SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Akıllı Ulaşım Sistemleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

Innovative Mobility Solutions: Potentials, Pitfalls, and Implications for Sustainable Urban Transport – A Systematic Scoping Review

Yenilikçi Mobilite Çözümleri: Sürdürülebilir Kentsel Ulaşım İçin Potansiyeller, Riskler ve Çıkarımlar – Bir Sistematik Kapsam İncelemesi

Zeynel Baran Yıldırım(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-4068-7161
Pages
152–181
Publication Date
2026-10-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal a gap between expected and observed outcomes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Innovative mobility solutions, including micromobility, on-demand passenger transport, autonomous vehicles (AVs), innovative urban logistics, and Mobility as a Service (MaaS), are frequently presented as direct instruments for achieving sustainable urban transport.
📊
Key Findings & Data:While innovative mobility can support cleaner vehicle fleets, enable more efficient infrastructure use, and strengthen first- and last-mile connections, many real-world deployments increase total vehicle-kilometres through deadheading and rebound effects, divert demand from public transport and active modes, rely on precarious gig-economy labour, and exclude users without stable digital access or those outside commercially attractive areas.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal a gap between expected and observed outcomes.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Akıllı ulaşım sistemleri · Kentsel ulaşım · Sürdürülebilir ulaşım

Abstract

Innovative mobility solutions, including micromobility, on-demand passenger transport, autonomous vehicles (AVs), innovative urban logistics, and Mobility as a Service (MaaS), are frequently presented as direct instruments for achieving sustainable urban transport. Adopting a systematic scoping review approach, this study critically examines such claims in the context of car-dependent urban development, where congestion, greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), pollution, and inequalities in access to opportunities persist. Using the three pillars of sustainability as a reference, it develops and applies an assessment framework to these five service groups. The findings reveal a gap between expected and observed outcomes. While innovative mobility can support cleaner vehicle fleets, enable more efficient infrastructure use, and strengthen first- and last-mile connections, many real-world deployments increase total vehicle-kilometres through deadheading and rebound effects, divert demand from public transport and active modes, rely on precarious gig-economy labour, and exclude users without stable digital access or those outside commercially attractive areas. The analysis suggests that sustainability performance is shaped less by the technologies themselves than by the regulatory and planning frameworks under which they operate. Accordingly, the paper proposes a governance agenda centred on binding sustainability objectives, a transit-backbone integration strategy, explicit handling of equity, environment, efficiency trade-offs, and stronger public control over curb space and strategic mobility data.

Özet

Mikro hareketlilik, talep bazlı yolcu taşımacılığı, otonom araçlar (AV), yenilikçi kentsel lojistik ve Hizmet Olarak Hareketlilik (MaaS) dahil olmak üzere yenilikçi hareketlilik çözümleri, sıklıkla sürdürülebilir kentsel ulaşıma ulaşmada doğrudan araçlar olarak sunulmaktadır. Sistematik kapsam incelemesi yaklaşımını benimseyen bu çalışma; trafik sıkışıklığının, sera gazı emisyonlarının (SGE), kirliliğin ve fırsatlara erişimdeki eşitsizliklerin devam ettiği otomobil bağımlı kentsel gelişim bağlamında söz konusu iddiaları eleştirel bir gözle incelemektedir. Sürdürülebilirliğin üç ayağını esas alan bir değerlendirme çerçevesi geliştirilmiş ve beş hizmet grubuna uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, beklenen sonuçlar ile gözlemlenen sonuçlar arasında bir boşluk olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Yenilikçi hareketlilik; daha temiz araç filolarını destekleyebilme, altyapının daha verimli kullanılmasını sağlama ve ilk/son kilometre bağlantılarını güçlendirme potansiyeline sahip olsa da, gerçek dünyadaki pek çok uygulama; boş sürüş ve geri tepme etkileri nedeniyle toplam taşıt-kilometresini artırmakta, talebi toplu taşıma ve aktif türlerden uzaklaştırmakta, güvencesiz gig ekonomisi işgücüne dayanmakta ve istikrarlı dijital erişimi olmayan veya ticari açıdan cazip olmayan bölgelerin dışındaki kullanıcıları dışlamaktadır. Yapılan analiz, sürdürülebilirlik performansının teknolojilerin kendisinden ziyade, bu teknolojilerin altında faaliyet gösterdiği düzenleyici ve planlama çerçeveleri tarafından şekillendirildiğini öne sürmektedir. Bu doğrultuda, bağlayıcı sürdürülebilirlik hedeflerine, toplu taşıma omurgalı bir entegrasyon stratejisine, eşitlik-çevre-verimlilik ödünleşimlerinin açıkça ele alınmasına ve kaldırım kenarı kullanımı ile stratejik hareketlilik verileri üzerinde daha güçlü bir kamu kontrolüne odaklanan bir yönetişim gündemi önermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yıldırım, Z. B. (2026). Innovative Mobility Solutions: Potentials, Pitfalls, and Implications for Sustainable Urban Transport – A Systematic Scoping Review. Akıllı Ulaşım Sistemleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 152–181. https://doi.org/10.51513/jitsa.1868440

