active on the modes road duesuch to as parked walking vehicles or cycling has paths, been found or can to be be rededicated a major drawbackto open ofspaces on-street for social parking interaction. [54,55]. The combination of providing more room for active modes and improvingReduced ecityffect design of urban with heat attractive islands. Another surroundings threat tocou healthld encourage is the phenomenon the use of public of urban and heat active islands.transportation Factors a ff [ecting37], reinforcing the occurrence the andpositive intensity ecological of urban effects heat islands of replacing include cars the weather with LEVs and by geographicpromoting location; a modal anthropogenic shift. activities that lead to waste heat from vehicles, factories, and air conditionersIn addition (University to the Corporationpositive effects for of Atmospheric rededicating Research, parking space, 2011 from LEVs [56 may]); andcontribute the way to cities a more aesthetic and people-oriented cityscape by reducing the visual dominance of cars by taking up less optical space. The lower height of the vehicles offers less restricted visibility; for example, when Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17 Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 11 of 17

walking on pavements alongside on-street parking bays. Smaller vehicles create an overall areatmosphere built. LEVs that can is contribute more open; to a reduction more pleasant in heat feeling islands of in space two ways—first,(e.g., on sidewalks they allow); and areas a more with highgenerous heat space capacities, for social such participation. as concreted parkingFurthermore, bays, todue be to converted their generally into green smaller spaces, size, andLEVs second, could theyimprove reduce safety heat for emission vulnerable from vehiclesroad users. when Larger they replace parked cars cars with reduce internal visibility combustion for pedestrians engines. Transportationcrossing roads is(see one Figure of the 6) main. The sourcesinability of to anthropogenic see other vehicles activities, on the together road due with to parked indoor vehicles heating andhas coolingbeen found (Soltani to be and a major Sharifi, drawback 2017 from of [on56-]).street parking [54,55].

Figure 6. Height of different vehicle types depending on the eye level of women and men Figure 6. Height of different vehicle types depending on the eye level of women and men (50th (50th percentile). percentile). 4.3. Framework Conditions and Recommendations for Action Reduced effect of urban heat islands. Another threat to health is the phenomenon of urban heat Although LEVs could act as an alternative to increasingly large passenger cars, they are rarely islands. Factors affecting the occurrence and intensity of urban heat islands include the weather and bought in Germany today. Sales numbers from The Motorcycle Industry in Europe (ACEM) show that geographic location; anthropogenic activities that lead to waste heat from vehicles, factories, and air between 2013 and 2018, around 3500 electric quadricycles were sold [14]. This number only provides conditioners (University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, 2011 from [56]); and the way cities a limited insight because it contains four-wheeled vehicles and numbers from the members of the are built. LEVs can contribute to a reduction in heat islands in two ways—first, they allow areas with association. However, as data on the current number of LEVs in Europe are very heterogeneous and high heat capacities, such as concreted parking bays, to be converted into green spaces, and second, rather scarce, this at least provides an indication. they reduce heat emission from vehicles when they replace cars with internal combustion engines. The very low market share is mainly due to framework conditions of the transport infrastructure Transportation is one of the main sources of anthropogenic activities, together with indoor heating that make using LEVs unattractive in comparison with cars or offer no incentives for LEVs. Examples and cooling (Soltani and Sharifi, 2017 from [56]). of such framework conditions are: widespread speed limits of 50 km/h or above; parking infrastructure adapted4.3. Framework to cars; Conditions very few parkingand Recommendations bays reserved for Action small vehicles; and few car bans due to pollution in Germany. Additional reasons for the reluctance to buy LEVs include: safety concerns; a small variety of models;Although and LEVs relatively could high act as prices an alternative compared to to increasingly passenger cars large [32 passenger]. When comparingcars, they are prices rarely of LEVsbought with in batteryGermany electric today. vehicles Sales numbers (BEV) in Germany,from The itMotorcycle is very disadvantageous Industry in Europe that the (ACEM purchase) show of a BEVthat is between currently 2013 subsidised and 2018, by around the federal 3500 government electric quadricycles by up to EUR were 9000 sold per [14]. vehicle, This while number LEVs only do notprovides receive a limited any national insight subsidy. because In it somecontains regions four- ofwheeled Germany, vehicles there and are subsidiesnumbers from for purchasing the members an LEV,of the but association. these are However, much lower as data and on are the often current restricted number to