《国际交通论坛：促进农村地区移动出行的创新发展（英文版）（112页）.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《国际交通论坛：促进农村地区移动出行的创新发展（英文版）（112页）.pdf（112页珍藏版）》请在三个皮匠报告上搜索。

1、Innovations for Better Rural MobilityInnovations for Better Rural MobilityResearch Report 2021The International Transport Forum The International Transport Forum is an intergovernmental organisation with 63 member countries.It acts as a think tank for transport policy and organises the Annual Summit

2、 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

3、 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

4、 knowledge and promote exchange among transport decision-makers and civil society.The ITFs Annual Summit is the worlds 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,Az

5、erbaijan,Belarus,Belgium,Bosnia and Herzegovina,Bulgaria,Canada,Chile,China(Peoples Republic of),Colombia,Croatia,Czech Republic,Denmark,Estonia,Finland,France,Georgia,Germany,Greece,Hungary,Iceland,India,Ireland,Israel,Italy,Japan,Kazakhstan,Korea,Latvia,Liechtenstein,Lithuania,Luxembourg,Malta,Mex

6、ico,Republic of Moldova,Mongolia,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,the United States and Uzbekist

7、an.International Transport Forum 2 rue Andr Pascal F-75775 Paris Cedex 16 contactitf-oecd.org www.itf-oecd.org ITF Research Reports ITF Research Reports are in-depth studies of transport policy issues of concern to ITF member countries.They present the findings of dedicated ITF working groups,which

8、bring together international experts over a period of usually one to two years,and are vetted by the ITF Transport Research Committee.Any findings,interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Transport Forum o

9、r the OECD.Neither the OECD,ITF nor the authors guarantee the accuracy of any data or other information contained in this publication and accept no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence of their use.This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereign

10、ty over any territory,to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory,city or area.Cite this work as:ITF(2021),Innovations for Better Rural Mobility,ITF Research Reports,OECD Publishing,Paris.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INNOVATIIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/

11、ITF 2021 3 Acknowledgements This report sets out the findings of the Working Group“Innovative mobility for the periphery”facilitated by Lucie Kirstein,Policy Analyst at the International Transport Forum(ITF)and chaired by Professor Laurie Pickup(Vectos/SLR).Initial meetings of the group were chaired

12、 by Haruo Ishida(Emeritus Professor at the University of Tsukuba in Japan)and supported by Asuka Ito(ITF).Substantive input and advice were provided by Steve Wright(Vectos/SLR).The principal authors and section co-ordinators were:Linda Randall(Nordregio,Sweden),Daniel Bell(Transport Canada)and Lucie

13、 Kirstein(ITF):“Introduction”.Lucie Kirstein(ITF)and Jenny Milne(University of Aberdeen):“The innovative rural mobility landscape”,with contributions by Moritz Alers(German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure),Hakan Uraz(REM Consult),and Jenni Eckhardt(VTT Technical Research Cen

14、tre of Finland).Steve Wright(Vectos/SLR)and Lucie Kirstein(ITF):“Frameworks affecting innovative rural mobility”,with contributions by Brendan Finn(MemEx),Alexander Klinge(Institute for Climate Protection Energy and Mobility IKEM,Germany),Liza Clyne(Transport Canada),and Brian Caulfield(Trinity Coll

15、ege Dublin,Ireland).John Nelson(University of Sydney,Australia):“Implications of Covid-19 for(innovative)rural mobility”.Lucie Kirstein(ITF),“Conclusions and recommendations”.Additional inputs were provided by(in alphabetic order):Jessica Berg(VTI,Sweden),David Caubel(Directorate-General for Infrast

16、ructure,Transport and the Sea DGITM,France),Azarel Chamorro(MiraiShare,Japan),Tom Cohen(University of Westminster,United Kingdom),Lucia Cristea(European Integrated Projects,Italy/Romania),Elias Eickelmann(IKEM,Germany),Shinsuke Ito(Rimono,Japan),Peraphan Jittrapirom(Radboud University,Netherlands),H

17、ibiki Kimura(Nishimura and Asahi,Japan),Soichiro Minami(Ministry of Land,Infrastructure,Transport and Tourism MLIT,Japan),Blathin McElligott(National Transport Authority,Ireland),Pekka Niskanen(formerly Kyyti Group,Finland),Martin Schiefelbusch(Public Transport Authority Baden-Wrttemberg mbH NVBW,Ge

18、rmany),Stefan Seer(Austrian Institute of Technology),Saori Shimokawa(Ministry of Land,Infrastructure,Transport and Tourism MLIT,Japan),Heidi Smith(Department for Transport,United Kingdom),Bruno Spandonide(Roads Corporation of Victoria,Australia),Philippe Ventjol and Mathieu Voisin(RATP,France).The r

19、eport was reviewed by Stephen Perkins(ITF)and edited by Gemma Nellies.The following countries participated in Working Group activities:Australia,Austria,Argentina,Canada,Chile,Denmark,Finland,France,Germany,Ireland,Japan,Latvia,Mexico,New Zealand,Norway,Poland,Sweden,the United Kingdom and the Unite

20、d States.Further contributors are listed in the Annex.FOREWORD 4 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 Foreword In the context of the rural mobility landscape in 2021,this report by the ITF is a landmark document that demands a strong legacy.It has involved 12 primary and 20 secondary

21、contributors,covering all global regions.The work of the group has revealed over 80 case studies of rural mobility innovation across the globe covering the whole spectrum of mobility systems implemented or in pilot phases,from national or regional authority initiatives to projects by individual tran

22、sport operators and local community groups.Why is this report so important now?While the economic and social divides between urban and rural areas continue to grow in all countries,it is essential to introduce pro-active policies to stimulate the economies of rural areas in the post-Covid age.Rural

23、societies are undergoing dynamic change a new mix of locals,incomers,homecomers and visitors(be they tourists or seasonal workers),many have traditional roots in the rural area,whilst others bring with them urban values and mind-sets.There is a mix of those rural areas in decline due to outmigration

24、,economies kept alive by money arriving from the growing diaspora working in other countries,and of those witnessing growth on their urban fringes as families move out of suburban areas in search of a more rural locations.Mobility is the glue that binds together rural communities and helps rural eco

25、nomies survive and grow,and yet this report has found that when other sectors develop strategies for growth that could boost rural economies,mobility is the very area that is often forgotten.Urban-based planners generally consider rural mobility as an afterthought and this report shows that few coun

26、tries have strategic policies for rural mobility.Indeed,in the rush to achieve a low carbon society,a new strong urban-based myopia is emerging,where there is a real danger that rural accessibility and mobility issues may be an even larger afterthought.Ludwig Wittgenstein famously states that:“the l

27、imits of my language are the limits of my world”.The words used to describe rural areas peripheral,outlying,marginal,etc.are urban words.Rural areas may be“peripheral”to city dwellers,but to rural communities,these areas are the centre of their worlds.This report importantly underlines that we need

28、rural-centric mobility policies,not adaptations of urban ideas.This report provides intelligence on a whole range of rural mobility initiatives that can be adopted and fine-tuned to local circumstances.However,perhaps the strongest message from this report is more political.We need rural mobility pl

29、anning that stems from people who live the rural experience and governance structures that can accommodate and support innovative mobility planning.There should be flexible forms of micro-finance from which rural communities can develop their own mobility initiatives,supported by specialist advisory

30、 bodies with initiatives feeding from core transport networks that are properly funded by governments Sustainable Regional Mobility Plans(SRMP)not an annex or afterthought to a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan(SUMP).If there is political will to do this,then the 2020s may see the negative trends in r

31、ural accessibility and mobility reversed,but now is the time to act.As chair of the working group,I would like to express my thanks to all those who contributed to this report,saving a special thank you to Lucie Kirstein of the ITF,who was the real engine behind the work of the group and the primary

32、 editor.Professor Laurie Pickup,International Director Vectos/SLR,November 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 5 Table of contents Executive summaryExecutive summary .8 8 IntroductionIntroduction .1111 Rural areas are conceptualised in different ways.11 Diverse

33、 factors shape individual mobility and transport provision.12 Effective rural transport provision beyond the core network.15 The role of innovative mobility.16 The innovative rural mobility landscapeThe innovative rural mobility landscape .1818 Shared mobility.19 Active mobility.33 Integration of mo

34、bility services.37 Frameworks affecting innovative rural mobilityFrameworks affecting innovative rural mobility .4646 Rural transport policy frameworks.46 Financial frameworks.54 Legal frameworks.64 Rural transport planning.71 Implications of CovidImplications of Covid-19 for innovative rural mobili

35、ty19 for innovative rural mobility .7777 The effects of Covid-19 on rural mobility.77 A new normal for rural public transport?.80 Longer-term impacts for rural mobility.81 Conclusions and recommendationsConclusions and recommendations .8383 From afterthought planning to holistic rural development st

36、rategies.83 The right mobility approach for different types of travel.84 Sustainable funding and more cost-effective service delivery.86 NotesNotes .8989 ReferencesReferences .9191 Annex A.List of Working Group members and observersAnnex A.List of Working Group members and observers .104104 Annex B.