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (122)

  1. Acheampong, R. A., Agyemang, E., & Yaw Asuah, A. (2023). Is ride-hailing a step closer to personal car use? Exploring associations between car-based ride-hailing and car ownership and use aspirations among young adults. Travel Behaviour and Society, 33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2023.100614
  2. American Public Transportation Association (APTA). (2016). Shared Mobility and the Transformation of Public Transit. https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Resources/resources/reportsandpublications/Documents/APTA-Shared-Mobility.pdf
  3. An, C., & Shen, J. (2025). Assessing the impact of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) on sustainable urban travel behaviors: a systematic literature review. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2025.1645488
  4. Anair, D. (2022). Ride-Hailing’s Climate Risks: Steering a Growing Industry toward a Clean Transporatation Future. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/Ride-Hailing%27s-Climate-Risks.pdf
  5. Austin, A. (2017). Stick shift: Autonomous vehicles, driving jobs, and the future of work. https://globalpolicysolutions.org/report/stick-shift-autonomous-vehicles-driving-jobs-and-the-future-of-work/
  6. Badia, H., & Jenelius, E. (2023). Shared e-scooter micromobility: review of use patterns, perceptions and environmental impacts. Transport Reviews, 43(5), 811–837. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2023.2171500
  7. Bai, S., & Jiao, J. (2020). Dockless E-scooter usage patterns and urban built Environments: A comparison study of Austin, TX, and Minneapolis, MN. Travel Behaviour and Society, 20, 264–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2020.04.005
  8. Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
  9. Bashmakov, I. A., Nilsson, L. J., Acquaye, A., Bataille, C., Cullen, J. M., & Fischedick, M.,. & T. K. (2022). Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. In Climate Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 1161–1244). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.013
  10. Booth, L., Karl, C., Farrar, V., & Pettigrew, S. (2024). Assessing the Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles on Urban Sprawl. Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135551
  11. Borade, S., Cohen, K., Davis, C., & Stockman, J. (2020). Sustainable Mobility in the United States: Challenges & Opportunities from New Technologies ERE Practicum, Spring 2020 Heinrich Böll Foundation.
  12. Bouhouras, E., Ftergioti, S., Russo, A., Basbas, S., Campisi, T., & Symeon, P. (2024). Unlocking the Potential of Pick-Up Points in Last-Mile Delivery in Relation to Gen Z: Case Studies from Greece and Italy. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 14(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210629
  13. Bunsen, T., & Cazzola, P. (2020). How Urban Delivery Vehicles can Boost Electric Mobility Decarbonising Transport. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/urban-delivery-vehicles-boost-electric-mobility.pdf
  14. CalTrans. (2021). Fighting for Curb Space: Parking, Bike Sharing, Urban Freight Deliveries, Ride-Hailing, and Other Users. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovation-system-information/documents/research-results/task3397-rrs-7-21-a11y.pdf
  15. Çelik, Y. E. (2025). The Role of Mobility Hubs in Türkiye’s Sustainable Transportation Vision: A Strategic Transformation Tool. Ulaştırma ve Altyapı, (2), 116–142. https://orcid.org/
  16. Chang, K., Goodchild, A., Ranjbari, A., & Mccormack, E. (2022). Managing Increasing Demand for Curb Space in the City of the Future. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/62950
  17. Christoforou, Z., Gioldasis, C., de Bortoli, A., & Seidowsky, R. (2021). Who is using e-scooters and how? Evidence from Paris. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102708
  18. Circella, G., Matson, G., Alemi, F., & Handy, S. (2019). Panel Study of Emerging Transportation Technologies and Trends in California: Phase 2 Data Collection. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/35x894mg
  19. CIVITAS. (2016). Night-time deliveries using clean and silent vehicles. https://civitas.eu/mobility-solutions/night-time-deliveries-using-clean-and-silent-vehicles?
