The Future of Urban Mobility

The Future of Urban Mobility Towards networked, multimodal cities of 2050 Your innovation. Our dedication. Since 1886. Your innovation. Our dedication. Since 1886. Content 1 Executive summary 3 2 Study design: comprehensive scope and approach 4 3 Burning platform: urban mobility systems on their way to breakdown 6 4 Urban mobility futures: solutions and technologies waiting for deployment 8 5 Shaping the future: towards networked, multimodal urban mobility systems 10 Authors: Wilhelm Lerner Director Germany Strategy and Organization Practice Additional author is the Global Future of Urban Mobility Lab Team Salman Ali, Ralf Baron, Antoine Doyon, Boris Herzog, Daniel Koob, Oleksii Korniichuk, Stefan Lippautz, Kiyoung Song, Michael Zintel 1. Executive summary Management consultancy Arthur D. Little’s (ADL) new global study of urban mobility assesses the mobility maturity and performance of 66 cities worldwide and finds most not just falling well short of best practice but in a state of crisis. Indeed it is not putting it too stron- gly to say that many cities’ mobility systems are standing on a burning platform and if action is not taken in the very near future they will play a major role in slowing the growth and development of their host nations. What is needed is innovative change. This report highlights what is holding them back, showcases best practice and identifies three strategic imperatives for cities and three clusters of future business models for mobility suppliers that will enable cities to meet the urban mobility challenge. 3 The Future of Urban Mobility Methodology Where are we now? ■■ North America: A slightly below Arthur D. Little assessed the mobility Rated on a scale of 1-100 (with 100 average performance – but way below maturity and performance of 66 cities representing the top performance) the Western Europe – with 62.0 points. worldwide using 11 criteria ranging average score was close to 65 (64.4 Just Boston, with 76.2 points scores from public transport’s share of the points). Which means that, on average, highly, while Atlanta has only 46.2 modal mix and the number of cars the 66 cities achieve just two thirds of points, making it the worst performing per capita to average travel speed and the level of performance that could po- city surveyed. transport-related CO2 emissions. The tentially be reached today by applying mobility score per city ranges from best practice across all operations.Only ■■ South America: Average perfor- 0 to 100 index points; the maximum two cities (Hong Kong and Amsterdam) mance, just ahead of North America of 100 points is defined by the best scored above 80 points, with just 15% with 63.6 points. Mexico City leads the performance of any city in the sample of cities scoring above 75 points. way with 65.7 index points closely follo- for each criteria. In addition the study There are big differences between wed by Buenos Aires (65.3) and reviewed and analysed 39 key urban the top and low-end performers in the São Paulo (59.7). mobility technologies and 36 potential various regions. urban mobility business models. ■■ Asia / Pacific: The broadest range in ■■ Western Europe: Overall best performance – from Hong Kong, which Plotting the trend regional performance with an average with 81.9 points tops the global table, The world’s population is increasingly of 71.4 points, with seven out of the down to Manila with 48.4 points. This city-based; 51% or 3.5 billion people 18 analysed cities scoring above 75 gives an average of 62.5 points. currently live in urban areas and by 2050 this is expected to reach 70% of the population or 6.3 billion people. Urban mobility is one of the toughest challenges that cities face; accordingly, we will see massive investment in the future. Today, 64% of all travel kilomet- res made are urban and the amount of travel within urban areas is expected to triple by 2050. Being able to get around urban areas quickly, conveniently and with little environmental impact is criti- cal to their success. Existing mobility systems are close to breakdown. By 2050, the average time an urban dweller spends in traffic jams will be 106 hours per year, three times more than today. Delivering urban mobi- points. Amsterdam (81.2) and London ■■ Middle East / Africa: The lowest lity will require more and more resour- (78.5 points) lead the way, while Rome performing region with an average of ces. In 2050 urban mobility will: (57.9 points) and Athens (53.3) are the 54.4 points. Dubai (58.0) comes top and worst performing cities. Tehran bottom with 47.7 points. ■■ Cost €829bn per year across the globe, more than four times higher than ■■ Eastern / Southeastern Europe: What is holding back change? in 1990. Most cities performed close to the There are clearly sufficient available regional average of 64.0 points. Only solutions to meet today’s urban mobility ■■ Use 17.3% of the planet’s biocapaci- Istanbul (70.2) comes close to the top challenges. Arthur D. Little identified 39 key ties, which is five times more than in performance cluster and St. Petersburg technologies and 36 potential urban mobility 1990. (56.9 points) is the worst performing business models. However, these solutions city in Eastern / Southeastern Europe. are not being applied comprehensively. 