DOCSLIB.ORG

Shared Mobility, Maas and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 1/80

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shared Mobility, Maas and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 1/80 September 2019 Yves Crozet Georgina Santos Jean Coldefy CERRE 2019 | Shared Mobility, MaaS and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 1/80 The project, within the framework of which this report has been prepared, has received the support and/or input of the following organisations: Autoritat del Transport Metropolità (ATM) Barcelona, Île-de-France Mobilités, Région Île-de-France, Rhein-Main-Verkehrsverbund (RMV), Ruter and Uber. As provided for in CERRE's by-laws and in the procedural rules from its “Transparency & Independence Policy”, this report has been prepared in strict academic independence. At all times during the development process, the research’s authors, the Joint Academic Directors and the Director General remain the sole decision-makers concerning all content in the report. The views expressed in this CERRE report are attributable only to the authors in a personal capacity and not to any institution with which they are associated. In addition, they do not necessarily correspond either to those of CERRE, or to any sponsor or to members of CERRE. © Copyright 2019, Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE) [email protected] www.cerre.eu CERRE 2019 | Shared Mobility, MaaS and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 2/80 Table of contents About CERRE .............................................................................................................. 5 About the authors ...................................................................................................... 6 Executive summary .................................................................................................... 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 11 1. Shared mobility: opportunities and challenges .................................................. 14 1.1. Definitions and key issues ............................................................................... 14 1.1.1. What is shared mobility .................................................................................................. 14 1.1.2. The 4 models ................................................................................................................ 15 1.1.3. Benefits for customers and growth of new mobility providers .............................................. 17 1.2. Urban mobility ............................................................................................... 21 1.2.1. Overview of the 4 city-regions under study .......................................................................21 1.2.2. Mobility challenges .........................................................................................................22 1.2.3. Impact of new mobility services .......................................................................................23 1.3. Can shared mobility help local authorities meet their targets and objectives? ........ 29 1.3.1. Risks and opportunities ..................................................................................................29 1.3.2. Regulatory challenges ....................................................................................................31 1.3.3. Policy recommendations .................................................................................................33 2. MaaS, platforms and data: towards a new era for mobility? .............................. 34 2.1. Mobility as a Service: what is at stake? ................................................................... 36 2.1.1. General considerations ...................................................................................................36 2.1.2. The stakeholders involved and their respective objectives ...................................................37 2.1.3. What objectives for Maas? ..............................................................................................38 2.1.4. What package of services to be integrated in Maas? ...........................................................38 2.2. Questioning the business model of MaaS ................................................................. 40 2.2.1. New mobility solutions: between rhetoric and reality ..........................................................40 2.2.2. Flow, speed and cost: the key variables of urban mobility ...................................................42 2.2.3. What business model for Maas? .......................................................................................44 2.3. How to bring out the full potential of digital technology into mobility? ......................... 46 2.3.1. The main issues .............................................................................................................46 2.3.2. Governance of the territorial dataset ................................................................................47 2.3.3. Opening sales channels ..................................................................................................51 CERRE 2019 | Shared Mobility, MaaS and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 3/80 2.4. Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 54 3. Regulatory issues .............................................................................................. 55 3.1. Urban mobility: the limits of a fragmented regulation ......................................... 