**2. Technical and spatial forms of urban mobility**

#### **2.1 Sweeping technological change**

The 2010s were a decade defined by the confluence of multiple technological advances, with a strong focus on mobility [5]. Various technologies developed over the preceding years were combined with a new sense of synergy: GIS, GPS and smartphones. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) allowing for the processing, mapping and administration of geographical databases, are utilised by Google (Maps, Earth, StreetView) and others. GPS tracking, providing precise geographical location data in real time, became available for each individual mobile entity (individuals as well as vehicles), with relatively inexpensive portable devices. Mobile telephone services mean that individuals are always connected, anywhere and anytime (network coverage). Touch-screen smartphones have become the ideal tool for user interaction with any service. Individual users have the power to organise their travel plans, see their position on a dynamic map, enrich that map with information of interest to them (addresses, traffic conditions, public transport routes and stations), get recommendations for accessing transport and planning routes, and even receive directions in writing or in audio form in the language of their choice. Moreover, these services can be combined with the vast array of multimedia functions offered by modern smartphones.

The rise of individual mobility management has been remarkable. To get an idea of this, we need only consider the task of planning a complex itinerary on a metropolitan public transport network, before and after the advent of online route search services.

Individual users are now masters of their own 'customer experience', designers of their own transport services [6]. Consider the familiar Plan-Book-Ticket steps of the 'customer experience' from a marketing theory perspective:

We will first examine recent technological advances in mobility services and mobility-adjacent services, with reference to the fundamental spatial components of transportation: vehicles, stations, lines and networks. We will then demonstrate how a ring system makes it possible to cover a relatively large geographical area while also establishing service cycles for shared vehicles. A simple geographical model will be provided to quantify the geographical potential of demand, with

*Models and Technologies for Smart, Sustainable and Safe Transportation Systems*

Of course, such services still need to be attractive, offering decent quality of service at an affordable price. These factors have been represented in a specific technical and economic model [1–4]. The 'Orbicity' generic model can be tailored to different types of service. The modal models share a four-tier architecture which involves, from bottom up, (i) the physical operations of the service and the laws governing its vehicle flow, (ii) the balance between journey supply and demand, (iii) optimised service management in terms of fleet size and fare price, (iv) the strategic positioning of the service in terms of technologies, conditionally to the

Using this model, we will examine a number of scenarios which incorporate two key analytical dimensions: the generation of technology used and the applicable regulatory framework. We will demonstrate that not only does technological progress considerably expand the scope of possibilities, but also that regulation plays a vital role. It is entirely possible to imagine a shuttle service offering very reasonable

The 2010s were a decade defined by the confluence of multiple technological advances, with a strong focus on mobility [5]. Various technologies developed over the preceding years were combined with a new sense of synergy: GIS, GPS and smartphones. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) allowing for the processing, mapping and administration of geographical databases, are utilised by Google (Maps, Earth, StreetView) and others. GPS tracking, providing precise geographical location data in real time, became available for each individual mobile entity (individuals as well as vehicles), with relatively inexpensive portable devices. Mobile telephone services mean that individuals are always connected, anywhere and anytime (network coverage). Touch-screen smartphones have become the ideal tool for user interaction with any service. Individual users have the power to organise their travel plans, see their position on a dynamic map, enrich that map with information of interest to them (addresses, traffic conditions, public transport routes and stations), get recommendations for accessing transport and planning routes, and even receive directions in writing or in audio form in the language of their choice. Moreover, these services can be combined with the vast array of multimedia

The rise of individual mobility management has been remarkable. To get an idea of this, we need only consider the task of planning a complex itinerary on a metropolitan public transport network, before and after the advent of online route search

Individual users are now masters of their own 'customer experience', designers of their own transport services [6]. Consider the familiar Plan-Book-Ticket steps of

the 'customer experience' from a marketing theory perspective:

reference to a few examples from France.

fares, and possibly even without public subsidies.

**2.1 Sweeping technological change**

functions offered by modern smartphones.

services.

**164**

**2. Technical and spatial forms of urban mobility**

applicable regulation regime.


These are mobility-adjacent services which add much value to the travel experience as a whole, a value felt more keenly for public transport trips than car trips. The provision of information, the capacity to search massive databases and the customisation features 'make up for' the dissociation between vehicle and user which is an inherent feature of public transport (a dissociation which is necessary at this higher level of organisation, but which represents a fundamental handicap for collective transport solutions in comparison with private vehicles).

