MaaS Implications in the Smart City: A Multi-Stakeholder Approach

Abstract

Cities worldwide are calling for smart mobility strategies to tackle the negative externalities of their transport networks. Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is expected to introduce a new mobility model that promotes smarter and more sustainable urban futures. Given the novelty of the concept, this paper explores the implications that might arise from the implementation of MaaS in today’s metropolises in relation to the six dimensions of smart cities: smart governance, smart economy, smart mobility, smart environment, smart people, and smart living. To this end, 42 semi-structured interviews with MaaS stakeholders were conducted in Madrid (Spain). Thematic analysis identified a set of 35 urban implications. The success of MaaS requires more than the mere deployment of technologies and must be supported by the reorganisation of institutional structures, the reform of the regulatory scenario, the stimulation of innovation-based entrepreneurship, the promotion of environmental awareness, the encouragement of cultural transition, and the consideration of the public sphere. Overall, valuable insights are identified for policymakers when designing MaaS. Assessment of multiple stakeholders’ perspectives enables a holistic understanding of these strategies and thus maximises their potential to address the limitations of our complex mobility systems in meeting urban sustainability goals.

1. Introduction

Driven by the rapid growth of the world’s population and rising urbanisation processes, urban sprawl is taking over human settlements [1]. At the same time, other global megatrends, such as digitalisation and servitisation, are enhancing hyper-connected and “liquid” societies through constant change [2], re-shaping lives worldwide [3]. In particular, advances in information and communications technologies (ICTs) are democratising data, which are now conceived as the “new oil” of the 21st century [4]. Within this dynamic scenario, the concept of a smart city (SC) was introduced in the 1990s, fostered by the agile development of technological innovations and the aim of improving people’s quality of life [5,6,7,8]. This phenomenon has been widely addressed in the past decade as it appears to be an opportunity to re-think our metropolises and tackle the heterogeneous challenges that threaten their sustainability.

Today, there are numerous interpretations of SCs in academia, which shows that the intended reality is still unclear [9,10]. However, and despite this lack of global understanding, SCs are usually described as the confluence of six smart dimensions (articulated by ICTs): smart governance, smart economy, smart mobility, smart environment, smart people, and smart living [11,12,13]. Even though some authors have used other terminology to refer to these dimensions, this paper adopts the well-known approach of [11]. Each of the SC dimensions can be further broken down into different “areas of action” that help to clarify their scope. It is worth pointing out that the literature has not yet reached a consensus on the definition of these “areas” [14,15]. This is therefore the first knowledge gap that this paper aims to examine.

Among the six SC dimensions, smart mobility focuses on pursuing a smarter and more sustainable mobility model [9]. In parallel to the transformation of our cities, urban transport systems are currently undergoing a significant revolution. Specifically, during the past decade, a broad variety of app-based mobility services (e.g., micro-mobility, shared-mobility, or ride-hailing services) has flooded urban areas around the world, driven by a change in individuals’ attitudes towards consumption from “ownership” to “usership” [16]. The widespread availability of these new options, together with more “traditional” transport services, such as public transport, has created a complex network, leading experts to recognise the need to develop smart mobility solutions that simultaneously appeal to individual expectations and limit the societal, economic, and environmental impacts of travellers’ behaviours [17].

In this context, the concept of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) was proposed in 2014 as a smart strategy to revolutionise the urban mobility scenario. One of the first definitions was provided by Sonja Heikkilä, who described it as “a system in which a comprehensive range of mobility services are provided to customers by mobility operators” [18] (p. 8). Early research on MaaS also emphasised that mobility services should be delivered via means of a single digital interface (often in the form of a smartphone application or a website) that enables people to plan for multimodal travelling, provides a single mechanism for payment of all included alternatives, and offers subscription plans in the form of “travel packages” or “bundles” [19]. Since then, several authors have assessed the core characteristics of this new solution [3,20,21]. All its interpretations seem to share the four subsequent ideas: (i) MaaS presents a mobility distribution model that integrates all the mobility services of a city, including ticketing, payment, and real-time information; (ii) MaaS is driven by servitisation, encouraging a move from an “ownership-based paradigm” to an “access-based perspective” of mobility; (iii) MaaS is based on a user-centric scheme, providing on-demand tailored solutions according to individuals’ needs, preferences, and expectations; and (iv) MaaS is supplied through a single digital interface, underlining the importance of ICT for its deployment. Despite the fact that the scientific literature on this notion has grown rapidly in recent years, MaaS is not yet fully mature, and its definition is still evolving [19,22,23].