37、Annex B.List of contributorsList of contributors .106106 Annex C.Annex C.Case study questionnaireCase study questionnaire .108108 Annex D.Country questionnaireAnnex D.Country questionnaire .109109 TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 Figures Figure 1.Elderly Depend

38、ency Ratio,2Figure 1.Elderly Dependency Ratio,2019019 .1414 Figure 2.Positive/negative growth index of the totFigure 2.Positive/negative growth index of the total population,2001al population,2001-20(2001=0)20(2001=0).1414 Figure 3.Mobility pattFigure 3.Mobility patterns among those aged 65+yearsern

39、s among those aged 65+years .1515 Figure 4.Social,economic and environmental challenges to be addressed byFigure 4.Social,economic and environmental challenges to be addressed by rural mobility innovationrural mobility innovation .1717 Figure 5.Rural sharedFigure 5.Rural shared-mobility offermobilit

40、y offer .1818 Figure 6.Suitability of shared mobility types by population density and settlement typeFigure 6.Suitability of shared mobility types by population density and settlement type .2020 Figure 7.Community transport initiatives in BadenFigure 7.Community transport initiatives in Baden-Wrttem

41、berg,GermanyWrttemberg,Germany .2424 Figure 8.Carpooling stop in the Grenoble and Vercors Regional NaFigure 8.Carpooling stop in the Grenoble and Vercors Regional Natural Park regiontural Park region .2828 Figure 9.EFigure 9.E-bike carbon reduction capability in northern Englandbike carbon reduction

42、 capability in northern England .3535 Figure 10.Example of a multipurpose mobility hubFigure 10.Example of a multipurpose mobility hub .3838 Figure 11.Potential Demand for Mobility Hubs in Midlothian,Scotland,UnitedFigure 11.Potential Demand for Mobility Hubs in Midlothian,Scotland,United KingdomKin

43、gdom .3939 Figure 12.Regional MaaS(RMaaS):Combination of local services and theirFigure 12.Regional MaaS(RMaaS):Combination of local services and their integration with the core networkintegration with the core network .4141 Figure 13.Transport services in the Tampere region of Figure 13.Transport s

44、ervices in the Tampere region of Finland Finland before and during the ALPIO pilot,2019before and during the ALPIO pilot,2019.4 42 2 Figure 14.Rural Transport Policies in EuropeFigure 14.Rural Transport Policies in Europe .4747 Figure 15.Layers of the Flemish Basic Accessibility PolicyFigure 15.Laye

45、rs of the Flemish Basic Accessibility Policy .4949 Figure 16.ThreeFigure 16.Three-level structure of rural mobility in the pilot district of level structure of rural mobility in the pilot district of SchleswigSchleswig-Flensburg,GermanyFlensburg,Germany .5050 Figure 17.Funding for the Irish Rural Tr

46、ansport programme and passenger growth,2016Figure 17.Funding for the Irish Rural Transport programme and passenger growth,2016-2020 .5959 Figure 18.Japanese Mobility as a Service projectsFigure 18.Japanese Mobility as a Service projects .6060 Figure 19.CoFigure 19.Co-ordinated mobility service deliv

47、ery using a single onordinated mobility service delivery using a single on-demand systemdemand system .6767 Figure 20.Use of local public transport in Sweden before and after the CovidFigure 20.Use of local public transport in Sweden before and after the Covid-19 pandemic19 pandemic .7777 Figure 21.

48、Returning to public transport,Australia,March 2021Figure 21.Returning to public transport,Australia,March 2021 .7878 Figure 22.Opportunities emerging with the CovidFigure 22.Opportunities emerging with the Covid-19 crisis19 crisis .8282 TABLE OF CONTENTS INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/IT

49、F 2021 7 Tables Table 1.Rural public transport usersTable 1.Rural public transport users .1313 Table 2.IndividualTable 2.Individual-and contextand context-related factors shaping mobility needsrelated factors shaping mobility needs .7373 Boxes Box 1.Challenges for the community transport sector in E

50、nglandBox 1.Challenges for the community transport sector in England .2525 Box 2.Rural carpooling in FranceBox 2.Rural carpooling in France.2727 Box 3.EUBox 3.EU-funded innovative mobility projects in rural areasfunded innovative mobility projects in rural areas .6161 Box 4.Flexible transport in the

51、 UnitedBox 4.Flexible transport in the United KingdomKingdom .6565 Box 5.Constraints for community transport in EnglandBox 5.Constraints for community transport in England .6868 Box 6.Impact of CovidBox 6.Impact of Covid-19 on community transport services:The Huntly Commu19 on community transport se

52、rvices:The Huntly Community Busnity Bus .7979 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 Executive summary What we did This report presents best practices and recommendations for transport provision in rural communities.It examines how sustainable accessibility for peopl

53、e without access to a car could be provided in cost-effective ways.The report uses 80+case studies from 20+countries collected through questionnaires,workshops and interviews to capture and assess a wide range of innovative service delivery models,including new forms of partnerships and public,priva

54、te and non-profit models.What we found There are long-standing deficits in rural transport.Policy,funding,institutional capacity,service provision,planning and research are not given the same attention as in urban areas.Very few jurisdictions have developed binding standards for the provision of bas

55、ic transport services.This is reflected in a very heterogeneous provision of mobility,even under single jurisdictions.The lack of strategic rural mobility or accessibility policies results in piecemeal short-term,programme-specific funding,which is a major obstacle to delivering integrated and effic

56、ient services.A lack of co-ordination often precludes efficient use of subsidies across administrations.Limited transport options in peripheral,rural and remote areas hinder access to basic services,jobs and social activities.Often just a few kilometres separate poorly served rural and peripheral ar

57、eas from public transport networks.To improve access for these populations,a number of countries are developing novel ways to provide economically viable,affordable,inclusive and sustainable mobility where private and conventional public transport struggle to provide appropriate connections.Instead

58、of playing catch-up with the innovations trialled in urban areas,there are great opportunities for rural mobility innovations to develop in their unique context.However,policy makers have yet to develop the right frameworks in which these mobility approaches can thrive and grow.What we recommend For

59、mulate a countrywide accessibility policyFormulate a countrywide accessibility policy and implement Sustainable and implement Sustainable RegionalRegional Mobility Plans(SRMP)Mobility Plans(SRMP)Countrywide strategic accessibility policy paired with Sustainable Regional Mobility Plans(SRMP)are key t

60、o improve equality of access to opportunities.This means policy makers must shift from programme-based support provided,for example,through rural transport funds,to broader policy-based approaches.Target-bound rural mobility policy at the national or provincial/state level should define minimum stan

61、dards(“mobility guarantees”)for access to local service centres and connection to a core network of inter-urban trains and buses.In addition,alliances of municipalities,or larger“transport regions”,should be responsible for the development of SRMP and local area services to ensure the mix of schemes

62、 and approaches in each area takes into account unique population needs and funding contexts.Mobility hubs should act as the glue between the core network and local services,accompanied by initiatives to integrate EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 9 trip planning

63、and booking on a regional or national level.A convenient and affordable transport offer does not only improve access,but also provides the basis for incentivising more sustainable mobility behaviours.Adopt a wholeAdopt a whole-ofof-government approach for rural public services and thgovernment appro

64、ach for rural public services and the local economye local economy To ensure efficient use of resources,and to achieve broader societal and economic objectives,rural mobility policy needs to be linked with the provision of public services,regional economic development,land-use planning,digital conne

65、ctivity and climate policies.Overarching objectives should include:improving access to basic services in rural areas,promoting transit-oriented development of larger rural settlements and extending access to broadband telecommunications networks.Make reMake regulations more flexible to allow for the

66、 development of innovative,costgulations more flexible to allow for the development of innovative,cost-effective mobility solutionseffective mobility solutions Operators of a greater variety of mobility solutions should be given legal status as public transport service providers,in order to benefit

67、equitably from subsidies or tax deductions.Specifically,tender and operator licensing requirements should be adapted to allow local taxi,demand-responsive and community transport providers to bid for public service contracts in rural areas.Combine public mobility Combine public mobility budgets to a

68、chieve cost savingsbudgets to achieve cost savings To achieve more efficient use of limited local resources there should be greater integration of transport services operating in the same rural areas,rather than providing separate services for the general public,students,non-emergency hospital patie

69、nts and social care clients.Introducing common vehicle standards to all service contracts would remove many of the legal barriers to co-ordinated delivery across general public transport,education and health services.Fund Fund pilot schemes to test innovative mobility conceptspilot schemes to test i

70、nnovative mobility concepts Time-limited funding should be reserved for genuine pilots and new initiatives.Such funding should be provided for sufficient periods to allow meaningful pilots to be carried out,monitored and evaluated,including through living labs or regulatory sandboxes.Implementation

71、should follow a participatory approach to better address local needs and strengthen local awareness and support for new mobility approaches.Prioritise financial support for innovativePrioritise financial support for innovative services according to higher impact levels rather than use of high servic

72、es according to higher impact levels rather than use of high techtech Many funding streams are currently geared towards high-tech innovation,while many low-tech but high-impact solutions,including different forms of private or non-profit demand-responsive services,face severe funding constraints.In

73、central funding decisions,high-tech approaches should not overshadow other high-impact,cost-effective approaches.Use innovative financing approaches to increase funding pools and viability of individuaUse innovative financing approaches to increase funding pools and viability of individual transport

74、 servicesl transport services Increased overall funding for rural transport services,can be achieved through contributions from third-party financing(e.g.the“versement mobilit”levy on medium-sized and large employers in France).Cross-subsidisation from urban to rural areas(e.g.through larger tenders

75、,including both urban and rural areas)and cross-sectoral funding involving education,health services and local businesses(e.g.local sponsorship for community transport,already common in Europe)are possible through such schemes.However,it is important to ensure that the use of funds from such specifi

76、c mobility tax systems avoids over-subsidising urban mobility through tax levied in both urban and rural areas.Rural Mobility as a Service(MaaS),in EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 particular,requires the assessment of other local services that can be combined

77、 with mobility to achieve a sustainable business model(e.g.in Japan local businesses contribute to financing mobility apps).Increase central government funding for shared and activIncrease central government funding for shared and active travele travel in rural areasin rural areas A significant prop

78、ortion of trips in rural areas are under eight kilometres(e.g.60%in German small towns and villages)and can be made without a conventional motorised vehicle.The potential for shifting to bicycles,and particularly electrically assisted bicycles,for shorter distances has not yet been fully exploited.R

79、ural mobility funds or Covid-19 recovery stimulus packages could be a way to fund rental and repair schemes and improve safe active mobility infrastructure outside cities,including within villages and to connect to mobility hubs.Provide technical assistance for rurProvide technical assistance for ru

80、ral mobility at the national or regional levelal mobility at the national or regional level Central government should develop a rural mobility technical assistance programme to build local capacity and provide access to centralised expertise,including legal and technical support,to accompany not onl