The benefits on the demand side are not limited to these mobility-adjacent services. Operators and innovators have seized upon the opportunities offered by advanced technologies to invent (or reinvent) new mobility services and new vehicles:


Each of these sharing services depends upon a two-sided *digital platform*: a customer interface which handles the commercial operations, while the production side centralises the management and optimisation of resources.

If operators are capable of mobilising a fleet of vehicles and a team of service and maintenance personnel, they may also offer door-to-door services not dissimilar to a classic taxi service: Uber has emerged as the champion of so-called 'ride hailing' services accessed via mobile phone, combining the Booking, Planning and Ticketing functions into an extremely fluid user experience enshrined in a mobile app.

Other platforms offering car-sharing services (e.g. Drivy) or car-pooling, which are thriving for inter-urban travel (Blablacar), are yet to hit upon the magic formula for urban users.

All of these changes add up to form a new ecosystem, whose components mutually reinforce one another. While in transit, vehicles record information on the urban traffic conditions in real time, and this information is used to adjust the services on offer. The remarkable development of Uber has revolutionised taxi services in major metropolises and beyond (even as far as the distant suburbs of North America, cf. [7]).

The principle is similar to that of urban ring roads such as the Paris peripheral boulevard, which are more about distributing traffic flows than circumventing the

Transport lines which are relatively linear in shape are typically used for radial connections, linking dense zones (urban centres) to less densely-packed areas (the suburbs). The flow pressure is high on the dense side, and low on the less dense side. The ring form is more specifically suited to a relatively homogenous spatial milieu: the homogeneity of the milieu contributes to the effectiveness of the ringshaped service; reciprocally, the effectiveness of the service contributes to the

What is the potential user base for a ring-shaped service operating in a relatively

To answer, let us build up a simple model. Let A represent the surface area of the territory in question, and P its population. The mean density is P/A people per unit of surface area. Let *μ* represent the mobility rate per individual and per day, typically somewhere between 3 and 4 trips. In spatial terms, the hypothetical

Assume further, on a provisional basis, that the ring is a circle of radius R, and that along its whole circumference it attracts passengers from within a band 2ℓ wide – i.e. from a distance of at most ℓ from the pathway of the circular transport service. The total drainage basin for this infrastructure is thus equivalent to a

This drainage basin can be represented as a proportion of the total surface area

<sup>A</sup> ð Þ *limited to 1* (1)

*<sup>θ</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> <sup>4</sup>*<sup>π</sup>* <sup>ℓ</sup><sup>R</sup>

The key to using a loop transit system to transport products (e.g. water in buckets, to put out a fire) or people (e.g. a cable car) is to effectively combine the form of the circuit with the service cycle of the containers. The result should be a homogenous spread of load between the containers, with regularisation and

city altogether.

intensification of the overall rhythm.

*Towards Shared Mobility Services in Ring Shape DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94410*

homogenisation of the milieu.

**of a ring-shaped service**

surface area of 4*π* ℓR (**Figure 1**).

(A*)* of the territory:

**Figure 1.**

**167**

*Area served by a ring-shaped line.*

homogenous territory?

**3. Geographical potential and technical advantages**

'outbound density' is *μ*P*=*A trips per unit of surface area.

**3.1 Geographical principles: potential locations**

## **2.2 Questions of form**

The typical form of the *vehicle* as a mechanised, often motorised, form of transportation has been reinforced, with a diversification of models allowing for adaptations to local conditions: small electric vehicles in very dense urban areas where space is at a premium and pollutant emissions need to be kept to a minimum.

The typical form of the *road network* as a medium for multiple uses, a circulation infrastructure connecting different places, has also been confirmed. Shared services make use of the road network as their means of circulation and parking, and also recharging for electric vehicles.

Our notion of what constitutes a *station* has been diversified. Stations such as railway stations are fixed hubs with large numbers of users which serve as landmarks in the urban landscape. The positioning of bus and coach stops across the road network has become more visible thanks to mobile applications highlighting their location. Cycle hire stations are now being adapted to serve electric mobility options: the concentration achieved by grouping together the available spaces increases the probability of finding a free vehicle when it is needed (yet it puts a parking constraint at the trip destination). Meanwhile, free-floating services are challenging the very notion of stations: in fact, they are making every available parking space on the road network a potential station.