specificof LEVs buyerin Europe groups, are very such heterogeneous as companies orand municipalities. rather scarce, this at least provides an indication. ThereThe very are low currently market ashare number is mainly of di ffidueculties to framework associated conditions with using of the LEVs transport in many infrastructure European citiesthat make and theyusing face LEVs a number unattractive of barriers in comparison to their more with cars widespread or offer no use. incentives At the same for LEVs. time, Examples transport systemof such infrastructures framework conditions and regulations are: widespreadmostly prioritise speed passenger limits of cars 50 over km/h other or transport above; parking modes. Thisinfrastructure includes: adapted to cars; very few parking bays reserved for small vehicles; and few car bans due to pollution in Germany. Additional reasons for the reluctance to buy LEVs include: safety High speeds in cities; •concerns; a small variety of models; and relatively high prices compared to passenger cars [32]. When Low costs for car use (e.g., parking costs); •comparing prices of LEVs with battery electric vehicles (BEV) in Germany, it is very disadvantageous that Nothe advantagespurchase of fora BEV LEVs is currently in flowing subsidised and stationary by the urban federal tra ffigoverc (e.g.,nment no dedicated by up to EUR lanes); 9000 per • vehicle,No pollution while LEVs charges do not or city receive toll, anyfew entry national restrictions subsidy. for In vehicles some regions with high of Germany, pollutant emissions. there are • subsidies for purchasing an LEV, but these are much lower and are often restricted to specific buyer In addition to global issues, such as climate protection, local urban framework conditions in groups, such as companies or municipalities. particular are leading to pressure for action. Cities form the local level with a large scope for action. There are currently a number of difficulties associated with using LEVs in many European cities Different approaches can be taken to reduce land used by cars and minimise noise emissions. For the and they face a number of barriers to their more widespread use. At the same time, transport system development of the LEV market, it is conceivable that measures such as speed limits (e.g., 30 km/h infrastructures and regulations mostly prioritise passenger cars over other transport modes. This zones) could be put in place. Not only would this increase road safety, LEVs with a technical limitation includes: Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 12 of 17 to 45 km/h would also not hinder urban traffic, as is currently the case in most cities which have a maximum speed of 50 km/h. In Graz, for example, a speed limit of 30 km/h applies to all roads in the city except for priority roads. This applies to 80% of the road network [57]. Regulations in this respect can be laid down in noise action plans as well as in clean air plans. Effective measures to increase air quality in cities that have already been implemented in many European cities include driving bans (e.g., Milan, Italy; Vienna, Austria; Rotterdam, The Netherlands) and environmental zones. A congestion charge can also provide an incentive for LEVs through regulations such as discounts or free entry. Further amendments to the use of street space, such as shared spaces, are also conceivable. Measures such as parking space management can also be a major advantage for the use of LEVs. In Japan, for example, the need for proof of a private parking space certificate for the registration of cars in some cities has led to the registration of a large number of small vehicles (kei-cars). These are exempt from the obligation to provide such proof [58,59]. A car parking space in Japan can cost up to several thousand euros per month [60]. As a result, cities have a large toolbox of measures that could lead to the broader uptake of LEVs. On the basis of expert interviews, a number of concrete measures were evaluated which could have a positive effect on the uptake of LEVs in cities. These measures are aimed at different target groups. In addition to the challenges and requirements of vehicle technology for manufacturers and general usage regulations, stakeholders at the municipal level were addressed in particular. Different types of policies were discussed regarding this. The results showed that a higher degree of LEV use would require significant changes to road traffic regulations and the allocation of land used by cars. Concrete recommendations for actions derived from the expert interviews include:

Reallocate traffic areas • e.g., designate parking bays to LEVs only; Run pilot projects, e.g., sharing schemes • Test areas from single streets to larger traffic zones, in which, for example, a maximum speed of 30 km/h means that the slower LEVs use the same road infrastructure in a comfortable way; Include LEVs in noise action plans and clean air plans • Future city tolls with reduced tariffs for LEVs; Harmonise maximum speed limits for cars and LEVs • e.g., speed limit reduced to max. 45 km/h in inner city areas; Improve LEV safety • e.g., by providing passive and/or active safety systems, reducing speed limits (reduced impact energy in the event of a collision); Raise public awareness • Broader information/clarification of use (driving license, etc.).