56 3.1.1. Fragmented vs unified regulation of urban mobility ............................................................56 3.1.2. New mobility services and the blurring of frontiers between public and private transport ........58 3.1.3. MaaS and the scarcity of public space...............................................................................60 3.2. MaaS, new mobility services and the limits of the paradigm of substitution ........... 61 3.2.1. The paradigm of substitution: principles and limits .............................................................61 3.2.2. From substitution to addition ...........................................................................................62 3.2.3. Complementarity and the issue of public financing .............................................................63 3.3. Towards an integrated regulation of urban mobility: what does it mean? .............. 64 3.3.1. Private initiatives and platforms as integrator: a bottom-up process .....................................64 3.3.2. Public authority acting as an aggregator: a top-down process .............................................65 3.3.3. Regulation of urban mobility: the key variables .................................................................66 Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 70 Appendix .................................................................................................................. 72 References ............................................................................................................... 74 CERRE 2019 | Shared Mobility, MaaS and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 4/80 About CERRE Providing top quality studies and dissemination activities, the Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE) promotes robust and consistent regulation in Europe’s network and digital industries. CERRE’s members are regulatory authorities and operators in those industries as well as universities. CERRE’s added value is based on: its original, multidisciplinary and cross-sector approach; the widely acknowledged academic credentials and policy experience of its team and associated staff members; its scientific independence and impartiality; the direct relevance and timeliness of its contributions to the policy and regulatory development process applicable to network industries and the markets for their services. CERRE's activities include contributions to the development of norms, standards and policy recommendations related to the regulation of service providers, to the specification of market rules and to improvements in the management of infrastructure in a changing political, economic, technological and social environment. CERRE’s work also aims at clarifying the respective roles of market operators, governments and regulatory authorities, as well as at strengthening the expertise of the latter, since in many Member States, regulators are part of a relatively recent profession. CERRE 2019 | Shared Mobility, MaaS and the Regulatory Challenges of Urban Mobility 5/80 About the authors Yves Crozet is a CERRE Research Fellow and an Emeritus Professor at Sciences Po Lyon, the city’s Institute of Political Studies. An economist specialised in transport economy, he is a member of the Laboratory of Transport Economics (LET) of the University of Lyon, and used to be the director of this research team from 1997 to 2007. Since 2010, he is Secretary General of the World Conference on Transport Research Society (WCTRS). From 2008 to 2012, he was a member of the administrative Council of Réseau Ferré de France (RFF), the former French rail infrastructure manager (now SNCF Réseau). Yves Crozet holds a PhD in Economics from Université Lyon II. He is a Chevalier (Knight) of the French Legion of Honour. Georgina Santos is a CERRE Research Fellow and a Senior Lecturer at the School of Geography and Planning of Cardiff University. An economist, she is interested in environmental and transport economics and public policy. She has conducted
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Broadband Coverage 97% Fixed and Mobile Broadband
    Connectivity Broadband market developments in the EU Digital Economy and Society Index Report 2019 Connectivity The Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) is a composite index that summarises relevant indicators on Europe’s digital performance and tracks the progress of EU Member States in digital competitiveness. The five dimensions of the DESI 1 Connectivity Fixed broadband, mobile broadband, fast and ultrafast Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark, have the most broadband and prices advanced digital economies in the EU followed by the UK, 2 Human capital Internet user skills and advanced skills Luxembourg, Ireland and Estonia. 3 Use of internet Citizens' use of internet services and online transactions Bulgaria, Romania, Greece and Poland have the lowest scores on the index. 4 Integration of Business digitisation and e-commerce digital technology 5 Digital public e-Government and e-health services Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) 2019 80 1 Connectivity 2 Human capital 3 Use of internet services 4 Integration of digital technology 5 Digital public services 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 FI SE NL DK UK LU IE EE BE MT ES DE AT EU LT FR SI LV CZ PT HR SK CY HU IT PL EL RO BG Source: DESI 2019, European Commission DESI Report 2019 – Connectivity 2 In Connectivity, Denmark had the highest score, followed by Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden and Finland. Greece, Croatia and Lithuania had the weakest performance in this dimension of the DESI. Connectivity indicators in DESI 2019 EU The connectivity dimension looks at both the demand and the supply side of 1a1 Fixed broadband coverage 97% fixed and mobile broadband.
