IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt53z3h2gt.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Good Practices for Advancing Urban Mobility Innovation: A Case Study of One-Way Carsharing

Author

Listed:
  • Terrien, Clara
  • Maniak, Rémi
  • Chen, Bo
  • Shaheen, Susan

Abstract

Transforming urban mobility requires integrating public with private services into a single transportation system. Local governments and private companies face the challenge of how to coordinate themselves. An emblematic example is one-way carsharing (shared use of a fleet of vehicles that are typically free-floating throughout an urban area). Surprisingly, good practices for public and private players driving this change remain relatively undocumented. This paper proposes a systematic and balanced public-private approach to foster transportation innovation management. We review both public policy and business management literature and build a framework to help local governments and companies innovate together (organizational structures, project management processes, and profitability assessment tools). We use this framework to examine both public and private experiences through a case study analysis with five one-way carsharing services in Europe (Paris, Munich) and the United-States (San Francisco, Portland, Seattle). For each we conducted expert interviews with the local government and the private operator. This paper provides recommendations for both sectors. First, public and private players should have specific organizations, separated from the core business. Second, they should co-manage innovation since pilot projects lack certainty and require risk management. Third, a new approach that emphasizes value in the role of pilot project learning and capability building.

Suggested Citation

  • Terrien, Clara & Maniak, Rémi & Chen, Bo & Shaheen, Susan, 2016. "Good Practices for Advancing Urban Mobility Innovation: A Case Study of One-Way Carsharing," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt53z3h2gt, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt53z3h2gt
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/53z3h2gt.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Christophe Midler, 1995. "Projectification of the Firm : the Renault Case," Post-Print hal-00262524, HAL.
    3. Thomas Keil & Rita Gunther McGrath & Taina Tukiainen, 2009. "Gems from the Ashes: Capability Creation and Transformation in Internal Corporate Venturing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 601-620, June.
    4. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    5. Midler, Christophe, 1995. ""Projectification" of the firm: The renault case," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 363-375, December.
    6. Jorge, Diana & Molnar, Goran & de Almeida Correia, Gonçalo Homem, 2015. "Trip pricing of one-way station-based carsharing networks with zone and time of day price variations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 461-482.
    7. Susan Shaheen & Nelson Chan & Helen Micheaux, 2015. "One-way carsharing’s evolution and operator perspectives from the Americas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 519-536, May.
    8. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    9. Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & Antunes, António Pais, 2012. "Optimization approach to depot location and trip selection in one-way carsharing systems," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 233-247.
    10. Huwer, Ulrike, 2004. "Public transport and csar-sharing--benefits and effects of combined services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 77-87, January.
    11. Sylvain Lenfle, 2008. "Exploration and Project Management," Post-Print hal-00404168, HAL.
    12. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Chan, Nelson & Micheaux, Helen, 2015. "One-Way Carsharing's Evolution and Operator Perspectives from the Americas," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt83s1z8j4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    13. Firnkorn, Jörg, 2012. "Triangulation of two methods measuring the impacts of a free-floating carsharing system in Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1654-1672.
    14. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    15. Dowling, Robyn & Kent, Jennifer, 2015. "Practice and public–private partnerships in sustainable transport governance: The case of car sharing in Sydney, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 58-64.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shokoohyar, Sina & Sobhani, Ahmad & Sobhani, Anae, 2020. "Impacts of trip characteristics and weather condition on ride-sourcing network: Evidence from Uber and Lyft," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Perboli, Guido & Ferrero, Francesco & Musso, Stefano & Vesco, Andrea, 2018. "Business models and tariff simulation in car-sharing services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 32-48.
    3. Akse, Ruben & Veeneman, Wijnand & Marchau, Vincent & Ritter, Simone, 2023. "Governance of uncertainty in implementing mobility innovations: A comparison of two Dutch cases," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Jingjing Jia & Shujie Ma & Yixi Xue & Deyang Kong, 2020. "Life-Cycle Break-Even Analysis of Electric Carsharing: A Comparative Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-29, August.
    5. Beibei Hu & Yue Sun & Huijun Sun & Xianlei Dong, 2020. "A Contrastive Study on Travel Costs of Car-Sharing and Taxis Based on GPS Trajectory Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-28, December.
    6. Ann Kathrin Stinder & Nora Schelte & Semih Severengiz, 2022. "Application of Mixed Methods in Transdisciplinary Research Projects on Sustainable Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-25, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Golalikhani, Masoud & Oliveira, Beatriz Brito & Carravilla, Maria Antónia & Oliveira, José Fernando & Antunes, António Pais, 2021. "Carsharing: A review of academic literature and business practices toward an integrated decision-support framework," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    2. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    3. Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Söderholm, Patrik & Ylinenpää, Håkan, 2016. "The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1743-1761.
    4. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Circella, Giovanni & Alemi, Farzad & Tiedeman, Kate & Handy, Susan & Mokhtarian, Patricia, 2018. "The Adoption of Shared Mobility in California and Its Relationship with Other Components of Travel Behavior," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1kq5d07p, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    6. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    7. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    8. Walrave, Bob & Talmar, Madis & Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2018. "A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 103-113.
    9. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    10. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    11. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    12. Pesch, Udo, 2015. "Tracing discursive space: Agency and change in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 379-388.
    13. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    14. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    15. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    16. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    17. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    18. Coenen, Lars & Benneworth, Paul & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 968-979.
    19. Foxon, Timothy J., 2011. "A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2258-2267.
    20. Tyndall, Justin, 2019. "Free-floating carsharing and extemporaneous public transit substitution," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 21-27.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt53z3h2gt. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.