In addition to a wide range of “hard” measures, “soft” measures should not be ignored. Accordingly, the public relations work and advertising done by manufacturers should focus more on highlighting LEVs and their benefits in order to influence purchasing decisions. In addition, changes in traffic behaviour often result from changes in a person’s life situation; for example, relocation, children, starting vocational training or studies, taking up or changing employment. In these cases, the public should be aware of LEVs so that they can be considered as an option in transport decisions.

5. Conclusions and Outlook The analysis shows the potential of LEVs to contribute to a sustainable transport system and thereby help to restructure urban areas towards people-oriented living spaces. However, acceptance in Europe, and especially in Germany, is still low and LEVs, unlike cars such as SUVs, lack a powerful lobby. Moreover, under current market conditions, no significant sales figures can be achieved without push and pull measures that reduce car use and promote the use of small sustainable vehicles. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 13 of 17

As shown in the theoretically feasible substitution potential, there is a possibility that trips made by active modes could also be made using LEVs. In contrast to people changing from cars to LEVs, changing from active modes, such as walking or cycling, to LEVs would not be environmentally sustainable. Due to the fact that potential benefits would be compromised if LEVs were to replace active modes and PT on a large scale, appropriate measures should be taken to prevent this; additional research is needed in this area. LEVs could complement sustainable modes, such as public transport and active modes. These modes constitute sustainable forms of mobility in most use cases. However, using these modes is challenging for some user groups, such as mobility-impaired people. Another challenge is providing sustainable mobility for long trips in areas or times with low travel demand. Distances may be too long for active modes and public transport might be unattractive due to low frequency. Providing high frequency PT in order to increase its attractiveness is not an adequate solution for areas and times with low passenger numbers, as it would be financially and ecologically inefficient due to low or zero occupancy rates. On-demand bus systems [61] are not suitable for sustainable solutions because it is almost impossible to bundle journeys when low passenger numbers are combined with dispersed origin and destination points. In these cases, LEVs could provide sustainable individual mobility. Furthermore, it is possible that some people would be more willing to switch from car transport to another individual means of transport, such as an LEV, than to change their mobility behaviour more fundamentally. LEVs offer a high degree of flexibility in terms of routes and travel times compared to PT. In addition, compared to active modes, LEVs allow people to be mobile without physical exertion and, depending on the model, with the weather protection they are used to. Although LEVs are probably less ecological than public transport or active modes, they do have advantages over passenger cars. Due to the increasing number of mobility alternatives, conflicts over land use arise when designing public space. Although the car is still the dominant means of transport, the pressure to change the mobility culture and thus, to rededicate traffic areas is becoming increasingly great. LEVs require less space than cars, especially when parking. Theoretically, LEVs have a great deal of potential to replace cars for private journeys and thus, make new use of space. Therefore, there is lot of potential for reorganising current land use because LEVs are an attractive and sustainable addition to other means of transport and they can contribute to achieving the climate protection goals of the transport sector. However, the share of LEVs is unlikely to increase significantly unless push and pull measures are put in place that simultaneously encourage the use of LEVs and discourage the use of cars. The main obstacles at present are clearly still the high sales price and the safety of the vehicles (crash tests are not required for registration). In terms of further research, it would be interesting to examine holistic transport concepts and user acceptance. This requires a holistic approach with suitable areas for the coexistence of all forms of mobility, including walking, cycling, public transport, and LEVs, and new forms of mobility, including suitable vehicles. Living on a planet with limited resources and worsening climate change requires fundamental shifts in many fields, including the need for reorganising mobility. Reducing trips and mileage, shifting to sustainable transport modes, and optimising transport technology require close interdisciplinary collaboration between many scientific fields, such as urban and transport planning, engineering, and social psychology. Developing technical solutions is important just as understanding societal aspects and fostering a willingness to change, from political and regulative levels down to individual behaviour. Further research is needed in order to find solutions for these challenges. If today’s transport systems were to be reorganised, reducing hurdles for vehicles such as LEVs, they could be more successful and could become an important component in future systems.

Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, A.E. and M.B.; methodology, A.E., M.B., C.E., S.S.; validation, A.E., M.B., C.E., S.S.; formal analysis, A.E., M.B., C.E.; investigation, A.E., M.B., C.E., S.S.; resources, C.E.; data curation, C.E., A.E.; writing—original draft preparation, A.E.; writing—review and editing, A.E., M.B., S.S., C.E.; visualisation, A.E., M.B., C.E.; project administration, M.B.; funding acquisition, A.E., M.B., C.E., S.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 14 of 17

Funding: This research was partly funded by e-mobil BW GmbH State Agency for New Mobility Solutions and Automotive Baden-Wuerttemberg. Acknowledgments: This paper is based on the study “Light Electric Vehicles-Opportunities and potential for Baden-Württemberg” on behalf of e-mobil BW GmbH. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. European Environment Agency. (Ed.) Environmental Noise in Europe—2020; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxemburg, 2020; p. 104. 2. Destatis. Bodenfläche Nach Art der Tatsächlichen Nutzung-Fachserie 3 Reihe 5.1-2018. Available online: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Branchen-Unternehmen/Landwirtschaft-Forstwirtschaft-Fischerei/ Flaechennutzung/Publikationen/Downloads-Flaechennutzung/bodenflaechennutzung-2030510187004. html (accessed on 10 June 2020). 3. Eurostat. Greenhouse Gas Emission Statistics—Air Emissions Accounts. Available online: https://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Greenhouse_gas_emission_statistics_-_air_emissions_accounts (accessed on 16 April 2020). 4. European Environment Agency. Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Aggregated Sector. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/ghg-emissions-by-aggregated-sector-5 (accessed on 16 April 2020). 5. European Environment Agency. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transport in Europe. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases/ transport-emissions-of-greenhouse-gases-12 (accessed on 9 June 2020). 6. European Commission. Urban Mobility|Mobility and Transport. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/ transport/themes/urban/urban_mobility_en (accessed on 27 August 2020). 7. Deloitte. 2020 Global Automotive Consumer Study. Is Consumer Interest in Advanced Automotive Technologies on the Move? Available online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/ Documents/manufacturing/us-2020-global-automotive-consumer-study-global-focus-countries.pdf (accessed on 8 July 2020). 8. Zong, W.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, Y. Long-term changes in Japanese young people’s car ownership and usage from an expenditure perspective. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2019, 75, 23–41. [CrossRef] 9. Van Kampen, J.; Pauwels, E.; van der Mei, R.; Dugundji, E. Analyzing Potential Age Cohort Effects in Car Ownership and Residential Location in the Metropolitan Region of Amsterdam. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 151, 543–550. [CrossRef] 10. INFAS Institut für Angewandte Sozialwissenschaft GmbH. Mobilität in Deutschland. Kurzreport. Verkehrsaufkommen—Struktur—Trends. Ausgabe September 2019. Available online: http://www.mobilitaet- in-deutschland.de/pdf/infas_Mobilitaet_in_Deutschland_2017_Kurzreport.pdf (accessed on 9 October 2019). 11. Eurostat. New Registrations of Passenger Cars by Type of Motor Energy and Engine Size. Available online: https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=road_eqr_carmot&lang=en (accessed on 15 April 2020). 12. International Energy Agency. Global EV Outlook 2019: Scaling-Up the Transition to Electric Mobility; OECD: Paris, , 2019. 13. JATO Dynamics Ltd. Press Release: SUVs Make Up 40% of Total Car Registrations, as the European Market Records Its Best October Results Since 2009. Available online: https://www.jato.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2019/11/October-2019-Europe-Reg-Release-Final.pdf (accessed on 15 April 2020). 