    [Show full text]
  • Every Avenue Available Lessons from Monetary History for Tackling Climate Change
    EVERY AVENUE AVAILABLE LESSONS FROM MONETARY HISTORY FOR TACKLING CLIMATE CHANGE Rens van Tilburg and Aleksandar Simić February 2021 Every Avenue Available “I WANT TO EXPLORE EVERY AVENUE AVAILABLE 2 IN ORDER TO COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE” Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, July 2020 Sustainable Finance Lab Every Avenue Available 3 Utrecht, February 2021. The Sustainable Finance Lab (SFL https://sustainablefinancelab.nl/en) is an academic think tank whose members are mostly professors from different universities in the Netherlands. The aim of the SFL is a stable and robust financial sector that contributes to an economy that serves humanity without depleting its environment. To this end the SFL develops ideas and provides a platform to discuss them, thus bridging science and practice. This paper has been drafted by Rens van Tilburg, Director of the Sustainable Finance Lab at Utrecht University ([email protected]) and Aleksandar Simić, researcher of the SFL. The authors wish to thank Roben Kloosterman for his excellent research support and Alexander Barkawi, Simon Dikau, Maarten Kavelaars, Jens van ‘t Klooster, Cormac Petit, Rick van der Ploeg, Dirk Schoenmaker and Roland Uittenbogaard Sustainable Finance Lab for their comments. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of all members of the Sustainable Finance Lab. This paper was commissioned by the Council on Economic Policies and supported by the European Climate Foundation. Every Avenue Available KEY TAKEAWAYS Insufficient action to limit climate change The costs of runaway climate change are much higher than those of limiting it.
    [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]
  • The Bike- Share Planning Guide
    THE BIKE- SHARE PLANNING GUIDE Introduction Sub 1 Introduction Sub 2 THE BIKE- SHARE PLANNING GUIDE Introduction Sub 3 The Bike-share Planning Guide Cover Photo: Mexico City's Ecobici has helped to increase cycling mode share in Mexico City. Cover Photo By: Udayalaksmanakartiyasa Halim 9 East 19th Street, 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10003 tel +1 212 629 8001 www.itdp.org Introduction Sub 4 Authors and Acknowledgements The writing of this report was a collaborative effort across ITDP and our partners. Contributing authors include: Aimee Gauthier, Colin Hughes, Christopher Kost, Shanshan Li, Clarisse Linke, Stephanie Lotshaw, Jacob Mason, Carlosfelipe Pardo, Clara Rasore, Bradley Schroeder, and Xavier Treviño. The authors would also like to thank Christopher Van Eyken, Jemilah Magnusson, and Gabriel Lewenstein for their support in the creation of the guide. ITDP is especially grateful to the following people for providing comments on and contributions to sections of this report: Alison Cohen, Director of Bike Share Services, Toole Design Group (with many thanks to Shomik Mehndiratta and the World Bank for their support of Ms. Cohen’s research) Dani Simons, Director of Marketing, NYC Bike Share Matteo Martignoni, International Human Powered Vehicle Association and former ITDP board member Jeff Olson, Alta Planning and Design Chris Holben, former Project Manager for Capital Bikeshare District Department of Transportation. Introduction Sub 5 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 The Benefits of Bike-share 14 1.2 History of Bike-share 19 1.3 New Developments and Trends 25 1.4 Building Political Will 26 1.5 Elements of Bike-share 27 2 THE PLANNING PROCESS 28 AND FEASIBILITY STUDY 2.1 Overview of Planning Process 30 2.2 Feasibility Study 32 2.3 Bike-Share Metrics 40 2.3.1 Basic Context Data and System Metrics 40 2.3.2 Performance Metrics 41 2.4 Coverage Area 43 2.5 System Sizing: Three Basic 44 Planning Parameters 2.6 Financial Analysis 48 3 DETAILED PLANNING AND DESIGN 52 3.1 Station Location 57 3.2 Station Sizing 63 3.3 Station Type and Design 64 3.3.1 Manual vs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Knowns and Unknowns of West Nile Virus in Europe: What Did We Learn from the 2018 Outbreak?
    Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy ISSN: 1478-7210 (Print) 1744-8336 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ierz20 The knowns and unknowns of West Nile virus in Europe: what did we learn from the 2018 outbreak? Jeremy V Camp & Norbert Nowotny To cite this article: Jeremy V Camp & Norbert Nowotny (2020): The knowns and unknowns of West Nile virus in Europe: what did we learn from the 2018 outbreak?, Expert Review of Anti- infective Therapy, DOI: 10.1080/14787210.2020.1713751 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2020.1713751 Accepted author version posted online: 08 Jan 2020. Published online: 14 Jan 2020. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 11 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ierz20 EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTI-INFECTIVE THERAPY https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2020.1713751 REVIEW The knowns and unknowns of West Nile virus in Europe: what did we learn from the 2018 outbreak? Jeremy V Camp a and Norbert Nowotny a,b aViral Zoonoses, Emerging and Vector-Borne Infections Group, Institute of Virology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria; bDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Introduction: West Nile virus (WNV) is a mosquito-borne human and animal pathogen with nearly Received 28 October 2019 worldwide distribution. In Europe, the virus is endemic with seasonal regional outbreaks that have Accepted 7 January 2020 increased in frequency over the last 10 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Will Smart Bikes Succeed As Public Transportation in the United States?
    Will Smart Bikes Succeed as Public Transportation in the United States? Will Smart Bikes Succeed as Public Transportation in the United States? Paul DeMaio, City of Alexandria, Virginia President of MetroBike Jonathan Gifford, George Mason University Arlington Campus Abstract Bicycle-sharing programs have received increasing attention in recent years with initiatives to increase bike usage, better meet the demand of a more mobile public, and lessen the environmental impacts of our transportation activities. In 1996, the smart bike, or automated bike rental system, was first implemented in the United Kingdom, leading to a growing number of programs throughout Europe and Asia. However, there are presently no such programs in the United States. This article examines the potential success of smart bike programs in the United States. Introduction The purpose of this article is to describe briefly the history and development of bicycle-sharing, review experiences of selected smart bike, or automated bike rental programs, and develop guidelines for a successful smart bike program in the United States. In researching the article, the authors surveyed selected programs around the world, interviewed key figures in those programs, and reviewed the literature. 1 Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2004 The first section provides a brief history of bike-sharing programs and models. A listing of past and present smart bike programs follows it. The article concludes with a discussion of the most important characteristics that will determine the likely success of a smart bike program in the United States. Background Bicycles have several advantages over other modes of public transportation for short-distance urban trips because they: reach underserved destinations, require less infrastructure, are relatively inexpensive to purchase and maintain, generally do not add to vehicular congestion, do not create pollution in their operation, and provide the user with the added benefit of exercise.
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline for Bike Rental Transdanube.Pearls Final Draft
    Transdanube.Pearls - Network for Sustainable Mobility along the Danube http://www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Guideline for bike rental Transdanube.Pearls Final Draft WP/Action 3.1 Author: Inštitút priestorového plánovania Version/Date 3.0, 23.11.2017 Document Revision/Approval Version Date Status Date Status 3.0 23/11/2017 Final draft xx.xx.xxxx final Contacts Coordinator: Bratislava Self-governing Region Sabinovská 16, P.O. Box 106 820 05 Bratislava web: www.region-bsk.sk Author: Inštitút priestorového plánovania Ľubľanská 1 831 02 Bratislava web: http://ipp.szm.com More information about Transdanube.Pearls project are available at www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Page 2 of 41 www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Abbreviations BSS Bike Sharing Scheme ECF European Cyclists´ Federation POI Point of Interest PT Public Transport Page 3 of 41 www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Table of content Contacts ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Bike Rental ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Execuive summary ................................................................................................................................................. 5 1. Best practice examples from across
    [Show full text]
  • Public Bicycles
    New Seamless Mobility Services Public Bicycles 4 PolicyPliocyoeslli y notes t NICHES is a Coordination Action funded by the European Commission under the Sixth Framework Programme for R&D, Priority 6.2 Sustainable Surface Transport What is it about? Characteristics Public Bicycles: • are innovative schemes of rental or free bicycles in urban areas; Example: Vélo’v in Lyon • can be used for daily mobility as one-way-use is possible and they can be seen as part of the public How did the French City of Lyon transport system; encourage thousands of people to • differ from traditional, mostly leisure-oriented bicycle use the bicycle as urban transport rental services as they provide fast and easy access; mode within a few months? • have diversifi ed in organisational layout, the business A big part of this success story is models and the applied technology towards “smart bikes” due to the introduction of the (rental process via smart card or mobile phone). Public Bicycle scheme vélo’v. Each of the 2,000 bicycles available The transferability of Public Bicycle schemes to cities at racks throughout the city centre with appropriate framework conditions for cycling has is used on average 16 times on a been proven in many cases (e.g. in France, Germany, typical summer day. Within the Scandinavia and Spain). fi rst six months after its introduction, 2 Million trips were made with the Public Bicycles, Key benefi ts replacing around 150,000 car trips. In combination with the The implementation of a Public Bicycle scheme... increased use of private bicycles, • provides a fast, convenient and fl exible inner urban the scheme helped to increase the transport option; bicycle share in the modal split.