81、y local authorities,but also community based,bottom-up initiatives.Examples include the legal,funding and operational guidance targeted to small communities in France(France Mobilits Aides)and Germany(Mobilkon repository),the United States DOT Rural Transit Assistance Program,as well as the US Share

82、d-Use Mobility Centre Technical Assistance.Technical assistance can also be provided at the regional level,as for example in the German state of Baden-Wrttemberg,where community transport associations can receive technical and financial assistance,including for the digital integration of their mobil

83、ity service offer.Promote mobility hubs to connect local services to the core networkPromote mobility hubs to connect local services to the core network A core element of strategic rural transport policy is multimodal rural mobility co-ordination(e.g.at the regional level)for more sustainable,conven

84、ient and seamless travel.Mobility hubs are important to link the core network to local rural collective or shared services.Mobility hubs also offer possibilities to integrate local services and businesses to make waiting times more attractive.The scale and range of services offered through hubs will

85、 vary according to location and population density.Support the development of national or regional Mobility as a Service(MSupport the development of national or regional Mobility as a Service(MaaS)aaS)Digital integration for trip planning and ticketing purposes is important to better link local rura

86、l services and the core network.For MaaS,regional(e.g.Flanders)or national leadership(e.g.Denmark)is recommended to avoid multiple city-based apps overlapping in adjacent regions and creating interoperability issues.INTRODUCTION INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 11 Introduction Rur

87、al areas are conceptualised in different ways There is great diversity in how rural areas are conceptualised,as evidenced by widely differing value thresholds delineating rural and urban areas across jurisdictions(ITF,2021a).This report does not attempt to apply a common definition,but rather acknow

88、ledges this diversity and leaves room for the exploration of mobility solutions that are tailored to the needs of many types of non-urban communities that share similar challenges of car dependency and low density of demand for public transport.A geographical perspective Specific distinctions betwee

89、n rural and urban areas vary between countries and are often based on population counts or densities.For example,Denmark considers“built-up areas with at least 200 inhabitants”to be urban,with rural communities being those with less than 200 inhabitants(Statistics Denmark,n.d.).Canadas definition of

90、 rural areas has a similar population threshold(areas outside of settlements and with less than 1 000 inhabitants),but also incorporates a population density element(less than 400 inhabitants per square kilometre)(Statistics Canada,2017).At the other end of the spectrum,the population threshold betw

91、een rural and urban areas in Finland is 15 000 inhabitants(Statistics Finland,n.d.),and in Japan,settlements of up to 50 000 inhabitants are considered rural(MLIT,2018).Definitions of remote areas typically focus on proximity to other population centres,and often include value thresholds for variabl

92、es such as travel time,distance or cost.For example,in Scotland,settlements that are a 30-60-minute drive from a community of at least 10 000 inhabitants are considered remote,while settlements that are more than a 60-minute drive away from such communities are considered very remote(Scottish Govern

93、ment,2018).The OECD has a similar definition,classifying communities as remote if they are located more than a 60-minute drive from a functional urban area of at least 50 000 inhabitants(Fadic et al.,2019).Some countries,for example Australia and Canada,have developed indexes that measure levels of

94、remoteness for communities.Both are based on a measure of proximity to population centres,referring to travel cost in Canada(Subedi et al.,2020)and road distance in Australia(University of Adelaide,2020).An accessibility perspective Indicators of distance and driving time often obscure the actual ea

95、se of access for those unable to drive a car or those facing economic stress associated with car ownership.This is why some countries have conceptualised rurality or remoteness in terms of access to basic services,for example,health care,education and broadband connectivity(ITF,2021a).Here,it become

96、s relevant to consider the availability and affordability of transportation infrastructure and services,for example,access to a highway network or to air,rail or bus services.These factors relate the accessibility of basic services to connectivity,or the ease with which other locations may be reache

97、d(Lekakou,Remoundos and Stefanidaki,2021).Accessing basic services,while important,is but one of many reasons why people choose to travel.Travel for social reasons(e.g.visiting friends and family or tourism)and economic reasons(e.g.accessing employment,business opportunities or shopping)supports man

98、y aspects of overall well-being,such as preventing social isolation and generating income.A 2019 report on linkages between transport and inequality,summarised evidence of the importance of high-quality,accessible and affordable transport INTRODUCTION 12 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/IT

99、F 2021 options for obtaining and maintaining employment(Gates et.al,2019).The negative impacts of transport disadvantage on subjective well-being may be more pronounced for individuals living in rural areas,than those living in urban areas(Gates et.al,2019).A strict focus on service accessibility wo

100、uld miss these important drivers of mobility.A further accessibility aspect to consider is the growth of digital service provision,enhanced communications technologies and e-commerce,which may,in some instances,replace the need to travel.However,as the Covid-19 pandemic has illuminated,many jobs can

101、not be performed from home,not all services can be provided digitally,and people still value in-person social interaction(see the section on the Implications of Covid-19 for Rural Mobility).Mobility,therefore,will continue to have a role in meeting basic needs.Rural areas are shaped by social,econom

102、ic and political processes(Khn,2015).For example,labour market changes brought about by globalisation and technological change have resulted in many areas that could be considered peripheral from a geographical perspective also being“left behind”from a socio-economic perspective(Hendrickson,Muro and

103、 Galston,2018;Iammarino Rodriguez-Pose and Storper,2019).Socio-economic factors are important for understanding mobility,in particular,the extent to which they either limit or support the feasibility of private forms of mobility(e.g.access to a private car)or the pooling of demand that enables the p

104、rovision of publicly available transportation services.Farrington(2007)asserts the importance of socio-economic circumstances on accessibility:“Accessibility is at least as much about people as places.A place is not just more or less accessible,but accessible relative to people in all their differen

105、t circumstances:people experience more,or less,access to places.”As a result,access to services,economic opportunities and social activities may be quite different from place to place and even between individuals in the same place.Diverse factors shape individual mobility and transport provision Ter

106、ritorial factors Territorial factors play an important role for transport in rural areas.Island or mountain communities tend to have more limited choice when it comes to routes and modes of transport and these may be further limited by weather conditions(ITF,2021a).In rural areas without these geogr

107、aphical constraints,the greater distances between places of interest,and lower population density,makes the provision of public transport more costly,which leads to lower public transport provision and higher private car use compared to urban areas.Residents in rural areas are also less likely to en

108、gage in active travel(e.g.walking and cycling)than their urban counterparts.Socio-economic factors People travel to and from peripheral and rural communities for work,education,shopping,medical care,professional services,tourism,leisure and social purposes(Rozentale,Randall and Briggs,2020;Malatest,

109、2020).The ability to travel for any of these reasons is important for ensuring higher and stable incomes,better physical and mental health,and generally a better quality of life(Rozentale,Randall and Briggs,2020).At an individual level,access to mobility is shaped by a range of factors,such as,socio

110、-economic status(Haustein and Nielsen,2016;Lucas et al,2016),age(Haustein and Siren,2015;Haustein,2012;Ahern and INTRODUCTION INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 13 Hine,2015),gender and household composition(Bergstad et al.,2011;Miralles-Guasch,Martnez Melo and Marquet,2016).In rura

111、l areas where private car use is predominant,public buses and other shared mobility solutions often cater to a highly diverse audience,such as low-income individuals,seniors,students and people with reduced mobility(Haustein and Nielson,2016;Malatest,2020).Several studies(Lvia et al.,2020;Rozentale,

112、Randall and Briggs,2020;Malatest,2020;Brake and Nelson,2007)have identified populations with a greater need for rural public transport services(Table 1).T Table 1.Rural public transport usersable 1.Rural public transport users LowLow-income earnersincome earners Some people cannot afford to live in

113、larger communities/cities or to own a vehicle,so they may choose to live further away,where goods and services are not as accessible,in exchange for affordable housing.Likewise,those living in rural communities may not have access to high-paying jobs,which results in lower-income households.Persons

114、with reduced Persons with reduced mobilitymobility Some people have difficulty driving or accessing transportation due to physical impairments or limitations(e.g.people using wheelchairs,those with sight impairments,etc.).SeniorsSeniors While demographics in rural areas vary across the world,many ru

115、ral communities are experiencing an ageing population(Lvia et al.,2020).Seniors tend to fall into a variety of categories that can make them more vulnerable(e.g.low income,reduced mobility,decreased autonomy,unable to drive,etc.).Older populations also tend to have increased health needs,which may r

116、equire them to visit medical centres more frequently(Lvia et al.,2020;Rozentale,Randall and Briggs,2020).YouthYouth Young people are less likely to have stable or high-income jobs,less likely to have a vehicle,generally have less autonomy,and may have a higher need to travel for educational purposes

117、.Indigenous and Indigenous and“traditional”rural“traditional”rural communitiescommunities Indigenous communities(for definitions see ILO Convention 169 ILO,1989)differ widely across the world,but despite urbanisation trends,many still inhabit sparsely populated areas where goods and services are not

118、 easily accessible(e.g.Australia and Canada).1 Whilst these communities may consist of people from all of the populations described above,some may face additional economic stress and structural discrimination.Living in rural or remote areas is often framed as a lifestyle choice that implies the need

119、 to trade-off certain expectations and is used as a justification,in various countries,to rationalise public services in low density areas.However,there is also increasing recognition of the historical context and the strong ties that such communities may have with the region they inhabit,and with t

120、his comes greater political will to improve the living conditions for these groups.Anyone who cannot/does Anyone who cannot/does not drivenot drive Beyond the populations described above,anyone who cannot or does not drive could be considered more likely to rely on public transportation.For example,

121、some rural residents may not feel comfortable driving in the winter time or because of poor road conditions.Demographic factors From a demographic perspective,people living in regions far from metropolitan areas tend to be older than people living in metropolitan areas(see Figure 1).Further,the prop

122、ortion of the population over the age of 65 years is predicted to grow more quickly in rural areas in many countries.For example,in the United Kingdom the group aged 65+years is predicted to grow by approximately 50%in rural areas between 2018 and 2043,while virtually no increase is predicted among