  20. Clewlow, R. R., & Mishra, G. S. (2017). Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/82w2z91j
  21. Cui, C., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Integration of Shared Micromobility into Public Transit: A Systematic Literature Review with Grey Literature. In Sustainability (Switzerland) (Vol. 16, Number 9). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093557
  22. Dang, H., Lu, Y., Spicer, J., Kay, T., Yang, D., Yang, Y., & Li, T. J. J. (2025). Uncovering Disparities in Rideshare Drivers’ Earning and Work Patterns: A Case Study of Chicago. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2502.08893.
  23. Dang, L., von Arx, W., & Frölicher, J. (2021). The impact of on‐demand collective transport services on sustainability: A comparison of various service options in a rural and an urban area of Switzerland. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063091
  24. de Bortoli, A. (2021). Environmental performance of shared micromobility and personal alternatives using integrated modal LCA. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102743
  25. DESA, U. N. nations, department of economic and social affairs, population division. (2018). World Urbanization Prospects The 2018 Revision.
  26. Duarte, F., & Ratti, C. (2018). The Impact of Autonomous Vehicles on Cities: A Review. Journal of Urban Technology, 25(4), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2018.1493883
  27. Erum Hassan, S., Andruetto, C., & Posch, A. (2024). The role of battery electric vehicles in off-peak hour deliveries: Sustainability assessment of a case study in Stockholm. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clscn.2024.100175
  28. Fagnant, D. J., & Kockelman, K. (2015). Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77, 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.003
  29. Fagnant, D. J., & Kockelman, K. M. (2014). The travel and environmental implications of shared autonomous vehicles, using agent-based model scenarios. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 40, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.12.001
  30. Federal highway Administration (FHA). (2018). Shared Use Mobility: European Experience and Lessons Learned - Chapter 3. Principal Findings – FHWA Office of Policy. https://international.fhwa.dot.gov/sum/ch3.cfm
  31. Fernández-Aguilar, C., Brosed-Lázaro, M., & Carmona-Derqui, D. (2023). Effectiveness of Mobility and Urban Sustainability Measures in Improving Citizen Health: A Scoping Review. In International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (Vol. 20, Number 3). MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032649
  32. Fleming, K. L. (2018). Social Equity Considerations in the New Age of Transportation: Electric, Automated, and Shared Mobility. Journal of Science Policy & Governance, 13(1). www.sciencepolicyjournal.org
  33. Franke, J., & Gailhofer, P. (2021). Data Governance and Regulation for Sustainable Smart Cities. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2021.763788
  34. Glenn, J., Bluth, M., Christianson, M., Pressley, J., Taylor, A., Macfarlane, G. S., & Chaney, R. A. (2020). Considering the potential health impacts of electric scooters: An analysis of user reported behaviors in provo, Utah. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(17), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176344
  35. Gomez, J., Aguilera-García, Á., Dias, F. F., Bhat, C. R., & Vassallo, J. M. (2021). Adoption and frequency of use of ride-hailing services in a European city: The case of Madrid. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2021.103359
  36. Gössling, S. (2020). Integrating e-scooters in urban transportation: Problems, policies, and the prospect of system change. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102230
  37. Greenblatt, J. B., & Shaheen, S. (2015). Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility, and Environmental Impacts. Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports 2015 2:3, 2(3), 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40518-015-0038-5
