Micromobility in the UK – Time to Widen our Innovation Opportunities

Executive Summary:

Micromobility has the potential to slash emissions, empower users, increase social interaction, and all for less cost than our current transport choices. This benefits public health and social mobility, but to realise these benefits, we need to see a marked modal shift from away from private cars.

Progress is happening right now, with huge increases in cycling and ebike trips[1] aided by the Covid-19 pandemic seeing thousands of new cyclists taking to the roads and cycleways of the UK. In tandem, the UK has been trialling the global phenomenon of “escooters”, which have proven extremely popular, but they are very much the ‘tip of the iceberg’ to a world of highly innovative personal mobility devices which could deliver hugely on our modal shift requirement.

The trials represent a positive step towards realising the wider lower-carbon modal-shift opportunity, as well as unleashing UK innovation to develop the next generation of transport. Unfortunately though, they have met with a mixed response and we have begun to focus on the escooter as a mode of transport, rather than the wider opportunity they are a gateway to. Ridership in the trials is high, but modal-shift appears from early information to be lower than hoped[2] and there are key concerns about “pavement riding”, public safety, and street clutter which have dominated the headlines.

In this article, as well as reiterating that one of the dominant challenges facing Micromobility is infrastructure provision, I suggest that we may be developing an ‘attitude problem’ which is counter-productive and risks failing to realise the benefits of this significant modal shift opportunity. Wider-area trials including different form factors would open up significant multi-modal trip capability to increase modal-shift, and bring in a significantly different demographic to demonstrate more positive riding traits as the norm.

We have a huge opportunity here, and a compelling need to take it so I urge us to take these actions as soon practicable, unleashing the UK to lead the way in transport innovation once again.

Infrastructure remains the key concern for current and prospective users:

There are well publicised and legitimate challenges to widescale adoption of micromobility. One of the key examples being the provision of adequate infrastructure. In a recent staff and student survey at the University of Warwick, we found 47% of respondents living 0-5 miles from our campus cited “safer cycling infrastructure” as something which would make them more likely to cycle – the most common response by a margin (see Figure 1).

The strong response on this need for infrastructure is quite typical, and perhaps under-estimates the possible barrier as this question asked about cycling only, if we had asked “cycling or powered personal mobility device” (were the latter legal), we may have garnered more support from the 35% who stated simply “I won’t cycle”.

The escooter trials have highlighted the effects of a lack of infrastructure, and that we are late to the party:

The UK’s escooter trials have demonstrated to us that escooters riding on pavements is an issue, that’s brought about by a lack of infrastructure. Vulnerable riders take to the pavement to feel safer, which in turn causes new hazards for pedestrians - particularly so for more vulnerable groups in society such as the blind and partially sighted. The good news at least is that infrastructure challenge is an area which aligns to the needs of ‘active travel’ (i.e. cycling in this case), and is therefore widely acknowledged meaning improvements are happening, albeit more slowly than one would hope.

The problem micromobility has before this infrastructure arrives, however, is its own popularity. The UK escooter trials are in many ways later than might have been ideal. This delay has had the advantage of allowing us to learn from others’ experience, but one could argue this is outweighed by several downsides. First, we have lost first-mover advantage for UK innovators with this popular form-factor; second, the explosion of latent demand on opening up the trials has led to thousands of new riders hitting our roads and cycleways all at once, with no formal training and potentially fewer years of road experience than the average driver (being generally younger[1] ). Add to this; third, the popularity of personal escooters (while still technically illegal on public rights-of-way) whose riders don’t even have access to some form of ‘in app’ training or regulation that is commonplace for the rentals. So we have an explosive demand from riders with little training/experience, and our economy has missed out on a portion of the potential benefit.

??

