DOCSLIB.ORG

Free-Float Mobility How Free-Float Mobility Became Regulated in Amsterdam, Brussels and Madrid

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Free-Float Mobility How Free-Float Mobility Became Regulated in Amsterdam, Brussels and Madrid (Not so) free-float mobility How free-float mobility became regulated in Amsterdam, Brussels and Madrid Rens L. Jonker Supervisor: Bas van Heur Co-supervisor: Nadia Casabella Master thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Urban Studies (VUB) and Master of Science in Geography, general orientation, track ‘Urban Studies’ (ULB) Date of submission: August 12, 2019 Table of contents Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Mobility and the city ............................................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 A move towards shared mobility ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Defining new models of sharing .......................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Surge of free-float mobility .................................................................................................................................. 8 1.5 Competition between free-float mobility operators ......................................................................................... 9 1.6 Free-float mobility in the city ............................................................................................................................... 9 1.7 Regulating free-float mobility .............................................................................................................................. 9 1.8 Academic relevance ........................................................................................................................................... 10 2. Research goal .......................................................................................................................................... 11 3. Research question ................................................................................................................................... 11 4. Theoretical framework ............................................................................................................................ 12 4.1 Searching for a theory ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.2 What is ANT? ....................................................................................................................................................... 14 4.3 What does ANT do? ........................................................................................................................................... 14 4.4 ANT and the introduction of new technologies .............................................................................................. 15 4.5 ANT and the formulation of policy and regulations ........................................................................................ 15 4.6 Translation and its stages .................................................................................................................................. 15 4.6.1 Problematisation ....................................................................................................................................... 15 4.6.2 Interessement ............................................................................................................................................ 16 4.6.3 Enrolment ................................................................................................................................................... 16 4.6.4 Mobilisation ................................................................................................................................................ 16 4.7 Methodological principles of ANT .................................................................................................................... 16 5. Sub-questions ......................................................................................................................................... 17 6. Research context .................................................................................................................................... 18 7. Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 21 7.1 Application of ANT principles ............................................................................................................................ 21 7.2 Research strategy ............................................................................................................................................... 21 7.3 Analysing and processing the findings ............................................................................................................ 23 7.4 Case selection for interviews ............................................................................................................................. 24 7.4.1 Amsterdam ................................................................................................................................................. 24 7.4.2 Brussels ...................................................................................................................................................... 25 7.4.3 Madrid ......................................................................................................................................................... 26 7.4.4 Supranational ............................................................................................................................................. 27 2 8. Problematisation ..................................................................................................................................... 28 8.1 Amsterdam ........................................................................................................................................................... 28 8.1.1 Bicycles ...................................................................................................................................................... 28 8.1.2 Kickscooters .............................................................................................................................................. 