  38. Harper, C. D., Hendrickson, C. T., Mangones, S., & Samaras, C. (2016). Estimating potential increases in travel with autonomous vehicles for the non-driving, elderly and people with travel-restrictive medical conditions. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 72, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2016.09.003
  39. Hasselwander, M., Nieland, S., Dematera-Contreras, K., & Goletz, M. (2023). MaaS for the masses: Potential transit accessibility gains and required policies under Mobility-as-a-Service. Multimodal Transportation, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.multra.2023.100086
  40. Henao, A., & Marshall, W. E. (2019). The impact of ride-hailing on vehicle miles traveled. Transportation, 46(6), 2173–2194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9923-2
  41. Holguín-Veras, J., Hodge, S., Wojtowicz, J., Singh, C., Wang, C., Jaller, M., Aros-Vera, F., Ozbay, K., Weeks, A., Replogle, M., Ukegbu, C., Ban, J., Brom, M., Campbell, S., Sanchez-Díaz, I., González-Calderón, C., Kornhauser, A., Simon, M., McSherry, S., … Cruz, B. (2018). The New York city off-hour delivery program: A business and community-friendly sustainability program. Interfaces, 48(1), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.2017.0929
  42. Hollingsworth, J., Copeland, B., & Johnson, J. X. (2019). Are e-scooters polluters? the environmental impacts of shared dockless electric scooters. Environmental Research Letters, 14(8). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab2da8
  43. Internatioanl Transport Forum (ITF). (2020). Urban Logistics Hubs Summary and Conclusions. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/urban-logistics-hubs.pdf
  44. International Transport Forum. (2023). ITF Transport Outlook.
  45. International Transport (ITF). (2017). Managing the transition to driverless road freight transport. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2017/05/managing-the-transition-to-driverless-road-freight-transport_b618e446/0f240722-en.pdf
  46. ITF (International Transport Forum). (2020). Safe Micromobility. OECD Publishing.
  47. Jang, S., Caiati, V., Rasouli, S., Timmermans, H., & Choi, K. (2020). Does MaaS contribute to sustainable transportation? A mode choice perspective. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1783726
  48. Jittrapirom, P., Caiati, V., Feneri, A. M., Ebrahimigharehbaghi, S., Alonso-González, M. J., & Narayan, J. (2017). Mobility as a service: A critical review of definitions, assessments of schemes, and key challenges. Urban Planning, 2(2), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v2i2.931
  49. Johnson, L. L., Ebakivie, O., Everett, J., & Wynn, S. (2025). Inclusive and Accessible Transportation for All: Strategies for Integrating Equity in Transportation Research. In Logistics (Vol. 9, Number 2). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics9020072
  50. Karacameydan İncemehmetoğlu, N., Tuğlu, K., Çoşkun, Ö., İrdam, Ö. M., Avcı, İ., & Kınacı, B. F. (2024). Türkiye’nin MAAS Platformu İçin Veri ve Ödeme Yöntemi Standardizasyonu. Akıllı Ulaşım Sistemleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 7(2), 286–303. https://doi.org/10.51513/jitsa.1520992
  51. Kayakök, T., Aksakallı, F. Z., & Hatipoğlu, S. (2025). Engelli Hareketliliğinde Erişilebilirliğin Geliştirilmesi: Bir Hizmet Olarak Hareketlilik (MaaS) Önerisi. Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi, 8(2), 124–148. https://doi.org/10.38002/tuad.1599731
  52. Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R., Sharifi, A., & Hajian Hossein Abadi, M. (2021). The Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts of Ridesourcing Services: A Literature Review. In Future Transportation (Vol. 1, Number 2, pp. 268–289). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp1020016
  53. Koçyiğit, K., Koçak, İ., & Engin, T. (2025). Bandırma İlçesinde Mikromobilite Uygulamalarının Değerlendirilmesi: Veri Tabanlı Bir Yaklaşım. Akıllı Ulaşım Sistemleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 8(2), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.51513/jitsa.1728514
