ITS Monday: Edition 2, 2026

Who is inclined to embrace sustainable options in on-demand mobility?

Another from the Institute of Transport and Logistics‘ series of Working Papers, this one co-authored by Andrea Pellegrini and Andres Fielbaum. The abstract:

Shared on-demand mobility can be made more sustainable, but this often involves trade-offs in comfort and cost. For example, electric vehicles emit less CO2 but may require higher fares to compensate for charging time, while walking segments can reduce vehicle-kilometres travelled by avoiding detours, yet offer less comfort than door-to-door services.

This study examines travellers’ willingness to choose more sustainable shared mobility options and identifies which users are most likely to make such choices. To do so, we apply an integrated choice and latent variable model to data collected via a discrete choice experiment (DCE) administrated to a sample of residents of the Greater Sydney Area, Australia. Specifically, respondents were presented with three shared mobility options, two of which required walking to reach pickup or dropoff points.

Each option was described by a set of attributes, including waiting time, in-vehicle time, emission reduction relative to conventional vehicles, walking time and price. In addition to completing the DCE, respondents answered a series of attitudinal questions designed to capture key travel-related dimensions: safety of car, pro-walk orientation, time sensitivity, and variety-seeking behaviour.

Results indicate that respondents who place high value on car safety are less likely to choose carbon neutral trips, whereas pro-walkers are more inclined to select shared mobility services that involve walking to PUDO points. The results are then used to compute willingness to pay values for five distinct user profiles.

Our main findings are that (i) Users are generally willing to pay a higher fare to reduce emissions; (ii) Personalized sustainability options yield greater participation and emission reductions than uniform policies; and (iii) Regular public transport users show higher willingness to walk, highlighting potential synergies between on-demand mobility and transit.

Roadspace allocation between autos, buses, and bicycles with heterogeneous demand

Another academic paper, this co-authored by Yang Gao, Andres Fielbaum, and David Levinson. The abstract:

The allocation of road space among different transport modes has long been a key issue in urban planning, yet it lacks solid theoretical foundations. This paper investigates the optimal allocation of road space among three transport modes: private vehicles, buses, and bicycles, for overall system performance.

The travel time for each mode is determined based on travel speed derived from fundamental diagrams (FDs). Changes in bus travel time are the least sensitive to excessive demand, as the number of buses is only indirectly affected by demand. A mode choice equilibrium framework based on deterministic user equilibrium is proposed to handle cases with and without heterogeneity in passengers’ waiting time thresholds for buses.

Analytical and numerical results reveal that the optimal road space allocation strategy depends on the demand level. Without considering passenger heterogeneity, the optimal strategy is a corner solution – allocating all road space to one of the three transport modes. When heterogeneity is considered, low and medium demand levels result in all space being allocated to private vehicles and bicycles, respectively.

For high demand levels, the optimal solution is a non-corner solution, where road space is allocated to both buses and bicycles, and the proportion allocated to buses increases as demand rises. The initial road space share for buses significantly influences system performance. Crucially, this induces either a virtuous or vicious cycle that impacts public transport usage.

The threshold for this effect is around 0.4, meaning that allocating approximately half of the road space to buses is critical, and this threshold decreases as demand increases. This study highlights the importance of tailoring road space allocation strategies to demand levels to maximize transport efficiency.

Related iMOVE articles:

• Active Transport: Info, Projects & Resources

Related iMOVE project:

• Evaluation and implementation of shared spaces in NSW
• Optimising multimodal transport networks: Sharing road space

Cross-sectoral synergies for household energy savings: the role of electric vehicles, solar photovoltaics, and remote work

You guessed it, another new academic paper, this one co-aiuthored by Shivam Shardaa Nicole Viz,Venu M. Garikapati,Konstadinos G. Goulias and Katelyn Stenger. The abstract:

Over the past two decades, new technologies and behavioral shifts – such as electric vehicles, solar photovoltaics, and increased work-from-home practices – have reshaped residential electricity consumption and cost. However, their combined or synergistic impact on a household’s electricity cost remains unexplored.

Leveraging data from the 2020 Residential Energy Consumption Survey, this study uses a structural equation model to unravel the extent to which the bundled adoption of EV-PV and stay-at-home decisions impact the total electricity cost of households. Results indicate that adopting both EVs and PV reduces electricity costs by 31% despite a 16% rise in consumption.

When combined with stay-at-home practices, households still experience a 13% cost reduction, even with a 25% increase in electricity consumption.

These findings suggest that financial savings are not merely a byproduct of adopting new technologies or behavioral changes but could serve as a key consideration for household contemplating engagement with multiple modern energy solutions simultaneously.

Related iMOVE article:

• Electric Vehicles: Info, Projects & Resources
• The Conductor Series: The electrification of transport

Related iMOVE projects:

• An afterlife ecosystem for electric vehicle batteries
• Leading the charge in bi-directional charging
• Utrecht to Australia: Unlocking scalable, low-cost V2G
• Being a V2G trailblazer: Lessons for mass market adoption

London’s robotaxi trials: What we know so far

“London is gearing up to launch its first driverless taxi trials this spring. Robotaxis will be tested on public roads across tens of boroughs, ahead of pending national regulation later this decade.

This explainer sets out everything you need to know about what autonomous vehicle trials are coming, when they’re happening and where you can expect to see them.”

Related iMOVE project:

• Safely deploying automated vehicles on Australian roads

Technology Tracker: Spring Wave 2025

The link here goes directly to the document, reelased by the UK Department of Transport. “This report presents findings from the Spring 2025 wave, offering insights into the current public perceptions of transport technology across the UK. Where survey questions have remained unchanged, comparisons have been made with the Autumn 2024 wave.

However, comparisons with earlier waves are not included, as differences in sample composition and measurement mode introduced in Autumn 2024 make such comparisons inadvisable. All previous reports remain available for those interested in
exploring long-term trends. exploring long-term trends.”

Choosing Reality in How We Move

“The following borrows its framing from a recent speech at Davos by Mark Carney, who described how systems built for one reality eventually face “rupture” when the world changes faster than their design.”

Santa Monica Puts AI Cameras on City Vehicles to Ticket Bike Lane Blockers

“According to reporting by Damien Newton in Streetsblog California, “The move is designed to extend automated monitoring and enforcement of parking violations — especially those that obstruct bike lanes — across the city, not just along bus routes.” Santa Monica already uses bus-mounted cameras to identify violations in bus lanes and along bus routes.”