3 Key Decision Points for Successful Shared Scooter Programs
By Mark Bennett, AICP, Planner/Urban Designer
Building off the successes of the hugely popular Divvy bikeshare program, which has served more than 30 million rides since 2013, the City of Chicago has now announced a permanent shared scooter program. Chicago treaded carefully and thoughtfully into shared scooters, building its permanent program based on experiences and knowledge gained from two progressive pilots in 2019 and 2020. By supporting the City through those pilots and providing our insight and expertise to set up the permanent program, Sam Schwartz has had a front-row seat to the rapidly changing landscapes of shared scooters and, more broadly, shared micromobility.
Along the way, our team has discovered how invaluable it is that cities dedicate time upfront to laying a strong, thoughtful foundation before beginning the process of designing and operating a shared scooter program. Cities looking to build successful shared scooter programs should start by considering these three key decision points:
Why do you want shared scooters, and what are your goals?
Consider that just because a private company wants to sell shared scooter service in your city does not automatically mean their plans will provide a strong mobility benefit. Cities need to be able to answer why and how the service will be of value to residents; the more specific, the better. In Chicago, the city set detailed purposes and objectives for running their shared scooter pilot in 2020, which led to better rules, a better evaluation and better outcomes—particularly in historically-disinvested neighborhoods and neighborhoods with fewer mobility options.
For instance, Chicago’s explicit focus on delivering equitable mobility outcomes led to the creation of strict rules on scooter deployment to and education within neighborhoods facing elevated economic, health and mobility barriers. Thanks to close oversight, operators met deployment requirements at a significantly higher rate in the 2020 pilot compared to the 2019 pilot, resulting in a 60% increase in the share of trips taken in Equity Priority Areas.
How are you building a holistic shared micromobility network?
E-scooters, pedal bikes, e-bikes and other devices all have different benefits and constraints, and not every device type offers the same mobility benefits across different cities or to different users. Further, different device types meet the needs and preferences of different users. A good program is built by considering a holistic network and avoiding tunnel vision on just one type of device.
The opportunity to build a holistic shared micromobility network is becoming more accessible to both big and small cities—in the last year, several private shared micromobility operators that traditionally focused on just one device have started offering multiple device types. In Chicago, the publicly-owned Divvy bike share system is adding dockable scooters, becoming the first docked bike share system in North America to do so.
What is the right regulatory mechanism to reach your goals?
A city may simply develop a business license that permits any interested companies to sell their services; under this model, the city has limited control over service and outcomes, but the system is less resource-intensive for the city. However, because of limited control, a city using the business license model accepts the possibility that no company will be interested in securing a license to operate.
Alternatively, a city may wish to enter into a partnership with one or more companies. Under this model, the city typically has decided it is important that shared micromobility service is available to residents and may bear administrative or financial costs to help ensure the desired level of service and outcomes.
Ultimately, there is a spectrum of regulatory mechanisms, and deciding where on this spectrum a city lands has critical impacts on the entire process of program design and operation.
Shared Micromobility: Models of Operation Spectrum
Shared scooter services can add a convenient, agile, lightweight, low-carbon mobility option to cities’ transportation networks. But cities also face concerns around device safety, parking, equity, and costs. A city that wants to overcome these concerns and ensure positive outcomes must first think critically about their goals for shared scooters, consider a holistic shared micromobility network, and select the right regulatory mechanism to meet their goals. When in doubt, pilot a program and then refine. Only when careful planning and attention has gone into these decision points is a city ready to begin designing a full program.