Ultimately, it is the form of the transport *line* which has been most affected by these changes. On the one hand, designated itineraries on the public road network are being challenged by automatic route-planning search engines which throw up any number of unlikely variants (such as cutting through a hospital courtyard, or taking a side street between two sections of much busier roads). Put simply, customised itineraries are taking over from established routes. On the other hand, public transport lines such as bus routes are now in competition with shared services, especially those routes where passenger numbers are not sufficient to justify a high-frequency service. The competition is greater still in less dense zones where collective transport services form only a loose network with large blind spots, too much distance between stops and a lack of effective connections to other segments of the network.

Some authors have even questioned the pertinence of rail transportation for long-distance travel from one suburb to another, floating the hypothesis that self-driving taxis could be used to collect passengers travelling from similar starting points to similar destinations, dropping them off at their respective destinations [8, 9].

#### **2.3 Origins of the ring form**

Certain public transport lines take the form of a ring: Line 6 of the Madrid metro, the Circle line on the London Underground, the Singapore metro, the systems in place in various Chinese cities, and even the 'Circulator' bus route in Washington. The main function assigned to these lines is to fulfil both the transmission and distribution of passenger flows [10].

*Towards Shared Mobility Services in Ring Shape DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94410*

All of these changes add up to form a new ecosystem, whose components mutually reinforce one another. While in transit, vehicles record information on the urban traffic conditions in real time, and this information is used to adjust the services on offer. The remarkable development of Uber has revolutionised taxi services in major metropolises and beyond (even as far as the distant suburbs of

*Models and Technologies for Smart, Sustainable and Safe Transportation Systems*

The typical form of the *vehicle* as a mechanised, often motorised, form of transportation has been reinforced, with a diversification of models allowing for adaptations to local conditions: small electric vehicles in very dense urban areas where space is at a premium and pollutant emissions need to be kept to a minimum. The typical form of the *road network* as a medium for multiple uses, a circulation infrastructure connecting different places, has also been confirmed. Shared services make use of the road network as their means of circulation and parking,

Our notion of what constitutes a *station* has been diversified. Stations such as railway stations are fixed hubs with large numbers of users which serve as landmarks in the urban landscape. The positioning of bus and coach stops across the road network has become more visible thanks to mobile applications highlighting their location. Cycle hire stations are now being adapted to serve electric mobility options: the concentration achieved by grouping together the available spaces increases the probability of finding a free vehicle when it is needed (yet it puts a parking constraint at the trip destination). Meanwhile, free-floating services are challenging the very notion of stations: in fact, they are making every available

Ultimately, it is the form of the transport *line* which has been most affected by these changes. On the one hand, designated itineraries on the public road network are being challenged by automatic route-planning search engines which throw up any number of unlikely variants (such as cutting through a hospital courtyard, or taking a side street between two sections of much busier roads). Put simply, customised itineraries are taking over from established routes. On the other hand, public transport lines such as bus routes are now in competition with shared services, especially those routes where passenger numbers are not sufficient to justify a high-frequency service. The competition is greater still in less dense zones where collective transport services form only a loose network with large blind spots, too much distance between stops and a lack of effective connections to other segments

Some authors have even questioned the pertinence of rail transportation for long-distance travel from one suburb to another, floating the hypothesis that self-driving taxis could be used to collect passengers travelling from similar starting points to similar destinations, dropping them off at their respective

Certain public transport lines take the form of a ring: Line 6 of the Madrid metro, the Circle line on the London Underground, the Singapore metro, the systems in place in various Chinese cities, and even the 'Circulator' bus route in Washington. The main function assigned to these lines is to fulfil both the

North America, cf. [7]).

**2.2 Questions of form**

of the network.

destinations [8, 9].

**166**

**2.3 Origins of the ring form**

and also recharging for electric vehicles.

parking space on the road network a potential station.

transmission and distribution of passenger flows [10].

The principle is similar to that of urban ring roads such as the Paris peripheral boulevard, which are more about distributing traffic flows than circumventing the city altogether.

The key to using a loop transit system to transport products (e.g. water in buckets, to put out a fire) or people (e.g. a cable car) is to effectively combine the form of the circuit with the service cycle of the containers. The result should be a homogenous spread of load between the containers, with regularisation and intensification of the overall rhythm.

Transport lines which are relatively linear in shape are typically used for radial connections, linking dense zones (urban centres) to less densely-packed areas (the suburbs). The flow pressure is high on the dense side, and low on the less dense side. The ring form is more specifically suited to a relatively homogenous spatial milieu: the homogeneity of the milieu contributes to the effectiveness of the ringshaped service; reciprocally, the effectiveness of the service contributes to the homogenisation of the milieu.