  54. Kriukelyte, E., Sochor, J., & Kramers, A. (2024). Actualizing sustainable transport: the interplay between public policy instruments and shared mobility providers’ business models. European Transport Research Review, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-024-00634-4
  55. Kyoungho, A., Hesham A. Rakha, & Jinghui Wang. (2025). The Rebound Effect of Autonomous Vehicles on Vehicle Miles Traveled: A Synthesis of Drivers, Impacts, and Policy Implications. Sustainability, 17(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/172210089
  56. Lemardelé, C., Pinheiro Melo, S., Cerdas, F., Herrmann, C., & Estrada, M. (2023). Life-cycle analysis of last-mile parcel delivery using autonomous delivery robots. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103842
  57. Liljamo, T., Liimatainen, H., Pöllänen, M., & Viri, R. (2021). The effects of mobility as a service and autonomous vehicles on people’s willingness to own a car in the future. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(4), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041962
  58. Litman, T., & Brenman, M. (2012). A New Social Equity Agenda For Sustainable Transportation. [email protected]
  59. Massar, M., Reza, I., Rahman, S. M., Abdullah, S. M. H., Jamal, A., & Al-Ismail, F. S. (2021). Impacts of autonomous vehicles on greenhouse gas emissions—positive or negative? In International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (Vol. 18, Number 11). MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115567
  60. Michalakopoulou, K., Vann Yaroson, E., & Chatziioannou, I. (2025). Decoding cargo bikes’ potential to be a sustainable last-mile delivery mode: an operations management perspective. Transportation Planning and Technology, 48(4), 712–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2024.2375630
  61. Milakis, D., Van Arem, B., & Van Wee, B. (2017). Policy and society related implications of automated driving: A review of literature and directions for future research. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Technology, Planning, and Operations, 21(4), 324–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2017.1291351
  62. Mitropoulos, L., Kortsari, A., Mizaras, V., & Ayfantopoulou, G. (2023). Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Planning and Implementation: Challenges and Lessons Learned. Future Transportation, 3(2), 498–518. https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp3020029
  63. NACTO (National Association of City Transportation Officials). (2019). Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility.
  64. National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO). (2017). CURB APPEAL - CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING TRANSIT RELIABILITY. https://nacto.org/publication/curb-appeal/
  65. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2015). Traffic Safety Facts - Critical Reasons for Crashes Investigated in the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey.
  66. Niemeijer, R., & Buijs, P. (2023). A greener last mile: Analyzing the carbon emission impact of pickup points in last-mile parcel delivery. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113630
  67. Nyserda. (2019). Off-Hour Delivery Trusted Vendor Program NYSERDA Department of Transportation. https://www.nyserda.ny.gov
  68. Oğuztimur, S., Şahin, B., Dağ, A., & Tünay, S. (2021). MaaS – Mobility as a Service: A Comparative Study on the Examples of the World Cities and İstanbul. Trakya Journal of Architecture and Design, 1(1), 45–60. http://kapu.trakya.edu.tr
  69. Open Mobility Foundation (OMF). (2023). About MDS. https://www.openmobilityfoundation.org/about-mds/
  70. Open Mobility Foundatiton (OMF). (2020). Mobility Data Specification. https://www.swlaw.edu/sites/default/files/2022-03/OMF-MDS-Privacy-Guide-for-Cities.pdf
  71. Parlak, C. A. (2023). LOGISTICS TECHNOLOGIES AND SUSTAINABILITY.
  72. PBOT (Portland Bureau of Transportation). (2018). E-Scooter Findings Report.
  73. Peker, R., Akalin, K. B., & Yardim, M. S. (2024). Hizmet Olarak Hareketlilik ve Entegre Ulaşım Sistemleri Üzerine İnceleme ve Değerlendirme, Kitap Bölümü: İnşaat Mühendisliğinde Güncel Araştırmalar ve Çözümler. Bidge Publications.
