Transport challenges have become increasingly urgent, encompassing concerns about pollution, noise, air quality, and the looming threat of climate change. The weight of congestion further compounds these issues, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive approach to urban mobility. Historically, our cities have been built around car-centric planning, and addressing this legacy is paramount. The trend is shifting towards designing cities for people rather than cars, necessitating a profound reevaluation of how we allocate urban space. Cities built for cars must shift to a people-centered design, reallocating space for active travel and public transport. This shift, rather than new tech, will be transformative. It explains why the concept of the 15-minute city — the city of proximity — is gaining ground.

Read more

In my opinion, the concept of attractability  implies placing the individual back at the center of the conceptual process when considering, building and adapting mobility solutions.

Criteria such as safety, travel cost or travel time are objective criteria. As individuals are by definition not rational, what matters to them most is their perception, rather than the actual cost.

What is unsafe for one person is not necessarily so for another. Similarly, the quest for the fastest possible journey is not the criteria held by everyone. If the expectations of each individual are not taken into account, attractability  does not exist. If these needs are not at the heart of the approach, we're working on a shell that will remain empty overall, which explains why the use of alternative modes to meet individual preferences has reached a plateau.

Capturing data on individual experiences, whether as a user or not, is central. From this daily experience, shared but differentiated, an interesting chain can be set up: each individual can help his or her city, employer or mobility operator in improving existing solutions and to invent new ones, thus becoming  ever more efficient and responsible.

When designing transportation structures, we must not neglect their visual impact. Concerned about the potential degradation of their living environment, residents of these regions often tend to oppose the construction of new transportation infrastructure.

The visual effects of transportation infrastructure should be studied through the lens of historical, geographical and social perceptions. From a budgetary perspective, it is essential to consider landscape in transport planning.

Read more

The transportation sector is constantly evolving. And so should our understanding of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). While the terminology has changed over time, the overarching principle of these systems remains the same: providing real-time traffic information to riders for smoother trips.

If we take a step back, we’ll see that our need to optimise traffic was the catalyst in rethinking the way we design highways. This paved the way for high-occupancy toll lanes — also known as HOT lanes — in California. Designated to encourage carpooling, these roadways exempt cars with three or more riders from tolls.

Therefore, discourse around ITS and toll roads must emphasize social justice concerns. The implementation of such systems is inextricably linked to social considerations and consequences for low-income users.

On another note, we must keep in mind that enhancing road transportation isn’t always synonymous with building more roads. Providing more road capacity to alleviate traffic congestion actually creates more demand — and therefore brings more cars to highways.

Rather than building new lanes, we must focus on redesigning existing road infrastructure by providing efficient alternatives to cars. Micro-mobility solutions, which fall under the umbrella term of “ITS”, have become increasingly attractive mobility solutions in Europe. Ultimately, the best way to reduce traffic congestion is not by widening our roads but by investing in public transportation and other sustainable solutions to contribute to the “Net Zero” vision.

The model of the 20th century - what we call the “Predict Provide Paradigm”,  where urban  planners would predict the amount of vehicle infrastructure, provide them, and segregate traffic - is no longer sustainable. This model only served to incentivize the mass adoption of private  vehicles by the public at large, which then became self-reinforcing and required ever-more  expansion.

The 21st century, by contrast, has already seen the rise of Mega Cities - with populations of over 10 million citizens. Such urban density renders the use of private vehicles impossible. Even the nascent development of electric and autonomous vehicles does not solve this issue; carbon emissions may be reduced, but congestion would still remain prohibitively high. The only way to move citizens at this scale is through the use of public transportation. Cities such as Shanghai, which has a population of 26 million people, would literally not function without a robust public transportation system. With 20-30 billion transit rides per day globally, this trend will only increase.

Read more

To truly change our mobility habits, raising awareness about alternatives to private vehicles appears to be the key step.

Prompting us to rethink the way we get around, awareness campaigns help us reach an important conclusion: in the same way that the best type of waste is waste that is not produced, the best type of mobility is… less mobility.

Once we understand this — without depriving ourselves of mobility — we are guided by the following principle: we must avoid what can be avoided by enthusiastically re-investing in certain transport modes, such as night trains or urban cycling.

Enthusiasm must also pervade our new habits. Concern for our health, and our wallets, is part of the formula for change, and even then it must be guided by the right information. To me, all these elements seem essential to catalyze real change.

Private electric vehicles are insufficient to decarbonize mobility. Although they yield environmental benefits, they come with several constraints and issues, including lithium extraction, which raises ethical concerns. They are also unable to tackle urban issues such as road congestion or bus delays.

When it comes to electrification, we should use our scarce resources to optimize shared fleets, rather than individual cars. For example, we’ve conducted research that suggested that the electrification of taxi fleets can help reduce emissions - and therefore become a viable alternative to cars.

The role that public transit plays in decarbonizing mobility cannot be understated. By its very nature, public transportation is more efficient than individual electric cars. Public transportation systems have started to integrate electrification across all modes: electric buses, hydrogen buses, electric rail… Ultimately, the key to fully decarbonizing this sector is figuring out how to get more people onboard.

Any approach to safe mobility in the future must put people first. To create a warm and welcoming atmosphere on public transportation, we need to view our fellow riders as valuable allies, rather than potential enemies. By fostering a sense of collective responsibility and solidarity, we will be able to enhance the passenger experience, strengthen social ties and build inclusive environments.

We need to reevaluate how we articulate information about public transportation to reimagine it as a welcoming space. Instead of broadcasting anxiety-inducing messages on public transportation, we can deliver positive messages that fuel trust and strengthen social bonds.

Rethinking transport design by incorporating elements such as warm colors, pleasant lighting, and spaces for relaxation and exchange can promote a friendly, inviting atmosphere.