30 8.1.3 Scooters ..................................................................................................................................................... 30 8.2 Brussels ................................................................................................................................................................ 31 8.2.1 Bicycles ...................................................................................................................................................... 31 8.2.2 Kickscooters .............................................................................................................................................. 32 8.2.3 Scooters ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 8.3 Madrid ................................................................................................................................................................... 32 8.3.1 Bicycles ...................................................................................................................................................... 32 8.3.2 Scooters ..................................................................................................................................................... 33 8.3.3 Kickscooters .............................................................................................................................................. 33 8.4 Synthesis .............................................................................................................................................................. 34 9. Interessement .......................................................................................................................................... 36 9.1 Amsterdam ........................................................................................................................................................... 36 9.2 Brussels ................................................................................................................................................................ 37 9.3 Madrid ................................................................................................................................................................... 38 9.4 Synthesis .............................................................................................................................................................. 38 10. Enrolment .............................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2009 Annual Report Document De Référence
    Vienna 2009 Annual Report Document de Référence TABLE OF CONTENTS COMPANY OVERVIEW 3 Financial highlights 4 The year 2009 6 The outdoor advertising industry 8 One business, three segments 16 Our advertisers 33 Sustainable development 38 Research and development 54 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 58 Management discussion and analysis of group consolidated financial statements 59 Consolidated financial statements and notes 69 Management discussion and analysis of corporate financial statements 128 Corporate financial statements and notes 130 LEGAL INFORMATION 152 Corporate governance, internal control and risk management 153 Shareholders and trading information 179 Share capital 186 Other legal information 189 COMBINED ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS, 19 MAY 2010 205 Agenda 206 Summary of proposed resolutions 207 Proposed resolutions 208 OTHER INFORMATION 211 Statutory auditors’ reports 212 Person responsible for the Annual Report and Persons responsible for the audit of the financial statements 217 Incorporation by reference In accordance with Article 28 of EU Regulation n°809/2004 dated 29 April 2004, the reader is referred to previous “Documents de référence” containing certain information: 1. Relating to fiscal year 2008: - The Management Discussion and Analysis and consolidated financial statements, including the statutory auditors’ report, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 10 April 2009 under number D.09-0229 (pages 51 to 117and 213, respectively). - The corporate financial statements of JCDecaux SA, their analysis, including the statutory auditors’ report, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 10 April 2009 under number D.09-0229 (pages 118 to 141 and 214, respectively). - The statutory auditors’ special report on regulated agreements with certain related parties, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 10 April 2009 under number D.09-0229 (page 216).
    [Show full text]
  • Platform Innovation in Urban Mobility Transitions the Case of Dockless Bike Sharing
    platform innovation in urban mobility transitions the case of dockless bike sharing arnoud van waes colofon Dit proefschrift werd (mede) mogelijk gemaakt met financiële steun van de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) als onder- deel van het onderzoeksprogramma Smart Urban Regions of the Future (no. 438-15-160 397). Platform innovation in urban mobility transitions: The case of dockless bike sharing. PhD thesis. Author: Arnoud van Waes Bookdesign & illustrations: Ilse Schrauwers; isontwerp.nl Printing: Gildeprint Enschede; gildeprint.nl ISBN: 9789492303424 © Arnoud van Waes, 2021 All rights reserved. No part of this production may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without prior written permission by the author. Platform innovation in urban mobility transitions The case of dockless bike sharing Platform innovatie in stedelijke mobiliteitstransities Een studie naar innovatieve deelfietssystemen (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands) Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof.dr. H.R.B.M. Kummeling, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 27 mei 2021 des ochtends te 10.15 uur door Arnoud Harry Marianne van Waes geboren op 21 oktober 1987 te Terneuzen promotor Prof. dr. R.P.J.M. Raven copromotoren Dr. J.C.M. Farla Dr. A. Nikolaeva manuscriptcommissie Prof. dr. N.M.P. Bocken Prof. dr. M.C.G. te Brömmelstroet Prof. dr. C. Castaldi Prof. dr. ir. Q.C. van Est Prof. dr. A. Meijer 1 content Preface .