The UK trials are a positive step, but limit the user-base and modal-shift opportunity in their current form:

Over-indexing for younger riders is compounded by the current trial conditions in the UK. The trials only allow the use of rented scooters, not personally owned ones purchased from retailers. On speaking to retailers, they tell me that when they explain to potential purchasers that the device they are looking to purchase is illegal to ride on public land, the overwhelming majority of customers over the age of ~25 thank them, and leave the shop – anecdotal but something I can believe from talking to many prospective users myself. The reason given for this response is they can’t risk points on their license, or a brush with the law (presumably younger purchasers have less to lose, fewer other options, or are just willing to take their chances?). One retailer told me there have been more of these ‘walk outs’ than eventual purchasers over the last few years, and these are the people who didn’t know the law before heading to the shop; imagine how many didn’t even walk in because they know the rules (I would buy one tomorrow by the way, were it not illegal). This means that with personally owned scooters we have a further skew of the demographic towards the younger and consequently less experienced road user groups, and in this case by definition, also groups willing to take their chances with the law – potentially with little economical alternative.

Why are personally owned escooters significant? Because they hit a completely different demographic and market segment. While legal rental escooters are extremely convenient, offering a wonderful service in a similar way to a taxi being ‘on demand’, they can be expensive if used frequently, have a limited operating boundary for (amongst other things) economic reasons, and are built around a form-factor which is heavy and rigid for robustness meaning it cannot be taken into many homes. Even with the long-term rental models being offered by some companies, people in apartment blocks are not likely to be taking a 35kg scooter up the stairs, nor onto public transport, so a great number of highly credible commuted and multi-modal journeys are implausible[2] . The personally owned scooter addresses some of these challenges by being lightweight and foldable, meaning carrying is easy, and multi-modal journeys are enabled – they are also easy to store at home, and studies have shown they can be more effective at achieving modal shift[3] – but they’re illegal to use in the UK.

The mode is less of a problem than the behaviours:

This space is much more than escooters, though the conversation always ends up there. The wider Micromobility opportunity is massive, and an area where the UK has not yet missed first-mover advantage. The tight controls on powered micromobility devices in our trials are based solely around the escooter form factor, this is a sensible starting point as it’s a ‘known quantity’ but failing to move on from that 18 months later is stifling innovation opportunities in the UK. This concept has proven hard to articulate as most people seem to assume that micromobility is a synonym for escooter.

I recently heard a someone involved in local transport state their sincere concern that ‘active travel’ might leave less-able people behind, specifically the elderly in this case, and thus advocate more innovation with this group in mind and that cycle lanes should be designed to cater for ‘mobility carriages’. I support this view, but struggled to see how the same person had also suggested the banning of escooters. At the end of the day, they’re both electrically powered, speed-limited, personal mobility devices. The issue I believe is that the experience from the trials has skewed their view of scooters, based on how they are being ridden and who is riding them. The vehicle form factor is not the real issue here, and when we’re debating escooters it seems we are all too often in fact debating user groups and behaviours. Perhaps the debate would be better served to move onto how we support all users with training, and open up the mode to a wider demographic?

?

Micromobility can be so much more than escooters:

To try to broaden the debate to micromobility rather than just escooters, I searched for something credible to show people as an example. I was often being asked ‘other than eBikes which are legal anyway, what is micromobility beyond escooters?’ Aside from eCargo solutions, most of the form factors you can find seem ‘whacky’ and geared even more towards to the young (think mono-wheel…and this isn’t an anti-mono-wheel article, I just can’t see it catching on with 50-60 years olds) so I have struggled to answer this question in a rich and vividly described way.

In order to move the debate forward positively, WMG enlisted local design-house Astheimer to conduct a short design exercise with a simple brief; “Design a new type of personal mobility device, which would look equally at home being ridden by a 20 year old as a 60 year old. It needs to self-balance so no ‘push-off’ required to get it going (one of a range of things a lot of people find difficult with escooters), and it needs to serve a wider range of purposes so must have enough storage for a modest shopping trip”.

What they produced (see Figure 2) fits the brief nicely. A three-wheeler with an 80-litre storage box and the chance to switch this out for child seats or a flat deck for larger boxed loads etc. It incorporates some enhancements like a back rest for a slightly more relaxed longer-ride (maybe a seat would prove more popular, that would need some user trialling), and it also brings in some nice new features like a higher-level brake light (enabled by the back rest) and a rear-view camera which could display on the user’s smart phone.

