VM Interview Pava Partners: "Micromobility makes our cities more livable"

VM: Is there a "better micromobility," meaning "active" systems like bike rentals versus "passive" micromobility with e-scooters?

Dr. Jens Schmidt-Sceery: I would not speak of better or worse. From my perspective, both have their justification. Of course, active systems like non-electric bicycles are better at first glance because they leave no CO₂ footprint while riding. However, electric micromobility has the potential to encourage people to switch from cars who otherwise wouldn't. Convenience for users plays a role here, as not everyone is able or willing to exert themselves physically. The prospect of arriving at the office sweaty deters many from pedaling. In addition, the CO₂ balance of passive micromobility will further improve in the future through longer lifespans and better recycling.

The overarching goal must be to encourage as many people as possible to switch from taxis, ride-hailing, and private cars to lower-emission modes of transport. In this endeavor, both active and passive systems are equally helpful.

VM: Bike rental systems have so far struggled to be financially sustainable. How could that change?

JSS: I can't entirely agree with that statement. It depends on the business model. There are bike rental systems that are financially sustainable and highly profitable. Companies like nextbike, for example, consider themselves mobility infrastructure providers. They offer complete mobility solutions in cities, which are then fully or partially financed by these cities. In this case, the business model is not based solely on user rental revenues.

VM: So far, micromobility has failed to demonstrate that it can make a significant contribution to the transportation transition. Why should that change now?

JSS: Micromobility can and must make an important contribution to the transportation transition. This is demonstrated by a study by the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI in 2022. Using the example of six cities (Berlin, Düsseldorf, Paris, Stockholm, Melbourne, and Seattle), the greenhouse gas impacts of micromobility were investigated together with micromobility provider Lime, and data from 4,167 users were evaluated.

The researchers concluded that the latest generation of shared e-scooters and e-bikes can reduce net greenhouse gas emissions in the cities studied. The greatest effects were seen in Melbourne (-42.4 g/pkm*) and Seattle (-37.7 g/pkm), but emissions also decreased significantly in Düsseldorf (-22.1 g/pkm), Paris, and Stockholm (-20.7 g/pkm).

VM: Paris has completely banned e-scooters again, in Munich there is a grace period from the mayor to ensure order. Do they solve more problems or create them?

JSS: This segment of mobility is still very young and certainly some mistakes were made during the introduction. But now, as you mentioned, there are many experiences from municipalities and operators. The durability of the products and the ranges are also significantly better today.

In a sensibly designed multimodal traffic concept, they will therefore also have their justification in the future and help make our cities more livable.

Of course, the regulations for micromobility still need to be refined: providers and urban planners should work together to better link micromobility with public transport. For example, mobility hubs and reliable intermodal travel planning tools should be set up for seamless transfers.

VM: Many providers started ambitiously, but failed due to high ongoing operating costs. Why do you believe money can still be made with micromobility?

JSS: It's true that it was barely profitable in the past. However, the future looks much more promising: products now have a significantly longer lifespan, ranges for electric micromobility have significantly increased, and competitive pressure will decrease due to consolidation. Additionally, concepts such as swappable batteries, designated parking zones, and more data-based rebalancing will continuously optimize operating costs.

VM: What potentials do you see for the transport transition through micromobility? So far, the vehicles are predominantly used in the leisure and tourism sector, in Munich, for example, e-scooters only replace car trips by five percent.

JSS: If micromobility is integrated into a meaningful comprehensive concept, it can play an important role. Also, in replacing car trips, which must be the goal.

We need a seamless transition from different mobility solutions.

Users need to be able to plan, book, and pay for their trips with public transport, taxi, carsharing, rental car, bike, or kickscooter from a single source. Mobility as a service (MaaS) apps also play an important role here. Studies show that, for example, in Helsinki, users of the Whim app actually rely on cars less often than other residents of the metropolitan area. In a comprehensive concept, micromobility plays an important role.

VM: Free parking is convenient for users, but it is a nightmare for cities and municipalities as well as other road users. Has free-floating failed?

JSS: Free-floating is certainly the most convenient form for end-users. However, it is important that they behave responsibly, which is unfortunately not always the case. I believe the future will lie in hybrid models that consist of a combination of stations and predefined parking zones. We are already seeing that geofencing makes a significant contribution to a "tidier" parking culture.