On February 13 the London Assembly Transport Committee released a report on future transport in London. Jade Smith summarises the key points in relation to the bus industry, which focused on topics such as Mobility as a Service and autonomous vehicles
Planning and monitoring
- TfL faces a difficult challenge in attempting to predict and prepare for changes in technology and its application to the transport sector.
Recent developments in the private hire and dockless cycle hire industries suggest TfL has been unprepared for new uses of technology by the private sector. - TfL’s new Transport Innovation directorate is leading work to monitor and plan for technological change. Its findings and recommendations need to be embedded across TfL.
By subscribing you will benefit from:
- Operator & Supplier Profiles
- Face-to-Face Interviews
- Lastest News
- Test Drives and Reviews
- Legal Updates
- Route Focus
- Industry Insider Opinions
- Passenger Perspective
- Vehicle Launches
- and much more!
The report says in order to be successful this team’s work will need to be implemented across TfL, requiring a cultural shift in other parts of TfL, requiring teams to move from focusing on current service pressures to predicting developing trends.
Connected & autonomous vehicles
Connected and autonomous vehicle (CAV) technology has significant potential benefits for road safety and mobility.
Predictions vary widely on when and how CAVs will be used on London’s roads. TfL faces a difficult challenge in planning for different possibilities.
The main objective of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy is to reduce private car use in London. CAVs may put this in jeopardy if they simply replace existing cars or encourage greater car use.
The most effective strategy for TfL is to embed sustainable transport choices ahead of CAV rollout. Shared usage of CAVs is likely to be the most sustainable way of harnessing this technology in London.
There could be significant job losses in driving professions if CAV technology becomes widespread.
The report recognises that CAVs could improve mobility for those who have difficulty accessing the transport network, but that using a CAV will require a level of digital literacy that may continue to exclude many older and disabled people.
Although CAVs could use road space more efficiently, there are still concerns about their impact on the transport network, mainly related to the behavioural choices that Londoners may make. People who currently drive very little or not at all may decide to take advantage of CAVs by travelling in cars more often. If this happens on a large scale, this would mean CAVs may contribute to traffic congestion, and/or prevent a hoped-for shift towards more sustainable transport modes.
Autonomous buses: Autonomous buses are a subset of CAVs which raise a host of further issues, the report states. TfL currently commissions public bus services in London, including designing routes, and setting service specifications and vehicle standards. It would therefore have a significant role to play in the possible introduction of autonomous buses.
As a shared form of transport, autonomous buses would be welcomed as an alternative to people driving their own private CAVs. This would be the most efficient use of road space and help minimise any congestion impact.
The London Assembly Transport Committee has recently investigated bus safety in London, making recommendations on issues such as driver fatigue and distractions, as well as operator contract incentives and TfL staff bonuses. It believes the introduction of CAV technology has the potential to reduce collisions and injuries, providing robust trialling proves the safety of the technology. However, this is not a substitute for TfL taking substantive action now to improve the safety of bus passengers and those sharing road space with buses, says the report.
The introduction of autonomous buses would have implications for bus staffing, the report adds. Thousands of Londoners are employed as bus drivers and their positions may be at risk with the rise of this technology. Job losses as a result of automation may have a negative economic impact on London.
Removing on-board staff altogether would also affect passengers, as the customer service drivers provide would be unavailable. An autonomous bus should have a staff member on board to prevent fare evasion and anti-social behaviour.
The provision of autonomous buses on London’s roads is likely many years in the future, however, TfL should be preparing for this change, engaging with bus operators, manufacturers, trade unions and others, the report says. In particular there should be in-depth study of the implications for bus staffing, with plans for public buses to remain staffed even if they are driven autonomously.
App-based services
App-based services have already had a major impact on London’s transport network, in positive and negative ways.
Although TfL provides few app-based services itself, the organisation is a vital enabler of these services by making its data freely available. Londoners may see more benefit from this if the private sector made its data available to TfL in turn.
Buses are the mode most liable to radical change as a result of this technology, as new providers offer bus journeys booked by app. At present there is no dedicated regulation of these services, which would be necessary to encourage their growth while maintaining public service requirements.