Whilst this is only a concept, it breaks the mould and has already proven extremely useful in ‘making a point’, as well as attracting interest from some current escooter providers. It only took Astheimer a matter of weeks to develop this, acting as an illustration of the UK’s credentials as potentially the best innovation environment in the world. We are in a wonderful but frustrating position in the UK right now; we have Micromobility 2.0 in our hands, but risk allowing the first-mover opportunity to ebb away as it did for escooters. We’re also encouraging modal-shift away from cars, and introducing ‘sticks’ to discourage car use in urban areas (e.g. Clean Air Zones and Congestion Charging) but denying our citizens these more affordable “carrots” of exciting new products and alternatives to the car for shorter journeys.

?

Some simple actions could begin to move the needle on these issues – we need to widen the trials, to inform decisions on future legalisation:

We have learned a great deal from the current trials, but it’s time to move forwards. The following recommendations would begin to open up the space to innovation, and broaden the modal-shift opportunity significantly:

1)?????Support widening the trials and offer competitions to develop new form factors for personal mobility devices, particularly aimed at wider user groups. In addition to mainstream groups not catered for (e.g. those looking to do the weekly shop), involve organisations like Wheels for Wellbeing, Age UK and others who know the challenges of groups in society who could be left behind if not involved in building this new ecosystem. This will unleash innovation, and create export opportunities for UK businesses in the future. Most importantly though, it will broaden the appeal of Micromobility across the people of the UK, offering more choices to ditch the car, and accelerating the change we need to decarbonise transport.

2)?????Extend the UK trials to include folding escooters – potentially through ‘pseudo-owned’ models, keeping them on long-term rentals initially and retaining the speed limiting and geo-fencing similarly to the current rentals.

3)?????Provide incentives to expand existing trials on the ground to cover a wider area than today. ?This could mean opening up more neighbourhoods of a city (particularly contiguous ones), enabling integration with public transport, or adapting scooter use into ridesharing and commuter incentive policies. This will allow new demographics to take part, and is unlikely to increase street clutter (one of the major concerns with the current trials). It is a controversial suggestion, but those taking this option up are likely to be more experienced and law-abiding groups, who will consequently demonstrate better riding behaviours than those riding illegally today. This would have a positive effect on both perception of riders, and other riders’ behaviour (there is much research to suggest that seeing others doing something - i.e. riding well - is a far more effective way to achieve change than short-term ‘carrots’ or ‘sticks’, and it may also encourage non-riders to have a go). Crucially though, it will bring much wider learning to the trials to inform future policy.

If you’d like to work with us on developing UK supply-chains and trialling new forms of mobility, or you’d like to know more about the concept vehicle, get in touch with me via LinkedIn.

There’s a wide host of organisations we’re working with and learning from in this space including Cenex (@Beth Morley), CoMoUK (@Richard Dilks), The Connected Places Catapult (@Michael Edwards) and ForuMM - www.forumm.uk (@David Leipziger) amongst others – all worth following and connecting with to learn more.?

-----END----

[1] It’s extremely hard to find broad data on the UK trials at present as we still await the DfT reports on ridership, but if the UK is anything like the rest of the world, riders will be predominantly male and under the age of 35 – an example study for Vienna can be found here Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride - ScienceDirect [“We find that e-scooter users are more likely to be young, male…”]

[2] Note that at the time of editing this sadly the Mayor of London has had to make the move to ban scooters from the London Underground, however this is really an issue of product quality (folding ebikes are still allowed) which would be addressed by appropriate legalisation and standards - E-scooters to be banned from Tube from next week, TfL reveals | Evening Standard

[3] Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride - ScienceDirect

[1] Industry sales up 41% (Guardian ) - https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/21/cycling-boom-rolls-on-amid-struggle-to-meet-uk-demand-during-covid ?& Cycling demand up 200% (Cyclist ) - https://www.cyclist.co.uk/news/8285/cycling-has-increased-by-200-since-lockdown-government-reports

[2] This unfortunately remains anecdotal based on what I am told by industry insiders – we still await the interim report on the trials at time of writing, several months later than originally planned.?