    [Show full text]
  • Niche Innovation Dynamics and the Urban Mobility Transition the Case of Dockless Bike-Sharing in London
    Niche innovation dynamics and the urban mobility transition The case of dockless bike-sharing in London Russell Cannon Urban Studies Master’s Programme (Two-Year) 30 Credits VT2019 Supervisor: Désirée Nilsson 1 Abstract This thesis seeks to provide a detailed understanding of the introduction of dockless bike-sharing to London. As part of a wave of new smart and shared mobility services that are aiming to transform the way people move around cities, this emerging form of transport has created disruptions in London since its launch in 2017. This study aims analyse to what extent dockless bike-sharing aligns or conflicts with the aims and objectives of local authorities governing public space in London. In doing so, it also aims to reveal insights into transformations in contemporary mobility by exploring the dynamics of niche innovations within socio-technical transitions, thus contributing to knowledge in the field of transition studies. To do this, a qualitative case study methodology was employed using document analysis and interviews with four stakeholders integrally involved in the case study, representing both public authorities and a private sector dockless bike-sharing operator, Mobike. The findings demonstrate that dockless bike-sharing is well aligned with the city’s explicit objectives to reduce car dependency and encourage active travel. It has particular potential to make cycling more accessible by bringing bike-sharing to parts of the city that do not have access to the pre-existing, docked bike-sharing scheme, operated by the central transport authority, Transport for London. Despite this, dockless bike-sharing, as a niche innovation, has struggled to break into the existing urban mobility regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Intention to Use Obike Among University Students in Malaysia Chai Yat Ling Chin Pui Nee Tan Hui Bing Woo Ke Ni Yong Yon Yang Ba
    MK004/1805 INTENTION TO USE OBIKE AMONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN MALAYSIA CHAI YAT LING CHIN PUI NEE TAN HUI BING WOO KE NI YONG YON YANG BACHELOR OF MARKETING (HONS) UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING APRIL 2019 MK004/1805 INTENTION TO USE OBIKE AMONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS IN MALAYSIA BY CHAI YAT LING CHIN PUI NEE TAN HUI BING WOO KE NI YONG YON YANG A final year project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of BACHELOR OF MARKETING (HONS) UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING APRIL 2019 Intention to use oBike among university students in Malaysia. _______________________________________________________________________________ Copyright @ 2019 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this paper may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, graphic, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, without the prior consent of the authors. ii Intention to use oBike among university students in Malaysia. _______________________________________________________________________________ DECLARATION We hereby declare that: (1) This undergraduate research project is the end result of our own work and that due acknowledgement has been given in the references to ALL sources of information be they printed, electronic, or personal. (2) No portion of this research project has been submitted in support of any application for any other degree or qualification of this or any other university, or other institutes of learning. (3) Equal contribution has been made by each group member in completing the research project. (4) The word count of this research report is 10,724 words.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovation Briefinnovation Brief Regulating Dockless Bike-Sharing Schemes
    Innovation briefINNOVATION BRIEF Regulating dockless bike-sharing schemes The bike-sharing (bike hire) concept has by solutions allowing flexible parking of bikes been available for decades, but since the at public spaces and relocating them, while ac- turn of the millennium such systems have cess is offered more and more via the users’ spread across the globe and have become own smartphones (most commonly apps). part of the sustainable mobility offer for many As technology made so called ‘dockless’ (or cities. These schemes traditionally provide ‘freefloating’) solutions possible, such bike- public hire bikes at bike ‘docking stations’ sharing providers have emerged and boomed throughout the city. With the rapid develop- in the second half of the 2010s, with especially ment of technology and new business mod- high penetration in China. Their business model els, dockless bike-sharing1 providers have was based on introducing much larger bicycle emerged and boomed in the second half of fleets at a much quicker pace, allowed by free- the 2010s, with especially high penetration floating technology (as there was no need to in China. However, their rise in cities glo- deploy expensive docking stations) and making bally did not exploit the full potential of the use of the unclear regulation of the use of pub- concept in improving mobility, and has also lic space. Ofo started in October 2015 in Beijing with 2,000 bikes, while at the end of 2016 it had caused negative externalities, which made 85,000 bikes in China, and in 2017 it deployed necessary for cities to develop regulations. more than 10 million bikes in 250 cities globally.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustaining Dockless Bike-Sharing Based on Business Principles
    Copyright Warning & Restrictions The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a, user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use” that user may be liable for copyright infringement, This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. Please Note: The author retains the copyright while the New Jersey Institute of Technology reserves the right to distribute this thesis or dissertation Printing note: If you do not wish to print this page, then select “Pages from: first page # to: last page #” on the print dialog screen The Van Houten library has removed some of the personal information and all signatures from the approval page and biographical sketches of theses and dissertations in order to protect the identity of NJIT graduates and faculty. ABSTRACT SUSTAINING DOCKLESS BIKE-SHARING BASED ON BUSINESS PRINCIPLES by Neil Horowitz Currently in urban areas, the value of money and fuel is increasing because of urban traffic congestion. As an environmentally sustainable and short-distance travel mode, dockless bike-sharing not only assists in resolving the issue of urban traffic congestion, but additionally assists in minimizing pollution, satisfying the demand of the last mile problem, and improving societal health.