4 The Future of Urban Mobility Why has the innovation potential not that are owned by 95% of citizens, part tion. Following rigorous analysis of other been unleashed? There is one key rea- of a clear, well-articulated mobility strat- systems that have adopted open and son: the management of urban mobility egy that combines low transport-related innovative approaches to change, we operates globally in an environment emissions with a short average travel have identified three long-term sustai- that is hostile to innovation. Our urban time to work. nable business models for the evolving management systems are overregula- urban mobility ecosystem. ted, they do not allow market players Three strategic imperatives for cities to compete and they do not establish To meet the urban mobility challenge, ■■ The Google of urban mobility: Built business models that bring demand and cities need to implement one of the on a core asset of a user-friendly custo- supply into a natural balance. following three strategies dependent on mer interface, it provides a single point their location and maturity: of access for multimodal mobility and Some will say this is easier said than supplementary services to end consu- done but we need only look at the per- ■■ Network the system: For high per- mers on a large scale to drive uptake. formance of other sectors of the global forming cities the next step must be economy to see that transformative to fully integrate the travel value chain, ■■ The Apple of urban mobility: At the change is possible in a relatively short increasing convenience by aggressively core of this business model are integ- space of time. No example is more vivid extending public transport, implemen- rated mobility services and solutions to than that of the communications sector. ting advanced traffic management the end consumer or cities. Integrated In just two decades, hardware and systems and further reducing individual mobility services for end consumers software innovation coupled with the transport through greater taxation and provide a seamless, multimodal journey road tolls. experience such as public transport interlinked with car and bike sharing. ■■ Rethink the system: Cities in mature Suppliers that target cities provide inte- countries with a high proportion of grated, multimodal mobility solutions on motorised individual transport need to a turnkey basis. fundamentally redesign their mobility systems so that they become more ■■ The Dell of urban mobility: This is a consumer and sustainability orientated. basic offering such as cars or bike sha- This group contains the majority of ring, without integration or networking. cities in North America along with those It can also include disruptive techno- in Southwestern Europe. logical solutions such as transponders that make the Google and Apple models ■■ Establish a sustainable core: For ci- feasible. ties in emerging countries the aim must be to establish a sustainable mobility Arthur D. Little’s contribution to core that can satisfy short-term demand shaping the future of urban mobility at a reasonable cost without creating The current disparate nature of urban motorised systems that need to be mobility systems means that none of rise of the internet has brought about redesigned later. With access to new the individual stakeholders can create what is nothing short of a communica- and emerging transport infrastructure these models alone. Arthur D. Little tions revolution. What we need now is a and technologies these cities have the specialises in linking strategy, techno- mobility revolution. opportunity to become the test bed and logy and innovation, and aims to use breeding ground for tomorrow’s urban its Future Lab as the platform to enable Showcasing success – Hong Kong mobility systems. and facilitate an open dialogue between Successful cities, such as Hong Kong, urban mobility stakeholders. have a well-balanced split between Three future business models for different forms of transport that move mobility suppliers people away from individual motorised Having grasped the scale of the looming transport. In Hong Kong, travel is integ- crisis in the urban mobility sector, Arthur rated through multimodal mobility cards D. Little set about researching a solu- 5 The Future of Urban Mobility 2. Study design: comprehensive scope and approach The reform of urban mobility systems Prosperity – This was determined by The Public cluster (see figure 2) totalled is one of the biggest challenges con- the GDP per capita as of 2008, with 48 cities and the Individual one just 18.

Load more