    [Show full text]
  • Yearbook 2019/2020 Key Trends
    YEARBOOK 2019/2020 KEY TRENDS TELEVISION, CINEMA, VIDEO AND ON-DEMAND AUDIOVISUAL SERVICES - THE PAN-EUROPEAN PICTURE → Director of publication Susanne Nikoltchev, Executive Director → Editorial supervision Gilles Fontaine, Head of Department for Market Information → Authors Francisco Javier Cabrera Blázquez, Maja Cappello, Laura Ene, Gilles Fontaine, Christian Grece, Marta Jiménez Pumares, Martin Kanzler, Ismail Rabie, Agnes Schneeberger, Patrizia Simone, Julio Talavera, Sophie Valais → Coordination Valérie Haessig → Special thanks to the following for their contribution to the Yearbook Ampere Analysis, Bureau van Dijk (BvD), European Broadcasting Union - Media Intelligence Service (EBU-M.I.S.), EURODATA-TV, LyngSat, WARC, and the members of the EFARN and the EPRA networks. → Proofreading Anthony Mills → Layout Big Family → Press and public relations Alison Hindhaugh, [email protected] → Publisher European Audiovisual Observatory 76 Allée de la Robertsau, 67000 Strasbourg, France www.obs.coe.int If you wish to reproduce tables or graphs contained in this publication please contact the European Audiovisual Observatory for prior approval. Please note that the European Audiovisual Observatory can only authorise reproduction of tables or graphs sourced as “European Audiovisual Observatory”. All other entries may only be reproduced with the consent of the original source. Opinions expressed in this publication are personal and do not necessarily represent the view of the Observatory, its members or of the Council of Europe. © European Audiovisual Observatory (Council of Europe), Strasbourg 2020 YEARBOOK 2019/2020 KEY TRENDS TELEVISION, CINEMA, VIDEO AND ON-DEMAND AUDIOVISUAL SERVICES - THE PAN-EUROPEAN PICTURE 4 YEARBOOK 2019/2020 – KEY TRENDS TABLE OF CONTENT INTRODUCTION 0 Six keywords for 2019 and, possibly, 2020 .
