What about Shared

Mobility?

Perspectives from ITDP’s present work in

Indian context

V. S. Vaidya
 Some stats.

India is said to be the 3rd biggest market for technology-based cab aggregators at
present. It is expected to grow to ₹ 46,900 crores ($ 70 billion).
Ola, an Indian company which started out in January 2011; now operates in over 100
Indian cities. Its fleet exceeds 3,50,000 vehicles – one of India’s “unicorn start-ups”
Uber, a multi-national corporation started in India in August 2013. Presently, it
operates in 23 cities in India with 2,50,000 drivers.
Jugnoo – an auto-rickshaw aggregator operates in 30+ cities
Urban units (statutory and census towns) are about 8,000 in number
Ola's market share of about 52% is believed to be approximately twice that of Uber's
share.
 Beginning with conclusion
Public policy mandate vis-a-vis shared mobility…

Develop;
Not merely regulate.

Enhancing mobility, yet:

• Lesser pollution,
• Diminished risks,
• Lesser use of space.
Why have such a policy? What we care for?

Stabilised
Reduced

VKT
PMVKT
 What informality also means..

The Chennai story:

“Shared autos” on the ground are about seven times more than the licensed shared autos
Both, licensed /non-licensed shared serve non-authorised routes.
Other vehicle types offer shared services without being licensed at all to do so.
Auto-rickshaws or other vehicle types with only "contract-carriage“ (hail /unique-destination
service) permits offering fixed-route, ride-sharing services.
ICT-enabled, on-demand aggregator cab services and certain taxi /rental services are
“semi-informal” (if not fully informal). These are not licenses as licensed services.
What informality causes?
 Shared mobility?? What should we focus on? [I]
Public vs. Commercial shared
mobility
-- PT’s mandate set in a way.
-- Issues regarding jurisdiction.
 Shared mobility? What should we focus on? – [II]

Non-vehicular /non-motorised
shared mobility
vs.
Motorised shared mobility
www.parkcirca.com vehicles
[whether all such parking is publicly
accessible or traded online by individuals
amongst themselves]

[whether private properties provide

parking spaces on a commercial model]
 Nothing succeeds like sustainability..

Versatility

Objectives aligned to sustainability principles –

Equity, Safety, Environmental-sensitivity,

Efficiency

Potentially & actually

less sustainable – More
vehicle technology
wise and /or ride-wise
sustainable...
Reasonable give and take required
More sustainable; more incentivised
The regulatory regime (including the market) fairly rewards or
incentivises the performers and penalises or disincentivises
the non-performers.

“Winner does not take all”

 3 key considerations /challenges [I]

Be flexible by focussing on objectives:

Make it easy for PMVs to double as CSM vehicles.
Encourage the future demand for new / pre-owned vehicles to be geared largely towards
deploying them for CSM services.

Focus on outcomes for shared mobility that are well-targeted and easily
measurable.
 3 key considerations /challenges [II]

Gauge performance of CSM services, CSM policy itself depending on

how they meet sustainable transport principles /objectives and respect
the relevant rights of passengers and drivers.
Get CSM to complement PT /NMT by duly integrating them all using of
state of the art technology
Channelise revenue from CSM to fund infrastructure for PT /NMT
balancing it with reight incentives.
 Intended consequences

The role of conventional and present day CSM recognised /formalised.

CSM, on the whole, encouraged and enabled to meet the challenges of:
a) increasing competition.
b) greater innovation.
c) changed expectations regarding responsible and customer-friendly service delivery.

Raised bar with regard to the latter for all CSM services /their facilitators.
A level playing field for all CSM models (ensuring more sustainable
options getting a greater play).
A mix of policies /plans.
 Principles – Objectives – Outcomes
Principles of sustainable
urban transport
Efficient use of resources
Environment friendliness
Safety of all
Proposed outcomes for
Proposed objectives
Motorised CSM
Motorised CSM will stabilise at 33% mode
share in the total mode shares of motorised
Make CSM formal and organised
vehicles by 2031.
Harness CSM to promote PT and NMT
Motorised CSM will contribute 20% on the
whole to finances for PT and NMT.
Make CSM sensitive to the environment by
limiting overall vehicle kilometers travelled 21% of motorised CSM rides will either originate
(VKT) and particularly reducing the PMV and or terminate at public transport facilities.
Kilometers travelled (PMVKT)
Regulate all CSM to ensure safety and
10% or less accidents will involve a motorised
security of drivers and passengers are not
CSM
compromised, but are in fact enhanced

21% of motorised CSM rides will either originate

Ensure a level playing field and accountability and or terminate in locations that are identified
Social inclusion and equity
for all CSM services as areas not served or underserved by public
transit - area-wise or time-wise.