The current state of practice includes a number of MaaS demonstrations. Nevertheless, MaaS is a (relatively) novel concept, and almost all the pilots conducted so far have been small-scale [24]. Knowledge of the possible implications of MaaS for our metropolises is therefore still limited [25]; while many experts agree that MaaS is meant to trigger a new mobility model with the potential to bring relevant opportunities for all the dimensions of the city [26,27,28], others doubt its benefits and consider that MaaS could generate unintended consequences, compromising the ideals of urban sustainability (e.g., an increase in the number of personal trips, the emergence of private economic interests, or a rise in privacy issues) [29,30]. According to [31], a fundamental condition for defining a successful MaaS is to integrate the views of the various entities engaged in these multimodal solutions. At the moment, and although several authors have attempted to conceptualise this ecosystem, there is no agreement on the actors involved in the network. This is the second knowledge gap to be addressed in this study. In this paper, it should be noted that the term “ecosystem” refers only to the “network of actors” involved in MaaS, as in [32].

In accordance with prior investigations, the adoption of MaaS appears to be leading to the transformation of our cities. In this regard, some authors have already explored the possible effects of the mobility model behind MaaS on different urban dimensions, and particularly, on the six dimensions of the SC (see Section 2.2.2). However, none of this previous research has simultaneously evaluated the implications that MaaS might have for all these dimensions as a whole. This is the third knowledge gap tackled by the investigation. An integrative and multidimensional approach is key to define successful MaaS that responds to the different challenges faced by cities.

Consequently, and in response to the research gaps identified, this paper proposes the following three objectives. The first is to gain a better understanding of the SC concept by identifying the “areas of action” that conform each of its six dimensions: smart governance, smart economy, smart mobility, smart environment, smart people, and smart living. This will help to systematise their scope and structure. The second objective is to increase the knowledge of MaaS by exploring the network of actors engaged in these multimodal solutions. This evaluation will be of great relevance when considering the definition and implementation of the new mobility model. The final objective, based on previous contributions, is to assess the implications that MaaS—as a smart mobility strategy—might bring (simultaneously) to each of the SC dimensions and their corresponding “areas of action”.

Given that MaaS is an emerging phenomenon, this study adopts a qualitative methodology based on semi-structured interviews. Qualitative techniques are increasingly applied when investigating innovative concepts in the field of mobility, e.g., [33,34,35]. The findings of this paper will help prepare cities for the deployment of MaaS in line with the goals of the SC and will therefore be key for policymakers in outlining the way towards more sustainable urban futures.

Figure 1 describes the structure of the paper. After the Introduction, Section 2 includes two literature reviews: the first explores the notion of SC and its “areas of action”, while the second focuses on the concept of MaaS (as a smart mobility strategy) and the actors that play a key role in this new model. Section 3 describes the methodology applied in the case study of Madrid (Spain), and the results are exposed in Section 4. Finally, Section 5 discusses the findings, and Section 6 summarises the main conclusions.

2. Research Background: Revising the SC and MaaS

2.1. The SC Dimensions and Their “Areas of Action”

As noted above, the SC concept is commonly broken down into six dimensions, which are in turn subdivided into a series of “areas of action” [14]. The literature reveals a lack of consensus regarding these areas.

In January 2021, a comprehensive review of the literature published in the last ten years was conducted with the aim of exploring the SC dimensions and systematising their structure. The subsequent procedure was followed to detect relevant publications. First, the exact keywords “Smart City” and “Smart City dimensions” were searched for English-written documents in the Scopus and ScienceDirect databases. Then, and given the large and non-controllable number of studies found, the revision was limited according to the following three criteria: (i) first, to only peer-reviewed journal articles, following the approach of [36,37] and restricting the focus of interest to high-quality research; (ii) second, to investigations covering at least three of the six SC dimensions since the aim was to provide an integrative and multidimensional perspective; and (iii) third, to manuscripts pertaining to the field of smart mobility, given that MaaS is a smart mobility strategy. This last criterion was crucial to exclude certain studies and reduce the literature findings to a convenient and manageable amount. In total, 28 documents were kept for revision.