    [Show full text]
  • Week 45, 4-10 November 2018 CDTR
    COMMUNICABLE DISEASE THREATS REPORT CDTR Week 45, 4-10 November 2018 All users This weekly bulletin provides updates on threats monitored by ECDC. NEWS 33 000 people die every year due to infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria The burden of infections due to bacteria resistant to antibiotics is comparable to that of influenza, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS combined, according to a study published this week in The Lancet Infectious Diseases. The estimates are based on 2015 data from the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net) indicating that about 33000 people die each year as a direct consequence of an infection due to bacteria resistant to antibiotics. The study reveals that 75% of the burden of disease is due to healthcare-associated infections and that reducing this through adequate infection prevention and control measures, as well as antibiotic stewardship, could be an achievable goal in healthcare settings. Infections with bacteria resistant to last-line antibiotics such as carbapenems and colistin cause 39% of the burden. This is an increase from 2007 and is worrying because these antibiotics are the last treatment options available. When these are no longer effective, it is extremely difficult or, in many cases, impossible to treat infections. The study was developed by experts at ECDC and the Burden of AMR Collaborative Group. The results are used by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to estimate the economic burden of antibiotic resistance. I. Executive summary EU Threats New! Local transmission of malaria ±Greece ± Opening date: 5 November 2018 Latest update: 9 November 2018 Since August 2018, Greek public health authorities have reported several locally acquired non-falciparum malaria cases, in the regions of Evros and Central Macedonia.
    [Show full text]
  • Vergelijkende Studie Van Stedelijke Fietsverhuursystemen
    Academiejaar 2009 – 2010 UNIVERSITEIT ANTWERPEN FACULTEIT TOEGEPASTE ECONOMISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN Vergelijkende studie van stedelijke fietsverhuursystemen Jeroen Jonckheere Masterproef voorgedragen tot het bekomen van de graad van: Master in de Toegepaste Economische Promotor: Wetenschappen logistiek en transport Prof. dr. Ann Verhetsel Academiejaar 2009 – 2010 UNIVERSITEIT ANTWERPEN FACULTEIT TOEGEPASTE ECONOMISCHE WETENSCHAPPEN Vergelijkende studie van stedelijke fietsverhuursystemen Jeroen Jonckheere Masterproef voorgedragen tot het bekomen van de graad van: Master in de Toegepaste Economische Promotor: Wetenschappen logistiek en transport Prof. dr. Ann Verhetsel Voorwoord Een masterproef schrijven is een proces dat ongeveer een jaar duurt. In de loop van dit jaar krijg je hulp van een heleboel mensen. Ik wil dan ook gebruik maken van dit voorwoord om deze mensen te bedanken. De eerste persoon die ik wens te bedanken is professor Ann Verhetsel. Als promotor van mijn masterproef verbeterde zij op gepaste tijden mijn schrijfsels en gaf ze een aantal nuttige adviezen waarmee ik verder aan de slag kon. In tweede instantie zou ik ook Jan Schaeken van het Gemeentelijk Autonoom Parkeerbedrijf Antwerpen willen danken voor het geven van alle informatie die ik nodig had om het Antwerpse stedelijk fietsverhuursysteem te vergelijken met de al bestaande fietsverhuursystemen. In laatste instantie wil ik ook mijn ouders bedanken. Zij hebben er voor gezorgd dat ik 4 jaar lang heb kunnen studeren. Daarnaast wil ik hen ook nog bedanken voor het nalezen
    [Show full text]
  • OECD Competition Trends 2020
    OECD Competition Trends 2020 OECD Competition Trends 2020 PUBE 2 | Please cite this publication as: OECD (2020), OECD Competition Trends 2020 http://www.oecd.org/competition/oecd-competition-trends.htm This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This document, as well as any data and any map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. © OECD 2020 OECD COMPETITION TRENDS © OECD 2020 | 3 Preface Strong competition undoubtedly contributes to a country’s productivity and economic growth. The primary objective of a competition policy is to enhance consumer welfare by promoting competition and controlling practices that could restrict it. More competitive markets stimulate innovation and generally lead to lower prices for consumers, increased product variety and quality, more entry and enhanced investment. Overall, greater competition is expected to deliver higher levels of welfare and economic growth. Over the past 50 years, we have witnessed a remarkable dissemination of competition law enforcement around the world. In 1970, only 12 jurisdictions had a competition law, with only seven of them having a functioning competition authority. Today, more than 125 jurisdictions have a competition law regime, and the large majority has an active competition enforcement authority. The proliferation of competition laws and competition enforcers around the globe has led to a vast amount of activity in terms of investigations, decisions, advocacy initiatives and events.
    [Show full text]