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Sharing 5.0 Market Insights and Outlook
    Bike Sharing 5.0 Market insights and outlook Berlin, August 2018 This study provides a comprehensive overview of developments on the bike sharing market Management summary 1 Key trends in > Major innovations and new regulations are on the way to reshaping the mobility market innovative mobility > New business models follow an asset-light approach allowing consumers to share mobility offerings > Bike sharing has emerged as one of the most-trending forms of mobility in the current era > Digitalization has enabled bike sharing to become a fully integrated part of urban mobility 2 Bike sharing market > Bike sharing has grown at an extremely fast rate and is now available in over 70 countries development > Several mostly Asian operators have been expanding fast, but first business failures can be seen > On the downside, authorities are alarmed by the excessive growth and severe acts of vandalism > Overall, the bike sharing market is expected to grow continuously by 20% in the years ahead 3 Role of bike sharing > Bike sharing has established itself as a low-priced and convenient alternative in many cities in urban mobility > The three basic operating models are dock-based, hybrid and free-floating > Key success factors for bike sharing are a high-density network and high-quality bikes > Integrated mobility platforms enable bike sharing to become an essential part of intermodal mobility 4 Future of bike > Bike sharing operators will have to proactively shape the mobility market to stay competitive sharing > Intense intra-city competition will
    [Show full text]
  • Pourquoi Smoove a Remporté Les Vélos En Libre-Service D'helsinki
    En 2014 Smoove avait remporté le marché de Moscou D.R. Pourquoi Smoove a remporté les vélos en libre-service d'Helsinki La PME hexagonale poursuit son développement à l’international. Après Moscou en 2014, elle vient de remporter l’appel d’offres pour équiper la capitale de la Finlande de 1500 vélos en libre- service. Et elle prévoit de se positionner face à JCDecaux pour le renouvellement des marchés du Vélib’et du Vélov’. Après un an de discussions, c’est la PME montpelliéraine Smoove qui a décroché le contrat pour le déploiement du système de vélos en libre-service d’Helsinki. Un contrat remporté avec deux partenaires : le groupe catalan de transport et d’automobile Moventia, ainsi que l’américain Clear Channel, spécialiste de la publicité urbaine. "Nous avons principalement décroché ce contrat car nous étions les mieux positionnés en termes de prix", confie Laurent Mercat, président de Smoove. "Notre système est basé sur des stations d’accueil très légères ce qui réduit le coût d’infrastructure". Smoove a en effet développé un "système inversé" par rapport aux solutions telles que Vélib’où toutes les communications s’effectuent au niveau des stations. Dans le cas de Smoove, c’est le vélo qui intègre un boîtier de communication électronique, baptisé "Smoove Box", qui communique avec le serveur central du service par radios. Pour déverrouiller le vélo, il suffit ainsi de passer une carte sans contacts à proximité de ce boîtier. Une formule qui a séduit Helsinki qui prévoit le déploiement de 50 stations et 500 vélos en 2016. Dès le printemps 2017, le système sera étendu à 1500 vélos et 150 stations.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Report FY 2020
    Business report FY 2020 March 15th, 2021 Contents Annual business review – FY 2020 ......................................................................................... 3 Annual financial release – FY 2020 ............................................................................................. 3 Business highlights of FY 2020 ................................................................................................. 11 Perspectives .............................................................................................................................. 13 Related parties .......................................................................................................................... 14 Risk factors ............................................................................................................................... 15 Annual consolidated financial statements – FY 2020 ....................................................... 18 Annual consolidated financial statements .................................................................................. 18 Notes to the annual consolidated financial statements .............................................................. 24 Statutory Auditors’ report ...................................................................................................... 88 2 Annual business review – FY 2020 Annual financial release – FY 2020 ANNUAL BUSINESS REVIEW – FY 2020 ANNUAL FINANCIAL RELEASE – FY 2020 • Adjusted revenue down -40.6% to €2,311.8 million • Adjusted organic