As shown in

Table 1. The SC dimensions and their “areas of action”.

	“Areas of Action”		Literature References
Smart Governance (SG)	SG.1	Participation and collaboration	[3,20,38,39,41,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59]
	SG.2	Legislative and regulatory framework	[3,20,38,39,41,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,60,61,62]
	SG.3	Transparency and access to information	[3,20,38,39,41,43,44,46,47,48,49,50,51,53,54,55,56,57,60,61,62,63]
	SG.4	Public and social services	[9,20,38,39,41,42,44,45,49,50,51,54,56]
	SG.5	Efficiency in (government) management	[3,20,38,39,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,57,58,61,62,63]
	SG.6	Multi-level governance: structure and organisation	[3,20,38,39,41,43,44,45,47,49,53,54,55,57,58,59]
	SG.7	Digitalisation (i.e., digital capacity)	[3,39,41,44,45,46,49,50,51,53,54,55,57,58,59,61,62,63]
Smart Economy (SC)	SC.1	Business innovation: flexibility and creativity	[3,20,38,43,44,45,48,49,50,51,54,55,57,58,59,60,63]
	SC.2	Financing: funding and investment	[3,9,20,38,39,41,44,45,47,48,49,50,53,54,55,56,58,61]
	SC.3	Taxation	[20,38,43,44,53,55,61]
	SC.4	Entrepreneurship	[38,43,50,51,55]
	SC.5	Digitalisation: local and global interconnectedness	[9,38,39,44,47]
	SC.6	Efficient management for sustainable productivity	[20,38,39,43,44,48,50,51,54,56]
	SC.7	Circular economy	[43]
Smart Mobility (SM)	SM.1	Monitoring and management of the mobility network	[3,9,20,38,39,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,63]
	SM.2	Multimodality: integrated network of public transport and new mobility services	[3,9,20,38,39,41,42,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,63]
	SM.3	Digital and physical infrastructure	[3,9,20,38,39,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63]
	SM.4	Logistics	[20,42,43,44,45,48,49,50,54,56,61]
	SM.5	Accessibility	[9,20,38,39,41,45,48,49,51,56,57,58,59,61,63]
	SM.6	App-based (on-demand) mobility services	[3,20,38,39,41,42,43,45,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,58,59,60,61,62,63]
	SM.7	Clean and non-motorised options	[3,9,20,38,39,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,58,59,60,61,62,63]
	SM.8	Autonomous and connected vehicles	[3,41,46,55,56,58,59,63]
Smart Environment (SE)	SE.1	Environmental monitoring and protection	[3,9,20,38,39,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63]
	SE.2	Efficient management of the network for reducing environmental impacts	[3,9,20,42,43,44,46,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63]
	SE.3	Energy efficiency	[3,48,53,59,60,61,63]
	SE.4	Sustainable and adaptive urban planning	[3,9,38,39,41,42,43,44,45,47,48,49,50,51,55,56,58,61,62,63]
	SE.5	Sustainable resources management	[3,43,44,46,50,54,56,61]
Smart People (SP)	SP.1	Digital education and learning	[3,20,38,39,41,42,43,44,46,47,48,49,50,51,53,54,56,58,59,61,62]
	SP.2	Creative skills development	[3,9,20,38,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,53,54,56,58,59,61,62]
	SP.3	Social inclusion and equity	[3,20,38,39,41,43,44,45,48,51,54,55,56,57,60,61,63]
	SP.4	Awareness raising and behavioural change	[3,20,38,39,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]
	SP.5	Community building: participation in public life	[3,20,39,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,62]
Smart Living (SL)	SL.1	Connectivity and accessibility	[3,9,20,38,39,41,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,53,54,55,56,57,59,60,61,62,63]
	SL.2	Security and privacy	[3,41,43,44,46,47,48,49,56,57,60]
	SL.3	Safety	[3,9,20,38,39,41,42,44,46,47,48,51,52,54,55,56,59,60,61,62,63]
	SL.4	Resilience	[44,63]
	SL.5	Social welfare (i.e., liveability) and public value	[9,20,38,39,42,44,45,46,47,48,50,51,52,54,55,56,58,59,60,61,62]
	SL.6	Public space design (user-centred)	[52,62]
	SL.7	Flexibility and convenience (lifestyle)	[3,20,38,39,45,47,48,53,54,55,57,59,60,62,63]
	SL.8	Health and quality of life	[20,38,39,44,48,49,50,51,52,53,56,58,60,61,62,63]

