CPB Corporate Partnership Board Safe Micromobility Corporate Partnership Board Report Safe Micromobility Corporate Partnership Board Report The International Transport Forum The International Transport Forum is an intergovernmental organisation with 60 member countries. It acts as a think tank for transport policy and organises the Annual Summit of transport ministers. ITF is the only global body that covers all transport modes. The ITF is politically autonomous and administratively integrated with the OECD. The ITF works for transport policies that improve peoples’ lives. Our mission is to foster a deeper understanding of the role of transport in economic growth, environmental sustainability and social inclusion and to raise the public profile of transport policy. The ITF organises global dialogue for better transport. We act as a platform for discussion and pre- negotiation of policy issues across all transport modes. We analyse trends, share knowledge and promote exchange among transport decision-makers and civil society. The ITF’s Annual Summit is the world’s largest gathering of transport ministers and the leading global platform for dialogue on transport policy. The Members of the Forum are: Albania, Armenia, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States. About the Corporate Partnership Board The Corporate Partnership Board (CPB) is the International Transport Forum’s platform for engaging with the private sector and enriching global transport policy discussion with a business perspective. The members of the ITF Corporate Partnership Board are: AB InBev, Airbus, Alstom, Aramco, Bird, Bosch, Cruise, ExxonMobil, Grin, Iberdrola, Incheon International Airport, Kakao Mobility, Kapsch TrafficCom, Kyyti Group, Latvian Railways, Michelin, NXP, Penta Security, PTV Group, RATP Group, The Renault- Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance, Siemens, SNCF, Spea Engineering, Total, Toyota, Uber, Valeo, Volvo Cars, Volvo Group and Waymo. Disclaimer Funding for this work has been provided by the ITF Corporate Partnership Board. This report is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the ITF. It has not been subject to the scrutiny of ITF or OECD member countries and does not necessarily reflect their official views or those of the members of the Corporate Partnership Board. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgements The principal author of this report is Alexandre Santacreu of the International Transport Forum (ITF). Substantial contributions came from George Yannis (National Technical University of Athens), Ombline de Saint Léon (ITF) and Philippe Crist (ITF). The author is thankful for information and thoughts shared by Annie Chang (SAE International), Marko Dozza (Chalmers University), Tina Gehlert (German Insurance Association), Catherine Pérez (Public Health Agency of Barcelona), Adrià Gomila (City of Barcelona), Sophie Hamada (Inserm), Jean-Louis Martin (Ifsttar), Pernille Ehlers (Danish Road Safety Council), Candida Castro (University of Granada), Urs Walter (Swiss Federal Roads Office), Vaughn Allan (Institute for Sensible Transport), Adriana Jakovcevic (Buenos Aires City Government), Alexis Merkling and Antonin Nonis (French Insurance Federation), Valentin Löwenstein (Dekra) and AXA. The report also draws on contributions and discussions during an expert’s workshop, organised 18 October 2019 in Lisbon. The ITF wishes to thank Deputy Mayor Miguel Gaspar, Pedro Homem de Gouveia, Vasco Mora, Cristina Rocha and Pedro Machado for hosting this event. Workshop participants are listed in Annex E. At the International Transport Forum, credits go to Stephen Perkins and Sharon Masterson for contributions to the workshop and reviewing of the document. Sokob Challener supported the project and Hilary Gaboriau edited the draft. Special thanks go to the members of the ITF Safer City Streets network for their contributions and for helping to develop a better understanding of urban road safety challenges. The work for this report was carried out in the context of a project initiated and funded by the ITF’s Corporate Partnership Board (CPB). CPB projects are designed to enrich policy discussion with a business perspective. They are launched in areas where CPB member companies identify an emerging issue in transport policy or an innovation challenge to the transport system. Led by the ITF, work is carried out in a collaborative fashion in working groups consisting of CPB member companies, external experts and ITF staff. The authors wish to thank the members of the Corporate Partnership Board involved in this project: Bird, Bosch, Grin, Incheon Airport, Kapsch TrafficCom AG, Michelin, PTV Group, Toyota and Uber. The project was managed by Alexandre Santacreu and Philippe Crist. Sharon Masterson manages the Corporate Partnership Board and its activities. SAFE MICROMOBILITY © OECD/ITF 2020 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents Glossary ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Executive summary ........................................................................................................................... 10 What is micromobility? ...................................................................................................................... 13 Micromobility definition and classification ................................................................................... 14 International vehicle classification systems .................................................................................. 15 Other efforts to classify micromobility .......................................................................................... 17 How safe are micromobility trips? ..................................................................................................... 20 Lessons from fatality data ............................................................................................................. 20 Lessons from injury data ............................................................................................................... 24 Safety through mode shift ............................................................................................................. 29 Data collection: Why do it and how to improve it ......................................................................... 33 Safe vehicles and operations ............................................................................................................. 36 Vehicle design ............................................................................................................................... 37 Type approval and technical inspections ...................................................................................... 41 Shared fleet operations: Best practice in maintenance, recharging and redistribution ................ 46 Safe road users .................................................................................................................................. 48 Experience, training and education: Will micromobility become safer over time? ....................... 48 The regulatory questions .............................................................................................................. 54 Pedestrian protection.................................................................................................................... 59 Safe infrastructure ............................................................................................................................. 62 Rethinking cycling facilities ............................................................................................................ 64 Can cycling facilities accommodate all types of micro-vehicles? .................................................. 66 Collect data to identify dangerous locations ................................................................................. 68 Finding the right regulatory balance .................................................................................................. 70 Vehicle types: Ensuring regulations are proportionate to public health and safety impacts ........ 71 Potential for self-regulation .......................................................................................................... 73 Notes ................................................................................................................................................. 75 References ........................................................................................................................................ 76 Annex A. Standing e-scooter fatality details ....................................................................................... 89 Annex B. Vehicle involvement in fatal crashes ................................................................................... 91 Annex C. Micromobility