123、the younger population aged 16-24 years(information provided by the UK Department for Transport).The global trend towards urbanisation is resulting in slower growth,or even population decline,in many remote areas as young people out-migrate to a small number of urban centres(Figure 2).INTRODUCTION 1

124、4 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 Population ageing is a challenge for communities as it leads to increases in local expenditure,such as(special)transport and community services for the elderly.In addition,population ageing also reduces local direct tax revenues as a result of th

125、e decrease in the number of formal labour market participants(Kim and Dougherty,2020).Figure 1.Elderly Dependency Ratio,2019Figure 1.Elderly Dependency Ratio,2019 Percentage of population aged 65+divided by population aged 15-64 Note:Weighted averages of small regions(TL3).Source:OECD Regional Stati

126、stics(database),http:/dx.doi.org/10.1787/region-data-en.Figure 2.Positive/negative growth index of the total population,200Figure 2.Positive/negative growth index of the total population,2001 1-2020 (2001=0)(2001=0)Source:OECD Regional Statistics(database),http:/dx.doi.org/10.1787/region-data-en.At

127、the same time,increases in life expectancy and improved health into older age in many countries is greatly increasing the diversity of mobility behaviour among those aged over 65 years(Figure 3).0Metropolitan regionsRegions near a metropolitan areaRegions far from a metropolitan areaElder

128、ly dependency ratio(%)-40-30-20-50Predominantly urban regionsIntermediate regionsRural regionsINTRODUCTION INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 15 Figure 3.MoFigure 3.Mobility patterns among those aged 65+yearsbility patterns among those aged 65+years Source:Developed by th

129、e authors based on Haustein and Siren(2015).Effective rural transport provision beyond the core network Recognising the geographic,socio-economic and demographic challenges discussed above,many countries aim to improve public transport provision to revitalise rural areas.However,only a few regions d

130、efined a legal right to a minimum level of service locally(e.g.several districts in Germany and Switzerland).In a number of countries,transport provision is largely left to the open market,which results in operators cherry-picking the few core profitable routes and neglecting less profitable,but non

131、etheless important,local networks.Although rural areas,under many conceptualisations,are expansive in a geographic sense and home to significant sectors of the population,overarching frameworks to guide rural transportation policy making are rare(see the later section on“Frameworks affecting innovat

132、ive rural mobility”).The result is that rural mobility challenges are often addressed within policy frameworks that take urban areas as the starting point and are ill-equipped to respond to the unique circumstances in rural communities(Dick,Brand and Tovaas,2020).Working Group experts have therefore

133、 argued that transport provision in rural or sparsely populated areas should be part of a broader strategy recognising local needs.This includes a coherent governance structure to provide connections across three hierarchical levels:(i)the core train and bus network,as a competence of the state,prov

134、ince or region;(ii)branch networks providing inter-village or feeder traffic,as a responsibility of the region or an alliance of smaller regions;and(iii)local tailor-made services that cover the last mile(s)provided or purchased by the municipality or a co-ordinated group of municipalities.INTRODUCT

135、ION 16 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 The role of innovative mobility Given the diversity of rural circumstances,locally anchored,innovative types of mobility are often best equipped to provide critical links to conventional train and bus networks.Such local provision plays an i

136、mportant role to ensure complete and convenient travel:from cities or towns to rural areas and vice versa within rural areas and between villages and settlements within a municipality with dispersed settlements or villages of a larger size.Innovative mobility is not necessarily based on new technolo

137、gical approaches.This Working Group understands innovation as having three basic components.First,an innovation may be either a product,a process or a combination of the two(Edwards-Schachter and Wallace,2017;Gault,2020).It could be a new mobility offer(e.g.a new carsharing programme),a process chan

138、ge that increases the uptake of an existing solution(e.g.introduction of an online booking system),or a social or institutional process that results in the identification or application of a new mobility approach(e.g.a social innovation).Second,not every innovation needs to start from scratch.A well

139、-established mobility solution may be considered innovative if it is novel in the particular context in which it is being applied.It is important to recognise that no single innovation provides all the answers and different approaches are suited to different territorial,demographic and governance co

140、ntexts(Randall et al.,2020).Third,innovative mobility approaches should contribute to sustainable development from a social,environmental and economic standpoint(Edwards-Schachter and Wallace,2017).Figure 4 illustrates the key challenges for rural mobility innovation from these three standpoints.App

141、roaches that are prohibitively expensive for most people,or that dramatically increase the carbon footprint of a community,are not considered innovative by this definition.At the intersection,innovative approaches should acknowledge the way that global megatrends such as digitalisation,globalisation

142、 and urbanisation play out in different ways in different places.From a social perspective,perhaps the most important aspect is the diverse nature of rural communities.As noted above,many rural and remote communities are dealing with challenges related to population ageing and out-migration of the w

143、orking-age population.For some communities,new mobility approaches may be part of a strategy to turn this around,while for others,innovations may focus on finding ways to adapt to new conditions(Copus et al.,2020).It is also important to recognise that,despite an overall trend towards urbanisation,m

144、any peripheral communities are thriving(Kull et al.,2020).Responding to diversity is an important step in developing innovative approaches to mobility that cater effectively to community need.From an economic perspective,the biggest challenge is how to develop mobility approaches that can be sustain

145、ed in the long term.Demographic challenges,coupled with the sparsity and low density that characterises many peripheral communities,can make service-provision costs prohibitively high for the public sector and an unappealing business proposition for the private sector.In the face of this,some advoca

146、tes argue for a targeted policy response that would guarantee the funding and support that rural communities need to provide mobility for all residents(Lorenzini,Ambrosino and Finn,2021).The basic assumption here is that everyone has a right to a basic level of mobility,regardless of where they live

147、.INTRODUCTION INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 17 Figure 4.Social,economic and environmental challenges to be addressed by rural mobility innovationFigure 4.Social,economic and environmental challenges to be addressed by rural mobility innovation From an environmental and social p

148、erspective,it is important to recognise the importance of social justice in the green transition.Shared mobility approaches form an important part of the solution,particularly when it comes to supporting those who do not have private mobility options or for replacing the second car(Steger-Vonmetz an

149、d Steinwender,2014).It is also important to bear in mind that,for many rural communities,eliminating the private car altogether may not be a viable option.Particularly in more sparsely populated areas,cars are likely to remain a vital means through which to access social and economic opportunity.As

150、such,longer-term solutions may also play an important role.For example,financial models that increase the accessibility of electric vehicles,support the generation of clean energy,and mobility responsive approaches to community planning.This also involves promoting the shared use of cars through car

151、pooling and carsharing initiatives,as well as integrating private modes with mobility hubs.Three key questions arise at the intersection of the social,economic and environmental spheres.Addressing these questions is central for defining future rural mobility approaches:How can new mobility approache

152、s respond to the diverse needs of rural areas,while at the same time,remaining politically and financially viable in the long term?How can rural mobility approaches support an environmentally friendly transition,while improving access to opportunities,services and activities?What financial models ar

153、e most suited to supporting environmentally friendly rural mobility approaches?With these questions in mind,the report draws on a range of examples from across the participating ITF member countries to highlight innovative approaches to mobility on the periphery that are already taking place.Further

154、,it considers the role of different policy frameworks and funding models in supporting the implementation of these approaches in a diverse range of settings.Finally,it considers the implications of the Covid-19 pandemic for rural areas and offers a new approach to rural mobility in a post-Covid worl

155、d.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 18 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 The innovative rural mobility landscape Flexible and innovative mobility services that are adapted to the unique local circumstances are the best way of ensuring critical links to core public transport n

156、etworks.This section looks at innovative services mode by mode and summarises recent experiences with non-conventional shared services,active mobility and the integration of different modes,including mobility hubs and rural Mobility as a Service(MaaS)(Figure 5).Integration through mobility hubs,trip

157、 planners and integrated ticketing represents the glue between different modes that ensures uninterrupted and convenient travel chains.Figure 5.Rural sharedFigure 5.Rural shared-mobility offermobility offer Despite increased interest from policy makers,new mobility approaches are rarely implemented

158、on a large scale and lack integration with the wider transport network.One reason for this is the current policy,funding,legal and institutional environment,which is discussed further in the next section.Working Group THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD

159、/ITF 2021 19 findings from over 80 case studies show that innovative mobility services have enormous difficulties competing with the private car and with very low uptake in comparison to urban areas.These findings are also reflected in previous studies.For example,the EU SMARTA project evaluation ha

160、s shown that pilot services often attracted less than 1%of the population(unpublished evaluation report).Multimodal trip planners were used less than 10 times per day on average(e.g.Martin et al.,2021).Overall,services were rated positively by users,which may suggest that more time was required for

161、knowledge about these services to disperse and uptake to gather momentum.Numerous pilot projects underestimated the time to properly set up a service and overestimated the speed of user behaviour changes.More effective marketing targeted at specific user groups and introductory offers and rewards,e.