Smartphone apps have already transformed the transport system, and the way Londoners experience it. This includes apps helping Londoners plan journeys, or track service disruptions on social media.
Demand-responsive bus services: Demand-responsive bus services are an emerging form of transport. While traditional bus services operate on fixed routes and follow a regular timetable, for demand-responsive services these would be determined by journey requests made by users.
Londoners would use a smartphone app to request a particular journey from the service, and a route would be designed to accommodate that request. Buses would not arrive at a person’s home, but at designated ‘virtual bus stops’ nearby, to which the app would direct passengers. This bridges a gap between conventional buses and the ‘ride-sharing’ service some private hire operators provide, the report says. These services would operate in a way similar to the Dial-a-Ride minibus service TfL offers for disabled people, but with the intention of responding in real-time to journey requests and on a larger scale.
The Mayor’s draft Transport Strategy, published in July 2017, endorses the principle of these services: “Demand-responsive bus services, which operate without necessarily fixed routes or frequencies, are one particular application that could potentially cater for gaps in service provision where public transport is required. This could offer benefits particularly in outer London where travel patterns are characterised by trips having many different start and end points, and consequently conventional public transport is less able to provide services that cater for people’s needs. These demand-responsive services could also help address demand pinch-points or provide alternatives.”
The Mayor’s draft strategy states that TfL will ‘explore and trial’ demand-responsive bus services. At least three companies are planning to introduce different forms of demand-responsive bus service: Citymapper, Via and the Chariot shuttle bus service, operated by Ford.
Demand-responsive buses could supplement the existing transport network by offering journeys that are not currently possible except by private car. Arguably, however, they could undermine conventional bus services if they siphon off potential passengers, or if they increase traffic congestion by putting more vehicles on the road. Making existing services less viable may be detrimental particularly for older passengers, who rely on the bus network and may be less familiar with the technology needed to use demand-responsive services.
TfL commissions public services in London and directly operates Dial-a-Ride, while licensing other types of buses (e.g. tourist coaches) and private hire services. It is not clear which regulatory regime demand-responsive services should fall under. Citymapper and Via have both applied for private hire licences, but their similarities to conventional buses suggests this may be not be appropriate. The Chariot service has obtained a London Service Permit from TfL, which can be granted to buses that are not part of the London bus network.
There are wider questions for the transport network, too. For instance, many London roads have dedicated bus lanes, which any vehicle with at least 10 seats can use. If demand-responsive buses are smaller than this, but efficiently run, this would strengthen the case to allow them to use the bus lanes. Allowing this, in turn, may affect other bus lane users. The report says TfL will need to consider whether demand-responsive services form part of London’s public bus network, or if they are a separate entity.
TfL needs to remain closely involved with the development of demand-responsive bus services, the report suggests. Managed properly, this type of service could help enable capacity goes where it is needed.
Mobility as a Service: ‘Mobility as a Service’ (MaaS), refers to new ways for individuals to arrange and pay for transport services. The key innovations behind MaaS platforms are that multiple public and private transport operators can offer services via a single smartphone app.
Users can plan and pay for a journey using any providers’ services. Services may go beyond conventional public transport, for instance to include cycle hire, private hire or car clubs. Users can tailor their journey for specific requirements, such as speed, cost or accessibility. Payment can be made for specific journeys or by regular subscription.
Since October 2017 MaaS has been trialled in the West Midlands using the Whim app. App users have increased their public transport use and reduced personal car use, although they have also increased taxi usage.
TfL said that London already has a form of MaaS in its integrated Oyster system, through which users can pay for journeys across providers. However, London does not have an app offering the full functionality of journey planning plus booking and payment. The findings of the West Midlands MaaS trial will be reviewed to assess how these could be applied in London.
Summary
The Transport Committee report recommends the Mayor, TfL and Government should:
- Consider the potential development and impact of autonomous bus technology;
- Develop the principles of a new regulatory regime for demand-responsive bus services; and
- Ensure data produced by apps powered by underlying TfL data is shared with TfL.