By transforming mass transit into a harmonious and caring environment, we must put people back at the heart of the mobility experience.

A city that adopts an inclusive approach to urban planning is one that rethinks the status of women and the gendered nature of public spaces.

Women are commonly relegated to private or “indoor” spaces, such as schools or community centers. They are not fully included in public or “outside” spaces, where citizenship and freedom are molded.

When it comes to mobility, the transportation sector needs to make women's needs visible. Many women commute everyday with their children on transportation networks that are not adapted to their needs. For example, these transit systems do not accommodate the needs of pregnant women or mothers with strollers.

To rethink the needs of women within the urban sphere, we need to deconstruct our existing spaces to integrate the needs of women and marginalized communities, including people with disabilities or obesity. To help women conquer the “outside” world, we need to design public spaces that embrace the feminine and speak out about the reality of violence against women.

To guarantee inclusivity, urban strategies must take into consideration the needs of women — who are the vectors of human diversity — as well as promote intergenerational bonds and address the issue of sociability.

By comprehensively considering these issues, we can build spaces where each and everyone can reaffirm their right to the city and their right to be "outside.”

When working in the public space, decisions that may appear minor can have unintended consequences, substantially affecting stakeholders across a range of criteria. A good example is the modest bike lane.

One would think that installing a bike lane would be a quick and easy way to increase mobility. After all, it merely entails laying some asphalt, and putting down paint.
However, this is deceptively simple. It does not take into account the resistance of neighbors against the removal of parking spaces, or their common — yet irrational — fear that car users will take different routes and create congestion elsewhere.

Municipalities need to better explain to their residents that any one bike lane is meant to be part of a larger network. Such network capacities need to be strengthened, communicated, and relayed to the community. It’s important to properly communicate and explain the dynamics of this ecosystem approach to gain acceptance from residents.

I believe that, in tomorrow’s world, cars will have retreated from our cities. Concerned about air pollution and the rising costs of car ownership, the younger generation will catalyze this change.

To push cars out of cities, we will require more public transportation services. In places with advanced metro systems, there’s only so much tunneling you can do without addressing transportation needs above ground, such as buses or trams.

Private vehicles will certainly continue to pervade rural life; and that's where shared electric autonomous vehicles can play a role. Although driverless vehicles have become a hot topic, I believe that we should focus more on ride-sharing rather than autonomous technology.

The future of mobility doesn’t — and shouldn’t — depend on futuristic tech solutions such as flying cars. Although technology will play a part in changing the way we move in cities, it’s only part of the bigger picture. As we tend to emphasize and amplify the benefits of new car technologies, I believe that our main focus should be on improving our already-existing basic services. We must channel our energy into enhancing our public transit networks to make them safer and more reliable.

Considering the finite spaces in cities, coupled with the effects of climate change, we will need more urban areas that can cool people down. As our cities and populations continue to grow, space will become a premium. Our main challenge is not the lack of public transportation;, but rather the lack of space.

Once we phase out cars and optimize our transportation networks, we will be able to redesign our cities with cleaner, healthier air. Cities where our children and grandchildren will wonder why we ever drove polluting cars in the first place.

Transport tickets are an essential part of ensuring fair access to public transport. This conviction is at the heart of Atsukè and our applications, including Ticket by SMS and ATICK, which make it easy for users to obtain their tickets through their usual digital channels, while allowing transport networks to centralize the B2B2C distribution of their tickets. Today, it's essential that transport networks — no matter their size — offer a variety of solutions, enabling everyone to choose the method of obtaining their ticket that suits them best.

When it comes to innovation, many technological advances have been made, but it is crucial to simplify and diversify the means of urban mobility.

Offering promising prospects, contactless technologies and QR codes are now widespread.

Experimentation plays a crucial role. If we were to take greater advantage of the variety of digital contact points (retailers, shows, exhibitions, tourism…), transport tickets could be systematically offered as part of the purchase process, with transport preparation directly associated with it. For example, the purchase of a ticket to attend a match would include the return journey, to discourage car use.

This vision is also an opportunity for transport networks to optimize their digital investments by leveraging those of their partners. Mobility would thus become fully integrated into all aspects of our daily lives.

Given the limits of our decision-making and attentional resources, we should first and foremost address the structural issues that hinder change, instead of putting the onus on individuals.

First, individuals must be given the means to change their habits. When it comes to mobility, real and meaningful investment in public transportation infrastructure is the first prerequisite for change. Change requires an increase in accessible and reliable public transportation services, especially for people living in residential or isolated areas, where the use of private cars is deemed necessary.

Read more

Public transportation is a common good: this is a commonly accepted fact, even if its meaning isn’t explored in depth. The question of commonality raises a number of tensions between the public transport’s organization and its financing methods, which are little known to users.

For whom is public transport common? What kind of public are we talking about? Who is responsible for governance?

In France, in the context of public service delegation, financing methods are often hidden from users. This can create a discrepancy between the way in which users can imagine a form of free travel, and the way in which transport is structurally financed and governed.

We can already see a form of quasi-freedom, since public transport operations are largely financed by the mobility benefits paid by employers to their employees and by public subsidies. As part of the commons, on-board practices become an extension of the sidewalk and public space. Indeed, transport infrastructure is financed by a variety of public funds, from the local authority to the European level. And this is a real common: an infrastructure that becomes an extension of the sidewalk and is never paid for by the user.

Tomorrow’s urban mobility will be much like todays in that walking will continue to be an essential part of trips.

Within cities, most citizens walk at some point during the day, whether that’s to access key services or connect to their closest public transport stop. Approximately 80% of today’s trips can be made using a combination of walking, cycling and public transit options and in many cities that is already the reality or their ambition. In Hong Kong, for example, 90% of trips are made on foot or by public transport.

Read more