Which key measures for Demand-Responsive Transport in the new French Mobility Act?

Mobility Act key mesures Demand-Responsive Transport

What are the main key measures for Demand-Responsive Transport in the new French Mobility Act (LOM)? The text was published in the Official Journal of December 24, 2019. It brings many advances on shared mobility solutions including Demand-Responsive Transport. In particular, it marks the transition from a transport policy oriented towards major projects to an “everyday mobility” policy . 8 key points are to bear in mind:

1. Public Transport Authorities (PTA) mobility can more easily offer Demand-Responsive Transport services.

It is now possible for a PTA to intervene in the following 6 main areas, to develop an adapted offer to the territories: conventional regular transport, Demand-Responsive Transport, school transport, active and shared mobility, as well as solidarity mobility.

2. The mobility plans replace the current urban travel plans (PDU) and take into account Demand-Responsive Transport.

Active and shared mobility, solidarity mobility and the logistic challenges are better apprehended in these new plans. They are part of the objectives to fight urban sprawl, air pollution and for the preservation of biodiversity.

3. The transportation subsidy becomes the mobility subsidy and includes Demand-Responsive Transport.

This subsidy is subject to the setting up of conventional regular public transport services. In addition, it is possible to adjust its rate within the same work union according to the density of the territories.

4. Demand-Responsive Transport for People with Reduced Mobility (paratransit) is facilitated.

The mobility of people with reduced mobility will be facilitated, through concrete measures which include paratransit.

5. The development of Demand-Responsive Transport is facilitated.

The challenge is to make innovation a lever to meet the many unmet mobility needs.

6. The legal framework for carrying out experiments (POCs) on Demand-Responsive Transport in rural areas is adapted.

The act empowers the Government to legislate by ordinance to introduce legislative-level exemptions. This provision is part of the France Expérimentation approach.

7. Employers can implement Demand-Responsive Transport to facilitate their employees’ commuting as part of the compulsory negotiations to be carried out within companies with more than 50 employees.

These agreements must specify the manner in which employers undertake to facilitate the home-to-work trips of their employees. It could take the form of a mobility voucher.

8. A sustainable mobility package is created: up to € 400 / year to go to work by Demand-Responsive Transport.

Tous les employeurs privés et publics pourront contribuer aux frais de déplacement domicile-travail en solutions de mobilité partagée de leurs salariés. Ce forfait pourra s’élever jusqu’à 400 €/an en franchise d’impôt et de cotisations sociales. Aussi, il remplacera l’indemnité kilométrique vélo mise en place jusqu’à ce jour, mais dont la mise en œuvre est restée limitée car trop complexe. Ce forfait sera cumulable avec la participation de l’employeur à l’abonnement de transport en commun, dans une limite de 400€/an (la prise en charge de l’abonnement de transport en commun reste déplafonnée).

All private and public employers will be able to contribute to home-to-work trips’ costs through shared mobility solutions for their employees. This package can be up to € 400 / year free of tax and healthcare contributions. Also, it will replace the bicycle mileage allowance set up to date, but whose implementation has been limited because of it’s complexity. This package can be combined with the employer’s participation to the public transport subscription, up to a limit of € 400 / year (support for the public transport subscription remains uncapped).


Learn more about the LOM, the French Mobility Act (in Frenc)

Learn more about Home-to-Work trips

Lire la suite

Home-to-work trip : a social issue and a challenge for companies

Home to work trips

Home-to-work trip time, budget… employees are increasingly careful about their transport issues. Although the transport organization remain the responsibility of the public authorities, companies involvement in workers mobility is fundamental.

Home-to-work trips woes are not fresh. Jean Boyer made fun of it in times of war (“To get to my office,” 1945). Today, social medias are seeing the outpouring of discontent with users stranded on public transport; outside the cities, the Yellow Vest crisis has revealed the unease of workers forced to use an increasingly expensive car which is moreover, denigrated socially due to global warming.

Home-to-work mobility is almost as old as industrial society, most often considered as problematic.