162、g.vouchers or temporary reductions and free tickets,could help attract ridership in the first phase(e.g.SaMBA,2019).Covid-19 has affected the implementation of many recent mobility pilots.This makes it challenging to draw meaningful conclusions on the potential success of these options.On the other

163、hand,studies have also demonstrated the resilience of flexible transport services,with patronage recovering much more quickly than scheduled buses,possibly due to their ability to flexibly allocate resources and ensure social distancing due to pre-booking(see section on the“Implications of Covid-19

164、for(innovative)rural mobility”).Shared mobility The local shared mobility offer is an important building block to complement the existing core transport network.Different approaches,including rural demand-responsive transport(DRT),community or volunteer transport,ridesharing,carsharing and autonomou

165、s buses are explored in this section.Figure 6 provides an overview of the geographic contexts in which different service types tend to work best,depending on distances,settlement patterns and population densities.The upper quadrants show service types that work best in more densely populated rural a

166、reas.For example,authorities are increasingly replacing regular bus services with DRT,in some cases combining subsidised transport,such as school and health transport,as well as services for people with special needs.These services often require pre-booking in sparsely populated areas,particularly w

167、here a small fleet may cover a wide geographical area.In contrast,demand-responsive microtransit or shared ridesourcing emerging in more densely populated areas outside of cities can operate with a much larger vehicle fleet covering similar distances to the previous example,but with the capability t

168、o enable an almost instant response to booking requests(Volinski and Raton,2019;Lewis,2019).Similarly,station-based carsharing and bikesharing both require a critical mass to function,and are therefore suited mainly for village or small-town centres,where residents live in close proximity to the ser

169、vices offered.Autonomous vehicles(AVs)as a public shared mobility option are primarily being tested in rural towns where distances are small,and infrastructure and settlements relatively dense.On the lower part of the figure,in areas with very low and dispersed demand,peer-to-peer carsharing,ridesha

170、ring or hitch-hiking solutions are advantageous,as the services can harness existing assets and trips that would have been made anyway.This can also include the sharing of buses(e.g.a community pool of minibuses)where the vehicles are collectively owned(by the municipality,local company or community

171、 group)and made available for shared use by the municipality,members of certain local organisations or for members of the public.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 20 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 Figure 6.Suitability of shared mobility types by population density and sett

172、lement typeFigure 6.Suitability of shared mobility types by population density and settlement type Note:The shaded areas show where certain provision models are generally best suited.Some settlement structures lend themselves to more than one model.Demand-responsive transport(DRT)Rural DRT is a hybr

173、id between bus and taxi services,involving flexible routing and scheduling of small-or medium-sized vehicles.DRT services utilise technology to integrate orders and optimise routes.Customers may pre-order the service through call-centres and/or mobile apps by placing trip requests,including informat

174、ion on the origin and destination of the trip,as well as the desired pick-up or drop-off time.Pick-ups and drop-offs are organised either door-to-door or based on pre-defined or virtual stops.New operational possibilities through improved routing algorithms and user,driver and management interfaces

175、have sparked renewed interest in the use of DRT for public transport.DRT can contribute to multiple societal goals and provide benefits including:increasing access for people with diverse mobility needs(accessibility),completing the travel chain(modal shift,environmental),service viability through f

176、lexible use of resources(economic),and improving rural livelihoods(social,economic and demographic).An important benefit of DRT is its potential to increase accessibility for specific population groups.For example,an evaluation showed that demand for DRT services appeared to be higher in areas with

177、low car ownership and population density,as well as high levels of social deprivation(Wang et al.,2014).In areas outside Melbourne(Australia),key parameters affecting the use of DRT included gender(higher DRT use by women),low income and workforce status(Jain et al.,2017).Several studies have found

178、women to be dominant users of DRT(Mageean and Nelson,2003;Nelson and Phonphitakchai,2012;Bearse et al.,2004).Results from a DRT pilot in Vidzeme(Latvia)showed that 85%of users were women,and the average age was 60.Among the Flemish Belbus users,74%are women and 66%of users are over 45 years THE INNO

179、VATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 21 of age(De Lijn Centrale Diensten,2014).The French La Saire DRT service caters mainly to users under the age of 18(Padam Mobility,2020).DRT has the potential to encourage modal shift and reduce the need for a(secon

180、d or third)car(Jokinen,Sihvola and Mladenovic,2019).France Mobilits reports that DRT journeys are generally made in connection with journeys using regular public transport,and that by covering the last mile,DRT encouraged modal shift for the entire trip(France Mobilits,2020).Reduced car dependence a

181、s a result of the introduction of a DRT service has been examined in Finland.The assessment of the Kylkyyti service in Porvoo showed that 67%of trips made with the new service would otherwise have been made by car,while 27%would not have made the trip at all.As a result of the trial,driven kilometre

182、s were reduced by 12.6%,thus a reduction of 10 923 km and saving 2.6 tonnes of CO2.2 Of the total kilometres saved,36%would ordinarily have been undertaken as taxi rides(Eckhardt,Lauhkonen and Aapaoja,2020).DRT usually plays two different roles in the transport system:“interchange DRT”plays the role

183、 of a last-/first-mile service that acts as a feeder for scheduled fixed-route transport(Enoch et al.,2004).“substitute DRT”where DRT replaces a fixed-route service,or“network DRT”when the DRT service enhances public transport in a particular place or at certain times.Used in these ways DRT can step

184、 in where public transport with fixed routes and schedules are inefficient and costly due to long distances,sparse population and varying mobility needs(Enoch et al.,2004).DRT is also used to bundle fixed-route services and other subsidised minibus or taxi services,such as paratransit,school and eld

185、erly transport.A number of DRT services are specifically conceived as feeder services,helping to secure the viability of the core transport network.The Dutch Hubtaxi is a DRT system in the provinces of Groningen and Drenthe that brings passengers to the closest public transport or mobility/multipurp

186、ose hubs(Reisviahub,2020a).Other examples are FlexHop in rural areas outside Strasbourg(France)and Lincolnshires CallConnect DRT service(United Kingdom),which guarantees connections to the core network by offering a substitute taxi ride as a last resort.In New South Wales(Australia),the Opal Connect

187、 App allows DRT users to earn AUD 2 travel credit whenever they use DRT as a feeder to a fixed-route service(although this facility has yet to be rolled out to rural and regional locations).Complementarity requires careful design and co-ordination to avoid competition with regular public transport.I

188、n Catalonia,co-ordination and operation within the regular service network is mandatory(Generalitat de Catalunya,2020).The Swedish Nrtrafik services allow trips only when there is no public transport alternative,e.g.between certain hours and in certain areas(Kirsimaa and Suik,2019).If a regional bus

189、 departs within 30 minutes before or after the requested departure time,ILSE,a flexible service in the German district of Vorpommern-Greifswald,does not take passengers directly to their destination,but to a stop on the regional line.3 The JustGo DRT service in North Lincolnshire(United Kingdom)prom

190、otes the fixed-route service through its app,to limit competition and generate capacity for those travelling where a regular bus service is not an option(Liftango,2021).There are numerous examples where DRT has replaced regular public transport.As one of the largest contemporary trials,in New South

191、Wales(Australia),on-demand services are implemented to replace fixed-route buses in some regional centres and rural areas to deliver better value-for-money services and increasing patronage(Transport for New South Wales,2021;Franco,Bell and Galatioto,2012).Other examples are the Italian Prontobus an

192、d the Flemish Belbus,which replaced only parts of the scheduled off-peak services to guarantee mobility in regions with a very low transport demand at specific times.FlexDanmark,initially used for specific user groups,is a well-established nationwide on-demand service THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY L

193、ANDSCAPE 22 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 open to all citizens that provides an average of 15 000 trips per day.It is currently the worlds largest,most co-ordinated and centralised DRT system.Cost savings for the public sector are estimated at 20-40%(Lynott,2019a).Important sav

194、ings result from the integration of various subsidised services(regular buses,transport for health,school transport,etc.)into a single DRT service,as discussed in the next section on policy,funding and legal frameworks.Setting up a DRT service can involve high costs and there have been doubts as to

195、whether DRT can be generalised due to the high subsidies(up to EUR 20-25 per trip in France,CERRE,2021)and comparably low patronage in some contexts(Coutinho et al.,2020).In the first year of operation,an average cost per trip of USD 80(June 2018)and farebox recovery of 3%,compared to 24%for fixed-r

196、oute services,was reported for DRT services in rural New South Wales(Nelson and Wright,2021,forthcoming).In areas with low and dispersed demand,there is a risk that the DRT service could become a(possibly heavily subsidised)individual taxi service.Nevertheless,there are examples,as with CallConnect

197、in Lincolnshire or the Vidzeme region in Latvia,where the subsidy required for DRT is approximately the same as that required for the former,much less effective,fixed-route services.This has been achieved by the lower costs of operating smaller eight-seater buses,making this type of operation much m

198、ore affordable for the level of service provided than conventional services,although the low volume of passengers in a deeply rural area means that the subsidy per passenger is always going to be high.For these sparsely populated areas,lower cost solutions,such as those involving volunteers could be

199、 considered(see the next section on community transport).DRT does not always fit the specific operational context and users preferences.Frequent reasons for people not using DRT include uncertainty about travel and arrival times,waiting times at the(virtual)bus stop,as well as the risk that addition

200、al ad-hoc passengers disrupt some pre-booked passengers journeys.Some services require pre-booking,meaning less flexibility and more effort from users although this provided DRT with an advantage over conventional public transport during the Covid-19 pandemic,allowing for better social distancing.In

201、 many cases,bookings are subject to availability(some rides can be declined)and cannot be made through regular public transport apps.Inadequate operation times or limited geographical coverage can also deter users.In Ajoie,a rural district in Switzerland,a community has switched back to hourly buses

202、 to achieve higher cost-efficiency and ridership.The change had a strong effect on demand(from 371 000 passengers in 2011 to 760 000 in 2015)and hence a positive impact on cost recovery levels.Other reasons for low uptake of DRT are issues in attracting competent and reliable operators,as well as in

203、sufficient marketing and consideration of user needs.Where implementation of DRT has been difficult,careful analysis of demand and use of advanced technology,including improved dispatch algorithms and careful planning and marketing,could change the results(e.g.Connected Places Catapult,2020).Attenti

204、on should therefore be directed towards better knowledge of local needs and an operational design that best caters to diverse user demands.The Good Practice Guide for DRT services by Brake,Mulley and Nelson(2006)provides a comprehensive overview of planning and operational considerations,which remai

205、ns relevant in todays marketplace.Policy takeaways:DemandPolicy takeaways:Demand-responsive transportresponsive transport The experience with DRT is mixed,despite wide agreement that DRT is generally the most suitable means to cater for the diverse and dispersed demand in rural areas.Finding the rig

206、ht operational model can hugely influence the success of the service.DRT services should be implemented based on careful consideration of the operational environment,funding arrangements and user needs.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 23 The

