Business models for interoperable mobility services

Travellers often combine transport services from different firms to form trip chains: e.g. first taking a train and then a bus. Integration of different forms of public and private transport into a single service is gaining attention with the concept of mobility as a service (MaaS). Usually the attention focuses on such things as ease of use for travellers, and shifting demand away from the car. We focus on the effects of MaaS on behaviour and welfare via the market structure of transportation. In particular, we analyse three archetypical ways in which MaaS could be operationalised: Integrator, Platform, and Intermediary. We find that these models differ strongly in how consumers and firms are affected by the availability of MaaS technologies. The Integrator model seems best for consumers and social welfare. It always leads to lower prices than free competition without MaaS and therefore benefits consumers; transport firm profits can be lower or higher. The Platform model tends to lead to an outcome that is relatively close to free competition without MaaS: prices can be higher or lower, while transport firm profits are lower. Finally, the Intermediary model tends to lead to much higher prices. Regulation of the price that the MaaS firm has to pay may lower prices, but, compared to the Integrator model, the change due to regulation is often small. So, even without price regulation, MaaS supply can already benefit consumers by increasing competition and removing serial marginalisation, even before we consider other benefits of MaaS such as information provision, ease of use, and a demand shift towards public transport.