    [Show full text]
  • Public Bicycle Schemes
    Division 44 Water, Energy and Transport Recommended Reading and Links on Public Bicycle Schemes September 2010 Reading List on Public Bicycle Schemes Preface Various cities around the world are trying methods to encourage bicycling as a sustainable transport mode. Among those methods in encouraging cycling implementing public bicycle schemes is one. The public bicycle schemes are also known as bicycle sharing systems, community bicycling schemes etc., The main idea of a public bicycle system is that the user need not own a bicycle but still gain the advantages of bicycling by renting a bicycle provided by the scheme for a nominal fee or for free of charge (as in some cities). Most of these schemes enable people to realize one way trips, because the users needn’t to return the bicycles to the origin, which will avoid unnecessary travel. Public bicycle schemes provide not only convenience for trips in the communities, they can also be a good addition to the public transport system. Encouraging public bike systems have shown that there can be numerous short that could be made by a bicycle instead of using motorised modes. Public bike schemes also encourage creative designs in bikes and also in the operational mechanisms. The current document is one of the several efforts of GTZ-Sustainable Urban Transport Project to bring to the policymakers an easy to access list of available material on Public Bike Schemes (PBS) which can be used in their everyday work. The document aims to list out some influential and informative resources that highlight the importance of PBS in cities and how the existing situation could be improved.
    [Show full text]
  • AWARE in Openlca
    openLCA (1.7.4) Case study: Bike sharing openLCA Version: 1.7.4 Document version: 1.0 Date: 09. November 2018 Authors: Francesca Recanati, Andreas Ciroth GreenDelta GmbH Tel +49 30 48496030 Kaiserdamm 13 Fax +49 30 4849 6991 14057 Berlin GERMANY Bike sharing Outline 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Goal and scope definition ................................................................................................................ 2 3 Inventory analysis – baseline and alternatives .......................................................................... 3 3.1 Bike production .................................................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Bike use phase and maintenance ................................................................................................. 4 3.3 Baseline and alternatives cases ...................................................................................................... 5 3.4 Urban (public) transportation means – comparison ................................................................. 7 4 Summary of modelling approach and cases under study ....................................................... 7 5 Life Cycle Impact Assessment method ........................................................................................ 8 6 Results .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Uanotat 134 2019 Sykkeldelingsordninger
    Ingunn Opheim Ellis Notat Maria Amundsen 134/2019 Sykkeldelingsordninger Sykkeldelingsordninger Forord På oppdrag fra Kolumbus har Urbanet Analyse gjort en kartlegging av ulike sykkeldelingsordninger verden over. Oppdraget gikk utgangspunktet ut på å gjennomføre en analyse av suksesskriterier for en sykkeldelingsordning, basert på en kvantitativ analyse av ulike egenskaper ved et større antall ulike sykkeldelingsordninger. Den innledende kartleggingen av ulike sykkeldelingsordninger avdekket at det er lite tilgjengelig informasjon om svært mange av sykkeldelingsordningene som finnes, da dette i stor grad anses som forretningssensitiv informasjon. Den kvantitative analysen har derfor ikke kunnet gjennomføres. I dette notatet oppsummeres den kunnskapen om ulike sykkeldelingsordninger vi har fått gjennom arbeidet med prosjektet. Kontaktperson hos oppdragsgiver har vært Rolf Michael Odland. Fra Urbanet Analyse har Ingunn Opheim Ellis vært prosjektleder, med Maria Amundsen og Karoline Nielsen (Asplan Viak) som prosjektmedarbeidere. Katrine N. Kjørstad har kvalitetssikret oppdraget. Oslo, februar 2019 Bård Norheim Urbanet Analyse notat 134/2019 Innhold Hovedfunn ........................................................................................................................... i Vanskelig å finne gode data om bruk av sykkeldelingsordninger ......................................................... i Noen få kommersielle aktører har ansvar for mange sykkeldelingsordninger ..................................... i De største sykkeldelingsordningene
    [Show full text]