, a total of 40 “areas of action” were identified. The smart governance dimension refers mainly to the governance model and its adaptation to the new social requirements [38,39]. The seven “areas of action” identified include aspects related to participatory processes, legislation, information transparency, public and social services, efficiency in management, institutional organisation, and government digitalisation. The smart economy dimension focuses on the productive structure of the city [40,41]. Its seven “areas of action” are mainly associated with business innovation, finances, taxation, entrepreneurship, interconnection, management efficiency for sustainable productivity, and the notion of a circular economy. The smart mobility dimension aims to encourage a sustainable, inclusive, and efficient mobility system for people and goods [9,42]. This dimension is subdivided into eight “areas of action”, which refer to concepts such as the monitoring and management of the network, multimodality, transport infrastructure, logistics, accessibility, app-based mobility services, non-motorised options, and autonomous and connected vehicles. The smart environment dimension comprises several challenges related to the achievement of sustainable development [43,44]. It includes five “areas of action” addressing aspects such as environmental monitoring and protection, energy efficiency, sustainable urban planning, and sustainable resources management. Improving quality of life and social cohesion are the main challenges of the smart people dimension [20,45], whose five “areas of action” are associated with digital education, creativity skills development, social inclusion and equity, behavioural change, and community building. Finally, the smart living dimension fosters community living [46,47] and is broken down into eight “areas of action” related to the notions of connectivity and accessibility, security, privacy, safety, resilience, social welfare and public value, the design of public space, flexibility and convenience, and quality of life. For a more detailed explanation of the “areas of action”, the reader is directed to the references included in Table 1.

In line with the previous literature, it should be noted that the proposed classification is not static: new SC dimensions and “areas of action” may be added in future studies, as our cities and societies are in a continuous process of change.

2.2. MaaS as a Smart Mobility Strategy

2.2.1. The MaaS Ecosystem: Identification of Key Actors

MaaS is expected to bring together different mobility services and thus a wide variety of complementary entities. Experts are interested in exploring this innovative ecosystem, which does not yet seem to be well defined. They agree that identifying the network of actors involved in the new model is key to successfully defining such smart mobility strategies.

In response to this knowledge gap, a comprehensive review of the literature published in the last ten years was carried out in January 2021. The search for relevant publications was conducted in the Scopus and ScienceDirect databases, as in the case of sub-Section 2.1. The exact keywords “MaaS” and “MaaS ecosystem” were searched in English-language documents. Again, the review was limited to peer-reviewed journal articles. As shown in Table 2, a total of 16 studies were evaluated.

The revision revealed a set of 17 MaaS actors, which were grouped into 2 main categories: end users (or travellers) and urban stakeholders. Six of these profiles seem central to the new mobility model as they are considered in a significant number of studies: (i) end users (or travellers); (ii) academia and research institutions; (iii) IT developers and data companies; (iv) MaaS provider; (v) transport operators (both public and private); and (vi) urban authorities (or government).

According to several authors (see Table 2), the MaaS provider is the only actor that MaaS brings to the mobility scenario, while the others are already part of it [31]. The literature locates this entity at the centre of the ecosystem, between mobility service providers and end users, assuming two main roles: the MaaS integrator and the MaaS operator. This means that the MaaS provider is responsible for both assembling the offerings of various mobility service providers and for packaging and delivering them to travellers via a single digital interface. In agreement with previous research [34,64], the incorporation of the MaaS provider requires a person(s) or institution(s) to accept the above two assignments. It is also noted that there may be more than one MaaS provider in the same area. However, this topic is beyond the scope of the paper and requires further study.

Table 2. Identifying the network of actors involved in MaaS.