14. ACEM. Motorcycle, and Quadricycle Registrations in the European Union—2010–2018. Available online: https://www.acem.eu/market-data (accessed on 8 March 2019). 15. Honey, E.; Lee, H.; Suh, I.-S. Future Urban Transportation Technologies for Sustainability with an Emphasis on Growing Mega Cities: A Strategic Proposal on Introducing a New Micro Electric Vehicle Statement. WTR 2014, 13.[CrossRef] 16. Edwards, M.; Seidl, M.; Carroll, J.; Nathanson, A. Provision of Information and Services to Perform an Initial Assessment of Additional Functional Safety and Vehicle Construction Requirements for L7e-A Heavy on-Road Quads; Transport Research Laboratory: Wokingham, UK; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2014; Volume 3, pp. 139–152. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 15 of 17

17. Robinson, T.L.; McCarthy, M.; Pitcher, M.; Gibson, T.; Visvikis, C. Evaluating the Impact of Possible New Measures Concerning Category L Vehicles; Client Project Report; Transport Research Laboratory: Wokingham, UK, 2009. 18. Sachs, C.; Burandt, S.; Mandelj, S.; Mutter, R. Assessing the market of light electric vehicles as a potential application for electric in-wheel drives. In Proceedings of the 2016 6th International Electric Drives Production Conference (EDPC), Nuremberg, Germany, 30 November 2016; pp. 280–285. [CrossRef] 19. Davies, H.C.; Bastien, C.; Nieuwenhuis, P.; Bailey, S. Challenges and Opportunities for Improving the Safety of Lightweight Vehicles. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311494427_Challenges_ and_Opportunities_for_Improving_the_Safety_of_Lightweight_Vehicles (accessed on 14 July 2020). 20. Devasurendra, K.; Perera, L.; Bandara, S. An insight to motorized two and three wheel crashes in developing countries: A case study in Sri Lanka. J. Transp. Saf. Secur. 2017, 9 (Suppl. 1), 204–215. [CrossRef] 21. Harald, K.; Stefan, K.; Ernst, T.; Heinz, H.; Peter, L.; Wolfgang, S. Prospective Evaluation of the Collision Severity L7e Vehicles Considering a Collision Mitigation System. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 3877–3885. [CrossRef] 22. Pavlovic, A.; Fragassa, C. General considerations on regulations and safety requirements for quadricycles. Int. J. Qual. Res. 2015, 9, 657–674. 23. Bauer, W.; Wagner, S.; Edel, F.; Stegmüller, S.; Nagl, E. Mikromobilität. Nutzerbedarfe und Marktpotenziale im Personenverkehr; Fraunhofer-Institut für Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation IAO: Stuttgart, Germany, 2017. 24. Santucci, M.; Pieve, M.; Pierini, M. Electric L-category vehicles for smart urban mobility. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2016, 14, 3651–3660. [CrossRef] 25. Kampker, A.; Gerdes, J.; Schuh, G. (Eds.) Think Big, Start Small. Streetscooter the E-Mobile Success Story; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; ISBN 978-3-662-54997-1. 26. Ma, Y.; Zhao, F.; Hao, H.; Liu, Z. Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Low-Speed Electric Vehicles Using Different Kinds of Battery Technologies Based on Chinese Market. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Applied Energy 2019, Västerås, Sweden, 12–15 August 2019; p. 4. 27. Melo, S.; Baptista, P.; Costa, Á. The Cost and Effectiveness of Sustainable City Logistics Policies Using Small Electric Vehicles. In Transport and Sustainability; Macharis, C., Melo, S., Woxenius, J., Lier, T.V., Eds.; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2014; Volume 6, pp. 295–314. ISBN 978-1-78441-062-9. 28. John, R.; Kahrimanovic, E.; Otto, A.; Tavernini, D.; Camocardi, M.; Perelli, P.; Dalmasso, D.; Blaz, S.; Trojaniello, D.; Oleari, E.; et al. Light Electric Vehicle Enabled by Smart Systems Integration. In Advanced Microsystems for Automotive Applications 2016; Schulze, T., Müller, B., Meyer, G., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 201–215, ISBN 978-3-319-44765-0. 