Work is not everything: employees are also concerned about their quality of life.  The daily home-to-work trip time and the budget dedicated become determining criteria when seeking for a job, turning central in negotiations.
Recent studies show that the longer the journey time are (especially more than an hour), the higher the frustration is. However, this dissatisfaction is not limited to the route exclusively, but reflects how employment is regarded as a whole (less interest, less productivity, less interactions with colleagues, less loyalty to the company …) [1].
In some territories or within some social categories, mobility is even an absolute barrier to employment: one in four French people has already refused a job offer or training because they cannot get there [2].

The ‘mobility plan’, the company’s armed arm

With no intention to reduce the responsibility of political and societal choices, companies can play a big role in home-to-work mobility. Above all, it’s in her best interest. Expanding its recruitment pool, having an additional argument to attract the best profiles, improve worker”s quality of life and reduce the risk of road accidents, display social and environmental responsibility, are all incentives to look at the matter. That’s where “company mobility plan” comes into action.

Home-to-work trip: improving the quality of life for employees

Mandatory for all companies with more than 100 employees on the same work site, the mobility plan seeks to make it easier and “cleaner” for company travels, including commuting.

In addition to improving the quality of life, it has an essential environmental dimension, aiming to reduce the individual car use in favour of soft or collective transport. It can be developed within a single structure or between different companies in the same area.

In all cases, the plan is carried out in consultation with all stakeholders, in the first place the transport authority in the area concerned.

It includes a diagnostic phase to determine precisely the journeys undertaken by employees (location, length, duration, modes used, cost, satisfaction, needs and expectations…), before establishing the improvement axes and implement the concrete measures.

Home-to-work travel

Concert, facilitate, network

Various levers are available to improve workers’ mobility. In addition to “physical” accommodations, how work itself is organized plays a big role: establishing homework days, shifting schedules to avoid rush hour, encouraging video conferencing meetings, are all ways that can reduce travel.
In addition, simple equipment can easily lift the brakes on the use of soft modes: secure bike garages, changing rooms equipped with showers, service bikes…
Other actions can be taken, such as increasing the support for public transport subscriptions or a financial help to purchase electric bicycles.
Finally, with the help of new technologies, companies can play an active role in connecting its employees for carpooling or even, from a certain number of users, setting up a shuttle or creating a car-sharing service.

Home-to-work travel: making physical adjustments, but also rethinking the organisation of work

Companies therefore have an interest in promoting mobility : it is a factor of attractiveness as well as an element of its social and environmental responsibility. The legal requirements in this regard are also expected to be stronger, starting with the mobility orientation law just adopted: it now makes home-to-work mobility a mandatory part of social dialogue. Proof that in this great challenge of mobility, companies promise to be a central player.

[1] Paris Workplace 2018 Ifop-SFL Barometer

[2] Mobility and Employment Study 2017, Elabe for the Inclusive Mobility Laboratory

Lire la suite

Why will commuting be the focus of 2016?


If we look at the transport market, we notice a boom of urban public transport services, which, unlike the business model of taxis or chauffeur driven cars, aims to pool journeys of several passengers over short distances. New services are flourishing all over the world, to match the demand for commuting. Here an overview of this market that will be for us THE subject of transport this year.

Commuting : The USA are still one step ahead

Many players are interested in the subject around the world, starting in the United States, where several startups have positioned themselves on the niche. Among them is Bridj, active in Boston, Washington and Kansas City, and Chariot and Ridepal, based in San Francisco. All three offer to book a seat on buses on regular commutes via a smartphone app. They promote a better experience for users’ daily journeys, and therefore seek to replace public transport.