MaaS Actors	[65]	[64]	[22]	[31]	[66]	[67]	[34]	[26]	[68]	[69]	[32]	[70]	[30]	[71]	[72]	[73]
End users (travellers)	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
Academia and research institutions *				√	√	√		√	√		√		√	√		√
Automotive companies *						√							√
Energy companies *						√							√
Financing/funding companies *				√	√	√		√			√		√	√	√
Firms offering ticketing/payment solutions *			√	√							√
Insurance companies *				√							√				√
IT developers and data companies *	√	√	√	√	√	√		√	√	√	√		√	√	√	√
MaaS provider *	√	√		√			√	√	√	√	√			√	√
Media and marketing firms *				√	√						√				√
Passenger associations *						√							√
Transport consulting companies *						√							√
Transport operators (public and private) *	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
Unions *				√							√
Urban authorities (government) *	√	√	√	√		√			√		√	√	√	√		√
Vehicle manufacturers *					√									√
Local civic organisations *																√

* MaaS urban stakeholders.

Table 2. Identifying the network of actors involved in MaaS.

MaaS Actors	[65]	[64]	[22]	[31]	[66]	[67]	[34]	[26]	[68]	[69]	[32]	[70]	[30]	[71]	[72]	[73]
End users (travellers)	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
Academia and research institutions *				√	√	√		√	√		√		√	√		√
Automotive companies *						√							√
Energy companies *						√							√
Financing/funding companies *				√	√	√		√			√		√	√	√
Firms offering ticketing/payment solutions *			√	√							√
Insurance companies *				√							√				√
IT developers and data companies *	√	√	√	√	√	√		√	√	√	√		√	√	√	√
MaaS provider *	√	√		√			√	√	√	√	√			√	√
Media and marketing firms *				√	√						√				√
Passenger associations *						√							√
Transport consulting companies *						√							√
Transport operators (public and private) *	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√
Unions *				√							√
Urban authorities (government) *	√	√	√	√		√			√		√	√	√	√		√
Vehicle manufacturers *					√									√
Local civic organisations *																√

* MaaS urban stakeholders.

2.2.2. MaaS and the SC Dimensions

All the SC dimensions are interrelated and influence each other. Thus, although MaaS is essentially conceived as a smart mobility strategy [20], it also has effects on the other five.

As mentioned in Section 1, some authors have already explored the potential implications of MaaS on the different SC dimensions. Studies on MaaS and governance, e.g., [3,20,21,34,74], mainly focus on the different actors involved in the mobility scenario and their roles and responsibilities, as well as on the legislative strategies required to align the new model with urban sustainability goals. Research on MaaS and the economy, e.g., [16,30,31,33,75], deals with the design of an innovative business model based on “travel packages” or “bundles”. The literature on MaaS and mobility, e.g., [71,76,77,78,79], analyses the potential of the new solutions to integrate all the forms of transport available into a single digital interface to improve individuals’ travel experience. Investigations on MaaS and environment, e.g., [25,77,80,81,82], evaluate the potential of MaaS to minimise car-dependency, encouraging a more sustainable mobility scheme and a more liveable metropolis. Papers on MaaS and people, e.g., [83,84,85,86,87], explore the user-centric nature of MaaS. They also assess the behavioural transition from an “ownership” to a “usership” regime proposed by the new model; MaaS expects end users to acquire mobility services, not the transport modes themselves. Finally, research on MaaS and living, e.g., [26,88], addresses how to integrate societal goals into the framework of MaaS. While all these works represent an important step forward, their findings still provide a partial and sectoral understanding of how MaaS might transform our cities.

Based on a review of the literature and practice in the SC field, [89] highlights the relevance of adopting a holistic perspective for the assessment of SC strategies, such as MaaS in this case. In line with these authors, this paper follows a comprehensive approach with the aim of providing guidance on the potential implications of MaaS for the six dimensions of SCs as a whole. At this point, the complexity of considering all dimensions simultaneously, as well as the added value of establishing this framework, should be noted.

3. Methodological Approach: Semi-Structured Interviews in Madrid (Spain)

On the basis of the previous literature review, a set of semi-structured interviews were developed in Madrid (Spain). Figure 2 presents an overview of the methodological approach followed.

3.1. Description of the Research Location: Madrid (Spain)

The selection of Madrid (Spain) as a case study was mainly motivated by its potential to embrace the implementation of MaaS. A set of conditions make this area a prospective candidate for hosting these innovative solutions: (i) high digital-penetration rates; (ii) a robust and well-structured public transport system; and (iii) a growing and diverse offer of app-based mobility services (i.e., micro-mobility, shared-mobility, and ride-hailing services). However, it is key to consider how all these public and private options are integrated when deploying the new model. Although MaaS promises a highly attractive and sustainable multimodal scenario, some experts are concerned about the effects that the app-based services might have on public transport [29,90]. These new alternatives should complement—and not substitute—public transport experiences, which by definition have to be the backbone of MaaS [91].