  74. Pettigrew, S., Dana, L. M., & Norman, R. (2019). Clusters of potential autonomous vehicles users according to propensity to use individual versus shared vehicles. Transport Policy, 76, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.01.010
  75. Platenizen. (2020, January 29). Report: Last-Mile Deliveries to Increase 78% by 2030. https://www.planetizen.com/news/2020/01/108192-report-last-mile-deliveries-increase-78-2030?utm_
  76. PRISM. (2025, November 7). The Future of Mobility Data Regulation. https://prism.sustainability-directory.com/scenario/the-future-of-mobility-data-regulation/
  77. Ranieri, L., Digiesi, S., Silvestri, B., & Roccotelli, M. (2018). A review of last mile logistics innovations in an externalities cost reduction vision. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030782
  78. Ranjbari, A., Luis Machado-León, J., Dalla Chiara, G., MacKenzie, D., & Goodchild, A. (2020). Testing Curbside Management Strategies to Mitigate the Impacts of Ridesourcing Services on Traffic. Transportation Research Record, 2675(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120957314
  79. Rodrigues, T. A., Patrikar, J., Oliveira, N. L., Matthews, H. S., Scherer, S., & Samaras, C. (2022). Drone flight data reveal energy and greenhouse gas emissions savings for very small package delivery. Patterns, 3(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100569
  80. Rohács, D., Kale, U., Kilikevičius, A., & Rohács, J. (2025). Energetic, comparative analysis of package delivery by drones and e-vehicles. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 83, 104644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2025.104644
  81. Rosenblat, A., & Stark, L. (2016). Algorithmic Labor and Information Asymmetries: A Case Study of Uber’s Drivers. International Journal of Communication, 10, 3758–3784. http://ijoc.org.
  82. Sanders, C. K., & Scanlon, E. (2021). The Digital Divide Is a Human Rights Issue: Advancing Social Inclusion Through Social Work Advocacy. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 6(2), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-020-00147-9
  83. Schaller, B. (2018). The New Automobility: Lyft, Uber and the Future of American Cities. Schaller Consulting. www.schallerconsult.com
  84. Schaller, B. (2021). Can sharing a ride make for less traffic? Evidence from Uber and Lyft and implications for cities. Transport Policy, 102, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.12.015
  85. Schweiger, C. (2025). Mobility as a Service (MaaS): An Update. https://n-catt.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/MaaS_Final_WhitePaper.pdf
  86. SEI. (2025). COP30: mobilizing for human-centred transport in the coming UN Sustainable Transport Decade. https://www.sei.org/perspectives/cop30-human-centred-transport/
  87. Servou, E., Behrendt, F., & Horst, M. (2023). Data, AI and governance in MaaS – Leading to sustainable mobility? Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2023.100806
  88. Shaheen, S., & Cohen, A. (2019). Shared Micromoblity Policy Toolkit: Docked and Dockless Bike and Scooter Sharing. https://doi.org/10.7922/G2TH8JW7
  89. Sperling, D. (2018). Three revolutions: Steering automated, shared, and electric vehicles to a better future. Island Press.
  90. Stolaroff, J. K., Samaras, C., O’Neill, E. R., Lubers, A., Mitchell, A. S., & Ceperley, D. (2018). Energy use and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of drones for commercial package delivery. Nature Communications, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02411-5
  91. Storme, T., De Vos, J., De Paepe, L., & Witlox, F. (2020). Limitations to the car-substitution effect of MaaS. Findings from a Belgian pilot study. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.032
  92. Talih, Ö., & Tektaş, N. (2022). The Perspective of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and an Analysis of Türkiye. Journal of Transportation and Logistics, 7(2), 431–463. https://doi.org/10.26650/jtl.2022.1197450
  93. Taniguchi, E., Thompson, R. G., & Qureshi, A. G. (2020). Modelling city logistics using recent innovative technologies. Transportation Research Procedia, 46, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2020.03.157
  94. Temporelli, A., Brambilla, P. C., Brivio, E., & Girardi, P. (2022). Last Mile Logistics Life Cycle Assessment: A Comparative Analysis from Diesel Van to E-Cargo Bike. Energies, 15(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/en15207817
  95. Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
  96. Trivedi, T. K., Liu, C., Antonio, A. L. M., Wheaton, N., Kreger, V., Yap, A., Schriger, D., & Elmore, J. G. (2019). Injuries Associated With Standing Electric Scooter Use. JAMA Network Open, 2(1), e187381. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.7381
  97. UITP. (2019). READY FOR MAAS? EASIER MOBILITY FOR CITIZENS AND BETTER DATA FOR CITIES. https://www.uitp.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2025/04/Policy-Brief_MaaS_V3_final_web_0.pdf
  98. UITP. (2023, October 23). How Shared Mobility Solutions Can Improve Our Cities and Towns. UITP. https://www.uitp.org/news/shared-mobility-solutions-improve-cities/