207、 role of DRT in the overall rural mobility landscape needs to be clarified on a case-by-case basis:Are they feeders or stand-alone mobility solutions?Do they complement or replace traditional public transport services?Are fees and ticketing part of the public transport system or are they structured

208、and paid for separately?Should they be open to the general public or limited to certain user groups?Where possible,consolidate less financially viable regular public transport operations with various types of small-scale local transport,such as Dial-a-Ride,non-emergency patient travel,elderly and pa

209、ratransit,small deliveries and school services into a single service to achieve savings for the public sector.Ensure that the DRT service is co-ordinated with public transport,e.g.automatic interaction between the DRT and timetables of regular public transport.Ensure flexible bus services connect to

210、 a hub or feed into main transport links.Promote DRT integration into trip planning tools,as well as local or national ticketing systems.Design effective strategies to inform and onboard users.Involve users with diverse profiles and backgrounds directly in the design of the services to strengthen co

211、mmunity ownership,awareness and acceptance,e.g.through local schools,employers,religious institutions,associations,etc.Community transport Community transport(CT)services are usually not-for-profit local transport solutions organised in a“bottom-up”manner by local residents according to the specific

212、 needs of their community.For example,In Ireland,a Community Transport Service,as defined under the Taxi Regulation Act 2013,as“a transport service provided by persons concerned for the social and welfare needs of one or more communities,without financial gain for the person providing the service or

213、 another(volunteering),and where the payment for a journey or in respect of passengers using the service does not exceed the cost of providing the services in respect of the journey”.While all types of CT share a similar approach in terms of implementation and organisation,the types of solutions can

214、 differ.The services can be divided into fixed-schedule and DRT services,most of which are based on the involvement of volunteers.Buses owned or hired by an association tend to be the most frequent application,however some services are also provided by mobility companies or with private cars.A great

215、 variety of volunteer services can be found in the German state of Baden-Wrttemberg(Figure 7).Other types of non-profit initiatives,such as ridesharing,carpooling and carsharing are discussed further below.The most important benefits of CT are the low-cost transport coverage improvements through the

216、 involvement of volunteers,and associated social cohesion effects.They often have a high level of efficiency and effectiveness,as they are designed by and targeted to the specific needs of the citizens of their area.CT services originate mostly in rural areas where public transport is difficult to m

217、aintain financially,thus fuelling the need for other models.However,in regions where some form of public transport exists,CT can effectively bridge gaps by providing users with a last-mile connection to public transport and in this way,CT projects have contributed to the development of the existing

218、bus service networks.4 CT also brings with it social co-benefits(Canning et al.,2015;ECT Charity,2020).While volunteer drivers in Germany or the United Kingdom are often younger pensioners,in Luxemburg,the need for additional transport services was combined with the need to offer job opportunities f

219、or low-skilled workers and THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 24 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 resulted in the dial-a-ride service Bummelbus,which combines rural mobility services with a professional work reinsertion project(SMARTA,2019a).While many associations advertise

220、the need for drivers on their website,the rural Mobility as a Service(MaaS)app developed in Tompkins County(New York)has integrated a feature for volunteer driver recruitment,which supports the idea of“prosumers”an individual who is both a consumer and a producer being an integral part of rural MaaS

221、(Eckhardt,2020).It has been shown that the bottom-up organisation of CT often leads to a stronger integration of citizens from the communities where such services are implemented,thus significantly improving social life in rural municipalities.Figure 7.Community transport initiatives in BadenFigure

222、7.Community transport initiatives in Baden-Wrttemberg,GermanyWrttemberg,Germany Note:Red=community bus,blue=citizens car(volunteer-based DRT),green=bus services for special user groups,yellow=car services for special user groups,grey=other community transport.Source:Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Baden-Wrt

223、temberg,NVBW(n.d.).CT still faces several constraints,ranging from a lack of know-how,funding,legal recognition(see section on legal frameworks below),co-ordinated support at a higher level,as well as recruitment of personnel,exemplified by the challenges for the English CT sector(Box 1).Although CT

224、 is a low-cost alternative to conventional services,some CT provision may be less resilient due to uncertain status,sponsorship and operational models relying on volunteers.Additionally,despite its manifold benefits,the possibilities of CT are often overlooked by national and regional transport auth

225、orities as it is misperceived as a“niche”service.Communities often lack knowledge about where and how to start a CT project and where to go for information,support and guidance on the implementation of their own CT service.Basic information,such as how to start a community bus scheme,a demand-respon

226、sive dial-a-ride service or community health transport,is often difficult to obtain.CT services are often technology-light,with highly manual scheduling and operating systems,making them costly to run and unattractive to younger user groups.Many CT services still sit entirely in isolation from the r

227、est of the public transportation network.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 25 Box 1.Challenges for the community transport sector in EnglandBox 1.Challenges for the community transport sector in England Innovation funding for rural areas The

228、UK Government tends to channel rural funding and resources towards private initiatives.As rural mobility will never be profitable,commercial organisations withdraw their service after the funding period,leaving community transport(CT)to pick up the demand,often without the required funding to suppor

229、t them.Where funding is provided,it is often in the form of short-term grants or partnerships that leave CTs financially insecure and unable to plan for the long term,repeatedly having to use their limited resources to bid for new funding.Community leadership Each organisation operates uniquely,acco

230、rding to their local communitys specific needs and resources and this may create challenges,including:a.difficulty replicating successful models in other areas successes in one area may not translate directly into another area where there are differing resources and needs b.differing levels of suppo

231、rt local authorities differ in their budgets,expertise and willingness to support and fund CT c.lack of public awareness smaller grassroots organisations often lack the exposure and financial resources to advertise their services d.varying levels of organisation differing levels of co-ordination can

232、 create difficulties in building networks to share good practice and expertise.High proportion of older staff and passengers People with mobility issues and who require more accessible forms of transport,such as CT,tend to fall into the older age category.Meanwhile,only drivers who passed their driv

233、ing test before 1997 are able to drive a minibus without restrictions;while those who passed their test after 1997 must undergo further training to receive additional qualifications and certifications(PCV D1 and Driver CPC)to enable them to operate a minibus.Training is expensive,so many CT organisa

234、tions rely on older drivers who do not need to undergo training.This combination of factors means that CT suffers from a number of hurdles:a.The pool of available drivers is dwindling ageing drivers with a pre-1997 licence are gradually retiring from driving/volunteering.CT organisations have to wei

235、gh-up the long-term costs,risks and benefits of training drivers.In particular,there is a risk that CT operators may fork out considerable sums to train younger drivers who later leave the organisation.b.Reliance on unpaid labour requires CT operators to be more flexible in the demands placed on vol

236、unteers.For example,more leeway might need to be given if a volunteer wanted to drop out of a certain shift at the last minute,than if they were a paid member of staff.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 26 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 c.CT suffers from social stigma as it

237、 is often seen as a service exclusively for certain user groups,predominantly older people who are excluded from less accessible forms of transport,as well as those with disabilities.This leads to further challenges in the perception of CT:decision makers in governments,local authorities and transpo

238、rt bodies often overlook CT and its benefits as it is seen as a“niche”service that is not relevant to wider needs misconceived perceptions of CT create difficulties in reaching other user groups who may also suffer from transport exclusion,but who do not feel comfortable to use CT as it is seen as a

239、 service that is“not for them.”Source:Statement provided by the UK Community Transport Association(unpublished).Some countries are beginning to address these challenges.In the United Kingdom,for example,the Community Transport Organisation provides CT services an established network structure to bui

240、ld upon.In Germany,the state of Baden-Wrttemberg has introduced several programmes to support CT initiatives,including digitalisation and integration.The state mobility agency(Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Baden-Wrttemberg,NVBW)has its own competence centre for“unconventional”forms of public transport,whi

241、ch supports local authorities,municipalities and residents in developing and operating CT.Furthermore,manuals and IT tools are available to support route-planning,operation and management.This support,however,is not generally available across the rest of the country.To go further,an in-depth evaluat

242、ion of volunteer-provided transport in Germany recommends support on all administrative levels(Kommunen Innovativ,2020):communal level platforms for information exchange among citizens,contact points for advice,co-ordination and networking among different initiatives,(co-)funding of services state/p

243、rovincial level co-ordination and networking,stable dedicated funding programmes,short and easy application procedures,information on eligibility for further funding,knowledge transfer,support for regional or communal advisors central/federal level legal clarification and distinction from taxi and c

244、ommercial DRT operators,clarification of licensing and insurance requirements.Policy takeaways:Policy takeaways:Community transportCommunity transport Offer easy-to-access information about how to start up and finance a community bus or taxi scheme,demand-responsive dial-a-ride service or community

245、health transport.Shorten and simplify funding application procedures.Assistance by experienced personnel on federal,state or regional level helps to integrate and connect CT with existing transport networks(e.g.Local Link in Ireland,KOMOBIL35 recommendations for Germany)and improve levels of profess

246、ionalism in CT service models.This support should take place without endangering unique CT operating models,which are often adapted to local circumstances and needs.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 27 Ridesharing Peer-to-peer ridesharing or

247、carpooling and formalised hitchhiking have a high potential in rural areas by tapping into an existing pool of vehicles and drivers.Ridesharing among private individuals has particularly high economic and environmental benefits,as this can be implemented with relatively low effort,possibly linking i

248、nto existing informal or social ridesharing networks,especially in less densely populated areas and simply adds passengers to rides that would have taken place in any case.There are different types of formal ridesharing services:arranged carpooling commute-share or long-distance closed network carpo

249、oling trips to and from the same workplace,school or other location organised on a closed platform flexible or ad-hoc carpooling,including hitchhiking.Key components are a registration platform for drivers and passengers,and a marketing campaign to achieve the desired network effect.In some cases,a

250、network among commuters working for one or several employers makes the service work(e.g.Liftshare in Scotland).Registration can be completed via app,website or personally through a local administrator.Once registered,users can request rides or be picked up at a designated hitchhiking stop.To increas