29. StreetDrone Limited. StreetDrone|Autonomous Urban Vehicles. Available online: https://www.streetdrone. com/ (accessed on 16 April 2020). 30. Groupe Renault. EZ-POD, A Robo-Vehicle Designed for Micromobility–Easy Electric Life. Available online: https://easyelectriclife.groupe.renault.com/en/outlook/markets/robo-vehicle-ez-pod-micromobility/ (accessed on 25 June 2020). 31. Nobis, C.; Kuhnimhof, T. Mobilität in Deutschland—MiD Ergebnisbericht. Study from infas, DLR, IVT and Infas 360 on Behalf of the German Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure; FE-Nr. 70.904/15; BMVI: Bonn, Germany, 2018. 32. Brost, M.; Ewert, A.; Schmid, S.; Eisenmann, C.; Gruber, J.; Klauenberg, J.; Stieler, S. Elektrische Klein- und Leichtfahrzeuge. Chancen und Potenziale für Baden-Württemberg on behalf of E-mobil BW; e-mobil BW: Stuttgart, Germany, 2019. 33. Ministerium für Verkehr Baden-Württemberg. (Ed.) Effiziente Flächennutzung für die Mobilität der Zukunft. Available online: https://vm.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-mvi/intern/Dateien/ PDF/200512_Empfehlungspapiere_TF_5_Fl%C3%A4chennutzung_final.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2020). 34. International Energy Agency. Global EV Outlook 2020. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/global- ev-outlook-2020 (accessed on 13 July 2020). 35. García-Olivares, A.; Solé, J.; Osychenko, O. Transportation in a 100% renewable energy system. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 158, 266–285. [CrossRef] 36. Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club e.V. (ADAC). Stromverbrauch Elektroautos: Aktuelle Modelle im ADAC Test. Available online: https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeug/tests/elektromobilitaet/ stromverbrauch-elektroautos-adac-test/ (accessed on 27 August 2020). Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 16 of 17

37. Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. Urban and transport planning pathways to carbon neutral, liveable and healthy cities; A review of the current evidence. Environ. Int. 2020, 140, 105661. [CrossRef][PubMed] 38. Umweltbundesamt (Ed.) Umwelt- und Aufenthaltsqualität in Urbanen Quartieren. Available online: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/1410/publikationen/fachbroschuere_ umwelt-aufenthaltsqualitaet_urbane-quartiere.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2020). 39. Hansson, L. Visual representation in urban transport planning: Where have all the cars gone? Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 133, 1–11. [CrossRef] 40. Greenpeace e.V. Greenpeace-Report 2019: Ein Dickes Problem. Wie SUVs und Geländewagen das Klima und Unsere Städte Ruinieren. Available online: https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/ publications/s02571_gp_report_suv_09_2019_es.pdf (accessed on 2 July 2020). 41. Buchenau, M.-W.; Fasse, M.; Hubik, F.; Kersting, S.; Menzel, S.; Murphy, M.; Rickens, C. Der SUV-Wahnsinn—Warum die Autoindustrie sehenden Auges in eine Falle tappt. Available online: https://www.handelsblatt.com/technik/thespark/klimaziele-der-suv-wahnsinn-warum-die-autoindustrie- sehenden-auges-in-eine-falle-tappt/24976708.html?ticket=ST-3781338-1m02yHMCeQvRacdigLtC-ap5 (accessed on 5 July 2020). 42. Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA). Bestand an Personenkraftwagen nach Segmenten und Modellreihen am 1. Januar 2020 gegenüber 1. Januar 2019 (FZ 12). 2020. Available online: https://www.kba.de/DE/Statistik/ Fahrzeuge/Bestand/Segmente/b_segmente_inhalt.html?nn=2601598 (accessed on 13 July 2020). 43. Klaus Westrup. VW Golf I LS (1974): Käfer-Nachfolger im ersten Test; Auto Motor und Sport. Available online: https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/test/vw-golf-1-ls-1974/ (accessed on 13 July 2020). 44. Volkswagen, A.G. Der Golf, Golf Variant & Golf Alltrack. Available online: https://www.volkswagen.de/ content/dam/vw-ngw/vw_pkw/importers/de/dialogcenter/brochures/golf-bq/golf_preisliste.pdf/_jcr_content/ renditions/original.media_file.download_attachment.file/golf_preisliste.pdf (accessed on 13 July 2020). 45. Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt. Zahlen-Daten-Fakten 2015/2016/2017. Available online: https://www.kba.de/SharedDocs/ Publikationen/DE/Jahresberichte/jahresbericht_2015_17_pdf.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=10 (accessed on 13 July 2020). 46. Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt. Personenkraftwagen am 1. Januar 2020 nach Ausgewählten Merkmalen. Available online: https://www.kba.de/DE/Statistik/Fahrzeuge/Bestand/Jahresbilanz/fz_b_jahresbilanz_archiv/2020/ 2020_b_barometer.html (accessed on 13 July 2020). 47. SWT-AöR. XXL Parken. Available online: https://www.swt.de/p/XXL_Parkpl%C3%A4tze-5-4429.html?_p_ Menu.PK=4516 (accessed on 13 July 2020). 48. B + B Parkhaus GmbH & Co. KG. Tiefgarage Kronprinzstraße in Stuttgart. Available online: https://www.bb-parkhaus.de/parken/stuttgart/parkhaus/stuttgart-kronprinzstrasse/?cHash= 0b46a29c48befbfbe8cab24375ba2230 (accessed on 13 July 2020). 49. Gicklhorn, K.; Ewert, A.; Brost, M.; Eisenmann, C.; Stieler, S. Light Electric Vehicles in Baden-Württemberg—Potential for Industry and New Mobility Solutions? In Proceedings of the 32nd Electric Vehicle Symposium (EVS32), Lyon, France, 19 May 2019; p. 10. 50. Brost, M.; Ewert, A.; Eisenmann, C.; Stieler, S.; Gicklhorn, K. Elektrische Klein- und Leichtfahrzeuge: Mobilitätskonzepte mit Zukunftspotenzial? J. Mobilität Verk. 2019, 41–49. [CrossRef] 51. Ewert, A.; Brost, M.K.; Schmid, S.A. Framework Conditions and Potential Measures for Small Electric Vehicles on a Municipal Level. WEVJ 2020, 11, 1. [CrossRef] 52. Rikus, S.; Hoffmann, S.; Ungureanu, T.; Rommerskirchen, S.; Plesker, M. FAT-Schriftenreihe 271. Available online: https://www.vda.de/de/services/Publikationen/fat-schriftenreihe-271-parkpl-tze-in-st-dten.html (accessed on 13 July 2020). 53. Directorate-General for Environment (European Commission). Reclaiming city streets for people. Chaos or quality of life? Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/pubs/pdf/streets_people.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2020). 54. Gitelman, V.; Balasha, D.; Carmel, R.; Hendel, L.; Pesahov, F. Characterization of pedestrian accidents and an examination of infrastructure measures to improve pedestrian safety in Israel. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2010, 44, 63–73. [CrossRef][PubMed] 55. Biswas, S.; Chandra, S.; Ghosh, I. Effects of On-Street Parking in Urban Context: A Critical Review. Transp. Dev. Econ. 2017, 3, 1–14. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40890-017-0040-2 (accessed on 20 July 2020). [CrossRef] Sustainability 2020, 12, 8098 17 of 17

56. Rupard, M. Urban Heat Islands: Causes, Impacts, & Mitigation. Available online: https://digitalcommons. calpoly.edu/crpsp/190/ (accessed on 10 July 2020). 57. Stadt Graz. Stadtgebiet Tempo 30 Ausgenommen Vorrangstraßen. Available online: https://www.graz.at/ cms/beitrag/10320495/7765198/Stadtgebiet_Tempo.html (accessed on 15 May 2020). 58. Lipscy, P.Y.; Schipper, L. Energy efficiency in the Japanese transport sector. Energy Policy 2013, 56, 248–258. [CrossRef] 59. Fraunhofer-Institut für Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation. Standortanalyse Japan–Automobilindustrie und Zukünftige Mobilitätsinnovationen; e-mobil BW: Stuttgart, Germany, 2018. 60. Aachener Zeitung. Tokio: Big in Japan: Der große Erfolg der kleinen Kei Cars. Available online: https://www.aachener-zeitung.de/ratgeber/auto/big-in-japan-der-grosse-erfolg-der-kleinen-kei- cars_aid-25756363 (accessed on 20 July 2020). 61. Gebhardt, L.; Brost, M.; König, A. An inter- and transdisciplinary approach to developing and testing a new sustainable mobility system. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7223. [CrossRef]

© 2020 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/).