  99. UN-Habitat. (2017). New Urban Agenda. (Quito Declaration on Sustainable Cities and Human Settlements for All).
  100. Verhoef, E., Nijkamp, P., & Rietveld, P. (2007). The trade-off between efficiency, effectiveness, and social feasibility of regulating road transport externalities. Transportation Planning and Technology, 19(3–4), 247–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081069608717572
  101. Verlinghieri, E., Itova, I., Collignon, N., & Aldred, R. (2021). The Promise of LowCarbon Freight Benefits of cargo bikes in London. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d30896202a18c0001b49180/t/61091edc3acfda2f4af7d97f/1627987694676/The+Promise+of+Low-Carbon+Freight.pdf
  102. Viegas, J. M., & Martinez, L. (2016). Shared mobility: innovation for liveable cities.
  103. Viu-Roig, M., & Alvarez-Palau, E. J. (2020). The impact of E-Commerce-related last-mile logistics on cities: A systematic literature review. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166492
  104. Wadud, Z., MacKenzie, D., & Leiby, P. (2016). Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 86, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.12.001
  105. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future.
  106. Whitmore, A., Samaras, C., Hendrickson, C. T., Scott Matthews, H., & Wong-Parodi, G. (2022). Integrating public transportation and shared autonomous mobility for equitable transit coverage: A cost-efficiency analysis. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2022.100571
  107. World Bank Blogs (WBB). (2022, January 22). Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) can help developing cities make the most of complex urban transport systems—if they implement it right. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/transport/mobility-as-a-service-can-help-developing-cities-make-most-complex-urban-transport-systems-if-they-implement-it-right
  108. World Economic Forum (WEF). (2020). WEF Report: Future of the Last-Mile Ecosystem Insights (2020). https://www.studocu.vn/vn/document/dai-hoc-xay-dung-ha-noi/do-an-kinh-te-xay-dung/wef-future-of-the-last-mile-ecosystem/123785794?
  109. World Economic Forum (WEF). (2024a). Transforming Urban Logistics: Sustainable and Efficient Last-Mile Delivery in Cities. https://reports.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Transforming_Urban_Logistics_2024.pdf
  110. World Economic Forum (WEF). (2024b, October 29). How will autonomous vehicles shape future urban mobility?
  111. World Health Organization. (2018). Global status report on road safety.
  112. World Health Organization. (2021). WHO global air quality guidelines: particulate matter (PM2. 5 and PM10), ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide.
  113. World Resource Institute (WRI). (2023, December 6). Mobility-as-a-Service Platforms: A New Trend in Low-carbon Transport. https://www.wri.org/insights/mobility-service-platform-green-transportation
  114. Yang, D., & Hyland, M. F. (2024). Electric vehicles in urban delivery fleets: How far can they go? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.104127
  115. Yin, J., Qian, L., & Shen, J. (2019). From value co-creation to value co-destruction? The case of dockless bike sharing in China. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 71, 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.12.004
  116. Zhang, W., Guhathakurta, S., Fang, J., & Zhang, G. (2015). Exploring the impact of shared autonomous vehicles on urban parking demand: An agent-based simulation approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 19, 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.07.006
  117. Zhang, W., Guhathakurta, S., & Khalil, E. B. (2018). The impact of private autonomous vehicles on vehicle ownership and unoccupied VMT generation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 90, 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.03.005
  118. Austin, A. (2017). Stick shift: Autonomous vehicles, driving jobs, and the future of work. https://globalpolicysolutions.org/report/stick-shift-autonomous-vehicles-driving-jobs-and-the-future-of-work/
  119. Bashmakov, I. A., Nilsson, L. J., Acquaye, A., Bataille, C., Cullen, J. M., & Fischedick, M.,. & T. K. (2022). Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. In Climate Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 1161–1244). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.013
  120. Booth, L., Karl, C., Farrar, V., & Pettigrew, S. (2024). Assessing the Impacts of Autonomous Vehicles on Urban Sprawl. Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135551
  121. Bunsen, T., & Cazzola, P. (2020). How Urban Delivery Vehicles can Boost Electric Mobility Decarbonising Transport. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/urban-delivery-vehicles-boost-electric-mobility.pdf
  122. Viegas, J. M., & Martinez, L. (2016). Shared mobility: innovation for liveable cities.