251、e the level of trust,it is usually possible for passengers to check the drivers affiliation and identity through identification cards or stickers on the vehicle.Carpooling can be provided for free or by charging a fare for the passenger that covers part of the driving expenses.Offering rides does no

252、t require a commercial transportation permit and damages are usually covered by the drivers or passengers liability insurance.While carpooling itself can only be carried out on a non-profit basis,the platform provider may charge extra fees for matching drivers and passengers(e.g.BlablaCar).The statu

253、tory Regional Transport Partnership for the South East of Scotland(SEStran),offers carpooling for each area on its website through an add-in by Liftshare.In Germany,the Mitfahrbnkle carpooling ad forum is provided on the municipalitys website.In Japan,some municipalities offer carpooling,however thi

254、s option is seen as a“last resort”as people often favour more traditional forms of public transport,rather than travelling with private individuals.Although carpooling is generally offered separately to the public transport provision,targeted subsidies for drivers have been tested(e.g.in France,see

255、Box 2).Formal hitchhiking is constructed as a free or low-cost voluntary service,where passengers wait at officially designated spots for passing private drivers to take them on their journey.Since the mid-2010s,local authorities in rural areas in Austria,Belgium,France,Germany and Switzerland have

256、started to formally support hitchhiking.This support has taken the form of hitchhiking stops(e.g.Mitfahrbnkle5)and hitchhiking networks,such as RezoPouce in France.Another possible option is the introduction of co-operatively owned ridesharing services,such as Eva Coop ridesharing in Montreal,a mode

257、l that is also applicable in low density areas,since individual co-operatives handle their own local governance,but a single platform supplies standardised technology and a brand name federating the members(The Reboot,2021).Box 2.Box 2.Rural cRural carpoolinarpooling in Franceg in France In France,4

258、0%of the population lives in areas that are not connected to public transport(AcoT,2020).In predominantly rural areas,54%of the population does not have access to a bus stop within THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 28 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 10 minutes walking dista

259、nce of their home(Orfeuil/Observatoire des Ingalits,2017).At the same time,many arterial roads between cities and surrounding rural areas face high congestion levels at peak times.Carpooling is one of the solutions promoted in France to address both a lack of public transport accessibility and high

260、traffic levels.A spontaneous carpooling model is being developed in France by Ecov.Passengers can use dedicated carpooling stops and enter their destination via a pushbutton panel,SMS,or mobile application.This information is sent to drivers who use the application and is displayed on illuminated si

261、gns located above the carpool stop.A few minutes later,a driver alerted to the presence of the passenger by the app and/or the light panels stops to pick up the passenger and drop them off at the desired stop.When the car stops,passenger and driver can identify each other with a carpool membership c

262、ard or a code,which makes it possible to organise cost sharing and activate safety features(Ecov,2021).Some schemes guarantee the waiting time(Greater Lyon,Grenoble and Rennes)if no driver appears within 10 minutes,a departure guarantee is triggered by the Ecov telephone assistance(e.g.taxi pick-up)

263、.The carpooling service is sometimes integrated into multimodal trip planners and the transport pass.For example,actions under the new Mobility Orientations Law(LOM)included the establishment of a consolidated national database referencing more than 2 300 carpooling locations in the National Access

264、Point for mobility data(Ministry for the Ecological Transition,2020).Digital carpooling providers,such as PIM Mobility(https:/pim- public transport timetables,self-service electric bicycle services and other complementary carpooling services.In some cases,the schemes include financial incentives for

265、 drivers.6 Trips between the Pays Voironnais and Grenoble are currently free for passengers,and drivers are compensated for providing seats(EUR 1 per journey made during peak hours)and for each passenger transported(EUR 2 per person)(MCovoit Lignes+,2020).At the beginning of 2020,the spontaneous car

266、pooling solution Synchro set up in Grand Chambry and Les Bauges reached 200 carpooling trips per week with an average waiting time of 3 to 6 minutes(Ecov,2020).Figure 8.Carpooling stop in the Grenoble and Vercors Regional Natural Park regionFigure 8.Carpooling stop in the Grenoble and Vercors Region

267、al Natural Park region Source:Ecov(n.d.).As with Ecov,other operators provide technical assistance in building local carpooling lines,such as La Roue Verte and Fleetme.Programmes such as LiCov and AcoT are public-private consortia financed by tradable Energy Savings Certificates(ESC)7 that support r

268、egional carpooling schemes financially and through co-creation processes with municipalities and the local population.Constraints for ridesharing in rural areas include low awareness and trust by residents,as well as the lack of sufficient offers and requests to make the service work(Lygnerud and Ni

269、lsson,2020).When matching THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 29 becomes a challenge,enthusiasm for the idea often fades and initiatives stop.To be effective,these solutions require support from local municipalities and cultural acceptance,idea

270、lly covering users of an entire area beyond single neighbourhoods and small communities.Design Thinking and other iterative processes that involve communities directly can also help to secure demand and help onboarding riders and drivers(Simmons,2021).Policy takeaways:RidesharingPolicy takeaways:Rid

271、esharing Provide local political and administrative support to help carpooling services reach a critical size and achieve a network effect.Communicate about local opportunities in order to encourage people to adopt the practice,targeting a mind-set change and making the services as attractive as pos

272、sible.Evaluate possibilities to subsidise drivers per kilometre driven to increase the pool of drivers(along the lines of initiatives tested in France).Develop dedicated infrastructure that includes carpooling parking and hitchhiking benches,ideally integrated with public transport and multipurpose

273、mobility hubs.Carsharing Carsharing schemes(or car clubs)are based on an organisational set-up providing individual motorised mobility within a(collective)sharing scheme,where the ownership of the vehicles(cars,vans,transporters,etc.)is legally separated from the use.Both station-based and peer-to-p

274、eer carsharing can be suitable in rural areas.The station-based form operates with fixed stations in publicly accessible spaces,car parks or garages,whereas the peer-to-peer model relies on individuals renting their car through a platform.Carsharing is differentiated from the traditional car-rental

275、concept by immediate or short-term availability and accessibility,cost-structure and convenience.Users register once with the carsharing service provider,identifying and checking the validity of their driving licence,and can subsequently use the operators fleet as required.In its most contemporary f

276、orm,registered users can book the vehicles in advance through a mobile app,using a smart card or PIN number to unlock and operate the vehicle.Cars are pre-booked for a set amount of time,which can be adjusted during usage,depending on the availability of the vehicle.Prices are usually based on a per

277、 minute or per hour basis,which in most cases includes all related costs(lease,maintenance,insurance,taxes,gasoline,etc.)up to a specific time or mileage threshold.Some providers offer daily rates.The common model of choice for rural carsharing initiatives is the station-based model.While the free-f

278、loating model provides a higher degree of flexibility,it is not sustainably operable in low density rural and peripheral areas.Large distances and a widespread customer base would prevent the vehicles being located in proximity to the users and“floated”back to denser pick-up locations.The stationary

279、 model has lower time-bound prices and is usually used for longer trips particularly suitable in rural areas.The stations are usually established in central high frequency locations such as town halls,community centres or other service clusters(e.g.market squares,banks).Another model is peer-to-peer

280、(P2P)carsharing,where individuals rent their car to private users.The service operator only provides the marketplace(usually via app),booking,payment and insurance services(e.g.Getaround,Turo,Snappcar).This type of model allows for longer distances than traditional carsharing schemes,and often serve

281、s as an alternative to short-term rental.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 30 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 Unlike in big cities,carsharing in rural areas is not usually a viable business model.The services are often provided by voluntary associations or co-financed by mu

282、nicipalities.Rural carsharing schemes have only recently started to emerge.In Germany,for instance,there are now 446 rural municipalities and small towns with a carsharing offer,which represents only 4.6%of all communities with less than 20 000 inhabitants(Bundesverband Carsharing,2021).A carsharing

283、 station can require a significant investment,especially if it is connected to modern e-mobility fleets,which require charging infrastructure on site as well as within the service territory of approximately 200-300 kilometres.Vehicle investment and maintenance costs are high,which can be offset by a

284、 large consistent membership and secure utilisation of vehicles.Booking,dispatching and payment systems,related ICT infrastructure and the operational costs are further expenses to be considered.E-Wald,a Bavarian carsharing provider,is one of the few successful commercial operators whose business mo

285、del is based on rural carsharing(Kirchhahn,2019).The business model of carsharing in small towns and rural areas is therefore largely socially oriented,with greater involvement of local municipalities and associations(Rotaris and Danielis,2018).Many rural carsharing schemes offer volunteer driving s

286、ervices which transport vulnerable users(e.g.elderly,youth,disabled),combining carsharing with social ridepooling elements(e.g.Cozycar in Belgium,E-Wald throughout Germany,and mobine in the German county of Cuxhaven).8 These non-profit co-operative structures often operate based on cost-based fees,r

287、equiring subsidies as well as voluntary contributions.As the customer base is generally low,prudent planning,co-development and needs assessment with the local residents is required to provide the optimum fleet size to cover the related costs.Some schemes are co-financed through sponsorship and co-b

288、randing by local employers,including banks and energy providers.Carsharing can work best in rural areas in a complementary way to other shared mobility options.The Needles Carshare Program in rural California,is an example of a subsidised public-private carsharing undertaking.Around 70%of the progra

289、mme cost is covered by utilisation revenue.The Victor Valley Transit Authority(VVTA)subsidises the programme,which means there is no membership cost or sign-up fee.Bookings can be made online or through a carshare kiosk for users without access to the Internet.Unbanked residents can use payroll debi

290、t cards specifically created for the carshare programme in partnership with a financial technology company(Godavarthy and Hough,2019).In Finland and Germany,hybrid carsharing allows individuals to book cars from municipal fleets when they are not otherwise being used.Municipalities have made vehicle

291、s they manage available to the public,referred to as“community-initiated hybrid carsharing”(Peltomaa and Tuominen,2020;E-Wald,2020).This model makes more efficient use of underutilised assets and increases viability in areas where there is usually not enough demand for conventional market-based cars

