Promoting Micro-mobility and Ride-Sharing Operations in Urban Areas - The WEF's Climate Solution for Cities

As I've pointed out in previous postings, there is one organization that has a solution for every issue that ails the globe; the World Economic Forum and its braintrust of contributors.  One recent posting really got my attention:

 

Here are the summary points:

 

1.) Shared mobility — such as ride-sharing services and e-scooters — could be key tools in the pursuit of net-zero emissions in our cities.

2.) But outdated or regressive attitudes and approaches towards the urban mobility sector too often restrict its growth — and can even endanger the safety and hold back decarbonisation.

 

Apparently, the useless eaters simply can't shake their "old think" when it comes to battling global climate change, at least in the eyes of the "thinking class" which has all of the solutions that they are more than willing to impose on us.

Here are some quotes from the article:

 

"More than half of the global population — 4.4 billion — live in cities. But by 2050, that figure is expected to nearly double. 

This growth makes cities a key staging area for the global fight against climate change as cities account for 70% of global CO2 emissions. These emissions, in part, are fed by cars. And while the boom in shared mobility options (from ride-sharing and ride-hailing to rental e-scooters and e-bikes) could help to slash emissions, in some cases, outdated regulations are holding back the evolution of new types of climate-friendly transit."

 

To help the non-thinking class, the article quotes three "experts" from the mobility sector, holding our hands to help us to better fight against climate change using even more government-imposed regulations that will have the added benefit of improving safety and efficient movement of traffic in urban areas.  Here are the three "solutions":

 

1.) Rethinking the curb - according to expert Shin-pei Tsay, one of the challenges is that on-street parking is either too cheap or too plentiful, reducing the ability to accommodate other forms of transportation like bike and e-scooter sharing and install additional charging stations for EVs.  She states that parking takes up about one-third of urban land mass with eight spots for every car.  Tsay believes that the solution is to have a net-zero pavement policy; for every additional parking spot that is built, one parking spot must be taken away because less parking would improve the ability of cities to be more compact and resource efficient, leading to fewer carbon emissions.

 

2.) Reversing Regulatory Fragmentation - according to Pauline Aymonier, e-scooters are the solution.  Despite the growth in use, there is still no legal status for e-scooters.  This has had a negative impact on technological innovation for micromobility companies and how they can offer their services and how citizens interact with these services.  She solves this problem by recommending that e-scooter riders are treated as vulnerable road users like pedestrians and bicycles.  In her mind, the key priority is to define the legal framework for e-scooters; where the drive on the road, whether insurance is required and whether protective equipment is needed.

 

3.) New levers for process in urban mobility -  according to Benjamin Bell:

 

"...cities need to provide incentives that are designed to help scale progress towards climate change goals."

 

He states that mobility operators can be a tool that isn't just used to move residents from one part of a city to another, it can be a tool that includes increased safety and inclusivity.  Incentives should be designed to help improve progress towards climate goals and, rather than taking a slice of revenue from mobility operators, authorities should consider a small "per vehicle fee", small enough that it won't discourage companies from offering their products (i.e. e-scooters) 

 

Now, let's look at two issues that these two experts seem to have ignored when promoting e-scooters, neither of which is going to make e-scooting easy:

 

 

I always like to put things into perspective, particularly when it comes to so-called experts offering their opinions.  Let's look at Shin-pei Tsay's background:

 

Do you think that her executive position at Uber, one of the world's largest ride-sharing companies, may have something to do with her views on commuters driving and parking?  After all, Uber clients don't need to use parking spots and, in fact, the fewer parking spots that there are available for use, the more likely that people will be to use Uber.

 

Now, let's look at Pauline Aymonier's background:

 

Coincidentally (or not), Aymonier just happens to be the Head of Public Policy at TIER Mobility, the world's leading micro-mobility operator that is rolling out emission-free vehicles including e-scooters and e-bicycles to help cities move toward a sustainable future.  According to BusinessCloud, TIER has captured over 20 percent of global market share in its core business of e-scooters since it launched in 2019.  It operates more than 40,000 scooters in over 60 cities in nine nations.

 

Lastly, let's look at Benjamin Bell's background.  Currently, he is Head of Public Policy, Northern Europe, also at TIER Mobility and was on Uber's UKI leadership team until he took the job at TIER in June 2020:

 

 

In closing, there is one thing that we need to remember.  The climate narrative is all about helping Mother Earth.  It has absolutely nothing to do with maximizing corporate profitability for select companies or increasing the personal net worth of those who work for these companies.  There is no conflict of interest to see here, move along folks.