A Literature Review on Interactions Between Stakeholders Through Accessibility Indicators Under Mobility as a Service Context

This study aims to explore accessibility indicators influencing the interactions between users, transport service providers (TSPs), and a platform operator, generating a conceptual framework for modeling these interactions under Mobility as a Service context. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all studies focusing on indicators and modeling the interactions. There are limitations in integrating psychological indicators and dynamic pricing into the existing models. Moreover, there are gaps in considering monthly service packages, the efficiency of transport systems, and the perspectives of the TSPs for modeling the demand–supply interactions. The study ends with conclusions, discussions, and directions for further studies.

[1]  M. Kowald,et al.  Exploring motivational mechanisms behind the intention to adopt mobility as a service (MaaS): Insights from Germany , 2020 .

[2]  Henrik Andersson,et al.  The integrated dial-a-ride problem with timetabled fixed route service , 2017, Public Transp..

[3]  Kamel Aissat,et al.  Real-Time Ride-Sharing Substitution Service in Multi-modal Public Transport Using Buckets , 2015, MCO.

[4]  Kamel Aissat,et al.  Multi-modal Transportation with Public Transport and Ride-sharing - Multi-modal Transportation using a Path-based Method , 2015, ICEIS.

[5]  H. Timmermans,et al.  Modeling the effect of Mobility-as-a-Service on mode choice decisions , 2020, Transportation Letters.

[6]  Qiang Meng,et al.  Solving the first‐mile ridesharing problem using autonomous vehicles , 2019, Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastructure Eng..

[7]  Kay W. Axhausen,et al.  Assessing the welfare impacts of Shared Mobility and Mobility as a Service (MaaS) , 2018, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

[8]  Jiaqi Zheng,et al.  A study on users' willingness to accept mobility as a service based on UTAUT model , 2020 .

[9]  Harry Timmermans,et al.  Bundling, pricing schemes and extra features preferences for mobility as a service: Sequential portfolio choice experiment , 2020, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

[10]  Yun Yuan,et al.  An Agent-Based Model for Dispatching Real-Time Demand-Responsive Feeder Bus , 2018 .

[11]  F. Witlox,et al.  Limitations to the car-substitution effect of MaaS. Findings from a Belgian pilot study , 2020 .

[12]  J. Nelson,et al.  MaaS for the suburban market: Incorporating carpooling in the mix , 2020 .

[13]  K. Geurs,et al.  On the likelihood of using Mobility-as-a-Service: A case study on innovative mobility services among residents in the Netherlands , 2019 .

[14]  Martin Fellendorf,et al.  A dynamic bike sharing module for agent-based transport simulation, within multimodal context , 2018, ANT/SEIT.

[15]  Chinh Q. Ho,et al.  Public preferences for mobility as a service: Insights from stated preference surveys , 2020, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

[16]  S. Hoogendoorn-Lanser,et al.  Early adopters of Mobility-as-a-Service in the Netherlands , 2020, Transport Policy.

[17]  A. Vij,et al.  Consumer preferences for Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) in Australia , 2020 .

[18]  Nicola Sacco,et al.  Designing a multimodal generalised ride sharing system , 2016 .

[19]  R. Palacin,et al.  Children, Young people and Mobility as a Service: Opportunities and barriers for future mobility , 2020 .

[20]  Bart van Arem,et al.  Optimizing the service area and trip selection of an electric automated taxi system used for the last mile of train trips , 2016 .

[21]  Bert van Wee,et al.  Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions , 2004 .

[22]  Qing Li,et al.  Incorporating free-floating car-sharing into an activity-based dynamic user equilibrium model: A demand-side model , 2018 .

[23]  J. Sochor,et al.  Inviting travelers to the smorgasbord of sustainable urban transport: evidence from a MaaS field trial , 2018, Transportation.

[24]  A. Páez,et al.  Measuring accessibility: positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators , 2012 .

[25]  Chinh Q. Ho,et al.  Mobility as a service in community transport in Australia: Can it provide a sustainable future? , 2020 .

[26]  Martin W. P. Savelsbergh,et al.  Enhancing Urban Mobility: Integrating Ride-Sharing and Public Transit , 2016, Comput. Oper. Res..

[27]  Jinhua Zhao,et al.  Transit-oriented autonomous vehicle operation with integrated demand-supply interaction , 2018, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies.

[28]  P. Cramton,et al.  Bringing the efficiency of electricity market mechanisms to multimodal mobility across congested transportation systems , 2020 .

[29]  S. Hoogendoorn,et al.  Drivers and barriers in adopting Mobility as a Service (MaaS) – A latent class cluster analysis of attitudes , 2020, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

[30]  Michael W. Levin,et al.  A linear program for optimal integration of shared autonomous vehicles with public transit , 2019 .

[31]  Joseph Y. J. Chow,et al.  A dynamic ridesharing dispatch and idle vehicle repositioning strategy with integrated transit transfers , 2018, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review.

[32]  Joseph Y. J. Chow,et al.  An agent-based day-to-day adjustment process for modeling ‘Mobility as a Service’ with a two-sided flexible transport market , 2017 .

[33]  Helena Strömberg,et al.  Developing the ‘Service’ in Mobility as a Service: Experiences from a Field Trial of an Innovative Travel Brokerage , 2016 .

[34]  Joseph Y. J. Chow,et al.  A many-to-many assignment game and stable outcome algorithm to evaluate collaborative mobility-as-a-service platforms , 2019 .

[35]  K. Axhausen,et al.  Transportation service bundling – For whose benefit? Consumer valuation of pure bundling in the passenger transportation market , 2020 .

[36]  L. Olsson,et al.  Perceived Accessibility of Public Transport as a Potential Indicator of Social Inclusion , 2016 .

[37]  Domokos Esztergár-Kiss,et al.  Creation of mobility packages based on the MaaS concept , 2020 .

[38]  Helena Strömberg,et al.  Implementing Mobility as a Service , 2015 .

[39]  Helena Strömberg,et al.  Trying Out Mobility as a Service: Experiences from a Field Trial and Implications for Understanding Demand , 2016 .

[40]  Michal Jakob,et al.  Market Mechanism Design for Profitable On-Demand Transport Services , 2015, ArXiv.

[41]  Roberto Montemanni,et al.  A Multi-Modal and Multi-Objective Journey Planner for Integrating Carpooling and Public Transport , 2017 .

[42]  R. Jayakrishnan,et al.  Designing a Transit-Feeder System using Multiple Sustainable Modes: Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Ridesharing, Bike Sharing, and Walking , 2018 .

[43]  Yu Nie,et al.  Connecting e-hailing to mass transit platform: Analysis of relative spatial position , 2017 .

[44]  Yanyan Chen,et al.  Optimizing fleet size and scheduling of feeder transit services considering the influence of bike-sharing systems , 2019, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[45]  Jishnu Narayan,et al.  Mobility as a Service: A Critical Review of Definitions, Assessments of Schemes, and Key Challenges , 2017 .

[46]  Oded Cats,et al.  Integrated route choice and assignment model for fixed and flexible public transport systems , 2020, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies.

[47]  R. Jayakrishnan,et al.  Promoting Peer-to-Peer Ridesharing Services as Transit System Feeders , 2017 .

[48]  Felix Gündling,et al.  A Multi-Modal Routing Approach Combining Dynamic Ride-Sharing and Public Transport , 2015 .