292、haring.Depending on the scheme,vehicles are either available at all times for users or their use can be limited to administrative use during business hours and only available to private users outside of these hours.In the case of E-Wald,operational matters,insurance and maintenance are organised by

293、the provider and 50%of revenues for a booking go back to the municipality.E-Wald also offers this scheme to local employers and housing providers.Besides conventional vehicles,many rural carsharing initiatives have a focus on e-mobility,thereby contributing to fleet electrification and charging infr

294、astructure outside of cities.9 The project“shared e-fleet”uses corporate fleets in rural areas and makes them available through carsharing on weekends and after work hours(Fraunhofer IAO,2016).Applications of vehicle sharing can also include buses(e.g.a community pool of minibuses)where the vehicles

295、 are collectively owned by the municipality,local company or community group(e.g.mobine and Drpsmobil).Such vehicles may then be made available for shared use by municipality departments for THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 31 transporting t

296、heir clients,by organisations providing a service for their members or for members of the public,often for social assistance purposes.When integrated with the wider public transit network and local tourist infrastructure,carsharing schemes can contribute to making peripheral destinations more attrac

297、tive and ease the pressure of excessive car influx on local communities.10 National or regional authorities,local communities,research and innovation institutes and civil society can work collaboratively to scale-up successful local services.11 Although carsharing can contribute positively to enviro

298、nmental objectives and accessibility in peripheral and rural areas,barriers remain for non-drivers,i.e.the young,elderly and people with disabilities.Carsharing is not always affordable for low-income populations,with prices often higher than public transport(e.g.EUR 8 per hour and EUR 50 per day in

299、 a Finnish example).When carsharing does not effectively complement the local public transport provision,but instead such schemes realise(partial)substitute effects,there is a risk that carsharing can lead to lower public transit ridership and a subsequent reduction in service.Residents who are depe

300、ndent on accessible and affordable mobility options would disproportionally suffer from such squeeze-out effects.A well-balanced,well planned and inclusive carsharing offering is paramount to avoid exclusionary repercussions of such sharing schemes.Instead of treating carsharing as a standalone,supp

301、lementary offer,carsharing schemes need to be integrated and aligned with the wider transport system and relevant sustainability targets.Cultural acceptance of carsharing services plays an important role in generating sufficient demand.For those driving and owning a car,a switch to carsharing may br

302、eak current social norms and may be associated with a certain degree of dependence,uncertainty or insecurity.Lack of public awareness and familiarity also affects acceptance and use,as people often do not fully understand the function and benefits of carsharing.In Austria,success relied on leadershi

303、p by local mayors using the service themselves and thus setting a positive example.High-level political support from the city council or mayor was also considered a crucial aspect for the success of hybrid carsharing schemes in Finland(Peltomaa and Tuominen,2020).Policy takeaways:CarsharingPolicy ta

304、keaways:Carsharing Focus on carsharing in smaller rural and peri-urban communities.In dense urban environments the risk that carsharing may develop as a competitor for public transport is higher than in more sparsely populated rural areas,however it is still important to align carsharing schemes wit

305、h the wider transport system to avoid substitution effects.Build up socially oriented business models involving local associations and other non-profit actors.Make municipal fleets available to carsharing users through hybrid public-private carsharing schemes.Autonomous buses The use of autonomous v

306、ehicles(AVs)could make rural transit cheaper to operate in the future an appealing opportunity,especially for structurally weak regions facing staff shortages(e.g.Japan).Three types of services could benefit from AVs:fixed-route transit,DRT and ridesourcing.Japan is one of the first countries to tes

307、t autonomous driving as part of the public transport offer in regional towns.The acute shortage of drivers,high driver cost(often around 60%of the operating cost)and the THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 32 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 increasing accessibility needs of a

308、n ageing population,have led some rural towns to adopt autonomous buses.Boldly,a Softbank company,is running autonomous buses in the rural town of Sakai,Ibaraki.The self-driving vehicles,constructed by the French company Navya,can carry 11 passengers at speeds of up to 20 km/h.While the incumbent bu

309、s company,Asahi,has reduced operations and is limiting operations to the main axes,the AVs are being deployed as a feeder service on smaller predefined routes that are not served by the larger buses.A staff member must be on board for safety and legal reasons.The service is currently provided for fr

310、ee to passengers.Co-funding by the municipality is secured until 2025.Digibus(Austria),the feeder service to the Ecosite Val de Drme(France)and the autonomous shuttle in Bad Birnbach(Germany),are further examples of autonomous public transport applications.Despite several promising trials,challenges

311、 related to complexity,cost and user acceptance remain.It is currently difficult to significantly reduce staff costs and to operate autonomous shuttles without the presence of staff on board to ensure safety,provide information,resolve technical issues or assist people with reduced mobility.Remote c

312、ontrol of the vehicle might reduce staff costs,but could face some initial acceptance issues with users,especially regarding the feeling of safety in isolated areas where immediate personal assistance cannot be guaranteed.Autonomous driving technology has several important operational requirements t

313、hat may be more difficult to meet in rural areas(Bosworth et al.,2020),particularly relating to:Digital connectivity underdeveloped telecommunications networks and the lack of a reliable support structure may be a significant obstacle to the uptake of AVs.They are heavily dependent on uninterrupted

314、connectivity to surrounding infrastructure,such as 4G and 5G networks,as well as sensors and devices placed around operating areas.Variable landscapes and infrastructure rural areas may contain more unexpected obstacles,as well as more challenging natural environments and infrastructure.There is oft

315、en little or no road surface markings and natural surroundings can change significantly from one season to another.Distance the rural“first mile”may be significantly longer than the urban“first mile”,especially in villages or small towns with a large and dispersed hinterland.It would be necessary to

316、 cover a larger distance at a higher speed in order to adapt services for passengers in sparsely populated areas.The potential of autonomous shuttles is currently limited to very predictable rural environments and small town centres.In several countries,the first step has been to create a legislativ

317、e framework that allows the testing of autonomous cars on public roads.However,many jurisdictions do not yet allow regular operation without a driver or support staff on board.Several countries restrict trials in terms of time and location and require official authorisation.Policy takeaways:Autonomo

318、us busesPolicy takeaways:Autonomous buses Conduct further AV trials to overcome technical challenges linked to rural environments.To provide an effective service in rural areas,the distances covered will need to be extended,requiring higher speeds.In addition,full technical autonomy needs to be reac

319、hed and manufacturing and user processes standardised to bring costs down.THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 33 Active mobility Cycling in rural areas is valuable as a standalone mode of transport or to bridge the last mile(s)to access branch

320、services and the core transport network.Cycling is suitable for short journeys of up to 5-10 kilometres(e.g.paths between municipalities or from a small settlement to the neighbouring village)and for accessing stations and mobility hubs.Common obstacles to bicycle use in rural areas are the lack of

321、safe cycling routes,longer distances and uphill stretches.Long distances are the main obstacle for walking,as well as missing or unsafe walking routes in villages.There are a number of measures that can address these issues,such as the provision of quality rural pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure

322、(e.g.Germany,the United Kingdom and the United States).Other promising approaches include(e-)bike rental schemes,user education and government or employer incentives.Infrastructure Providing safe infrastructure is key for making active mobility more attractive in rural areas.Policy measures include

323、road-space reallocation,improving infrastructure,restricting car access or reducing speed limits on routes into towns to protect and enable cycling(Philips,Anable and Chatterton,2021 forthcoming).While these adjustments may involve significant investments in rural areas(in the order of EUR 500-1 000

324、 per metre,Coldefy,2020),the environmental,health and social benefits compared to private vehicle infrastructure is undeniable.Mobility survey data show that safety,the amount of car traffic and the lack of separated lanes are key reasons why people do not travel by bike in rural areas.12 In the pas

325、t,funding has been typically focused on infrastructure for motorised vehicles and there has been little investment for active mobility.Consequently,few tools are available for the prediction of demand and active mobility infrastructure planning in rural areas.There may be important suppressed demand

326、 for more active mobility in rural areas,specifically for short trips to school or local shops.Analysis of origin-destination data,as well as trip distance and topographical features,could inform where new cycling infrastructures may have the most potential.For example,the Propensity to Cycle Tool(P

327、CT)for England and Wales provides an evidence base to inform cycling investment.13 The mapping tool also informs where gender differences in cycling are largest.Pedestrian and bicycle planning has traditionally been analysed from an urban design perspective,rather than a rural or regional planning p

328、erspective(Aytur et al.,2011).Many national cycling plans do not include objectives and targets for rural cycling.However,there is a need and desire in many rural areas and small towns to make active travel safer.In 2021,Ireland put in place its first ever major active travel investment programme de

329、dicated to rural areas(EUR 72.8 million),which exceeded the entire 2019 national funding for walking and cycling(National Transport Authority,2021).The German national cycling plan released in April 2021 recommends doubling annual investment by 2030 compared to 2020,to reach an average expenditure o

330、f around EUR 30 per person per year,although actual spending commitments have not yet matched this recommendation(Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure,2021).Only complete,or almost seamless,networks create a perception of sufficient safety,comfort and accessibility that will moti

331、vate residents of all ages and abilities to use these networks to reach services,shops or a neighbouring community(Federal Highway Administration,2016).Although,regions and districts often lack the co-ordinating competence needed to set up comprehensive cycling networks between different municipalit

332、ies.For this reason,Germany plans to establish cycling competence centres at the state level and a central co-ordination office for the national cycling network.Spatial integration of active mobility with other transport modes is important to allow for intermodal travel between rural areas and citie

333、s.Connections to mobility hubs,as well as bicycle parking and storage THE INNOVATIVE RURAL MOBILITY LANDSCAPE 34 INNOVATIONS FOR BETTER RURAL MOBILITY OECD/ITF 2021 facilities at bus and train stations are effective tools to support first-/last-mile cycling(e.g.Flanders,Belgium and Groningen-Drenthe,Netherlands).The National Cycling Strategy in Germany puts emphasis on integrating cycling needs in