Commuting also features the colossus Uber, which has been leaing UberHOP experiments in Seattle [1] and Toronto [2], and UberCOMMUTE in Chicago since December 2015. These two experiments are based on the same premise : on daily and regular commuting trips, there are so many requests that coincide geographically and temporally that it is possible to pool the journeys. UberHOP allows to pool the journeys of several people by giving them appointments at support points indicated in the app (sort of bus stops 2.0), while UberCOMMUTE is aimed at particular drivers making their regular journeys, encouraging them to pick up passengers on their way, getting closer to an instant carpooling system. Similarly, its rival Lyft has set up an experimental carpooling service [4], called the Lyft Line, encouraging the sharing of regular commutes. Available in about fifteen American cities, these routes represent according to Lyft 40% of the journeys made via their application and illustrate the high expectations on the topic in the major metropolises.


The common feature of all these services is that they have established themselves in large American metropolises with low quality public transport compared to our European standards, as the United States remains the country of the “all-car”.

The premise of these startups is therefore simple: on one hand the public transport system offers a relatively poor quality service, and on the other hand users wish to use more shared transport systems (for economic, ecological or practical reasons). Why not then provide a service that competes with public transport, almost at the same price with a much better quality? This approach is eased due to the much more blurred border between public and private in Anglo-Saxon countries, where many services deemed “public” in Europe have been liberalised and are therefore no longer subsidised. Users, accustomed to paying the “high price” are therefore not surprised to see new offers competing with local transport.

Commuting : In Asia, we’re taking it to the next level

Unsurprisingly, in Asia, similar transport services are booming, mainly to cope with the growing demand, which face a near-non-existent transport supply. In Singapore, for example, Beeline is supported by the government and has already set up 12 transport lines, adjusting its offer as it goes according to user requests. In India, ZipGo is also experiencing rapid growth, and has opened lines in major Indian metropolises (Bombay, Bangalore, Jaipur or New Dehli). Anyone who has ever taken transport in India will understand why this startup is so successful with educated and urbanized Indian youth. The startup even offers a service reserved for women [5] which is very popular to face the insecurity in the public space.. In addition, ZipGo is also giving a speech in favour of de-cluttering roads and environmental awareness, which will be a major challenge for this growing country. While ZipGo was banned in Bangalore by the local government [6], it received strong support from its users and was able to continue the expansion of its service.


The Chinese transport market is also a battleground for many companies because of its astronomical potential. One of the biggest players in this market is Didi Bus, a private bus service that can be booked via the Internet, launched by Didi Chuxing, the chauffeur driven cars leader in China. Didi Bus already claimed an impressive 500,000 users shortly after its launch in October 2015 [7], and a very strong growth potential. As in the case of ZipGo, Didi Bus takes advantage of a very poor and inefficient public transport offer to settle in this market.

What about France?

For the moment, initiatives on commuting remain timid in France and Europe. In Paris and in the major French cities, there are various local instant carpooling services (Wayzup, OuiHop or CityGoo in the Ile-de-France for example), which are likened to a 2.0 hitchhiking model. These services aim to establish regular use by drivers and passengers, but require a very large number of drivers and passengers in order to successfully balance supply and demand.

In addition to these collaborative services, there are “classic” chauffeur driven car offerings, competing with taxis and aiming for more irregular use. Few people can afford to take an Uber every morning to go to work. With the Padam Mobility service, we are halfway between these players, offering a regular-use transport offer based on professional drivers.


The ZipGo experience stands in stark contrast to the usual image of transport in India

Why make the choice to offer public transport when in France, and especially in Ile-de-France, where the transport offer is much more developed than in the United States or in emerging countries? We started from a rather simple observation: there is a regular and cheap public transport offer in Ile-de-France (because subsidized, let’s not forget), with extensive geographical coverage, and one (relatively) good quality of service.

The only alternative so far is the personal car (and by extension short-distance carpooling). Why not offer a second level of service in public transport, aimed at more demanding users? To provide them a private offer that would co-exist and complement the existing public offer?

If we draw a parallel with long-distance journeys, the diversification of transport offers is much more obvious: there are both “premium” offers, comfortable, fast but expensive (airplane, TGV), and more “low cost” offers (long bus Ouigo trains) or offers based on the principle of collaborative consumption (of the BlablaCar type). These offers are aimed at different types of users with different needs and expectations. Why not do the same for short distance saves?









Lire la suite