The region of Madrid covers an area of around 8020 km² and is divided into 179 municipalities. It has 6.8 million inhabitants, nearly half of whom (3.3 million inhabitants) live in Madrid City [92]. In recent decades, this city has undergone significant growth and suburbanisation processes, with many residents and businesses moving to its metropolitan area. Mobility in Madrid is characterised by a dense and integrated multimodal public transport network of 12 metro lines, 209 urban bus lines, 444 suburban bus lines, 8 suburban rail lines, and 4 tram/light rail lines [93]. Since 2010, this “traditional” system has been complemented by a wide variety of app-based mobility services. As noted by previous studies [17,94,95], these new solutions are becoming increasingly popular in Madrid. According to the 2018 Madrid Mobility Survey [96], an average of 15.8 million trips take place on a working day in the Madrid Region. These trips are split across multiple modes, the main ones being private car/motorbike (39.0%), walking and bike (34.0%), and public transport services (24.3%). The use of environmentally friendly options increases within Madrid City, where 20.3% of trips are made by private car/motorcycle, 40.0% by active modes, and 34.8% by public transport. A total of 14.2% of the travel experiences in this urban area are multimodal, a number that rises to almost 35.0% in the region.

Several travel-planning applications are currently available in Madrid to facilitate the use of the complex mobility network. Nevertheless, none of them include payment or e-ticketing integration across the multiple transport options. Today, the most promising MaaS application is called “MaaS Madrid”, which has been provided since 2018 by the local transport company (Empresa Municipal de Transportes de Madrid—EMT). This application is still under development.

At this point, it is worth noting that one of the central ambitions of this paper is to lay the foundations for the deployment of MaaS in Madrid in the near future, an initiative that has been already discussed by local urban authorities.

3.2. Application of the Methodology: Semi-Structured Interviews

3.2.1. Selection of Participants and Recruitment Strategy

Urban stakeholders should be placed at the core of urban planning and decision-making processes to ensure the success of SC strategies, such as MaaS. Their involvement ensures a comprehensive and holistic understanding of the challenges and opportunities that emerge in the city when an innovative service (or product) is introduced [14,97,98]. As a result, this paper focuses on evaluating urban stakeholders’ perspective in order to explore the potential implications of MaaS for our urban environments. The literature review developed in Section 2.2.1 identifies five profiles that can be considered essential in these multimodal solutions, and this study includes four of them: (i) academia and research institutions; (ii) IT developers and data companies; (iii) transport operators; and (iv) urban authorities (or government). The MaaS provider is not taken into account as MaaS is currently not implemented in Madrid.

For the recruitment, participants were contacted via e-mail (the e-mail addresses of all the stakeholders contacted to participate in the interviews —see

Table 3. Summary of the statistics of the semi-structured interview participants.

MaaS Stakeholders	Individuals Contacted (n)	Individuals Interviewed (n)
Academic and research institutions	6 urban mobility planners	6
	6 urban planners	6
IT developers and data companies	12 entities	6 1
Transport operators	2 public transport operators	2
	10 private transport operators	10 2
Urban authorities	5 central government authorities	5
	5 local municipality authorities	5
	2 public transport authorities 3	2

¹ Stakeholders involved in application design and development (IT), data management, and travel planners. ² 2 car-sharing; 2 scooter-sharing; 2 motorbike-sharing; 2 bike-sharing; 1 taxi; 1 ride-hailing (VTC). ³ In Madrid, there are two public transport authorities.

—are in the public domain and can be found on the web), and invited to take part in the study. The e-mail provided them with detailed information explaining the nature of the study and the confidentiality of its results. In addition, they were asked to complete a consent form that allowed the recording, storing, transcribing, and use the results of the interviews for academic purposes. In this pre-interview correspondence, each stakeholder was able to select a convenient date and time for the session, as well as their preferred means of communication, namely face-to-face, video, or phone call. The participants were not incentivised in any way to take part in this experiment.

In total, 48 stakeholders were contacted, of whom 42 took part in the interviews (Table 3). All of them were from Madrid (Spain) to ensure an appropriate level of knowledge on the case study. The authors of [99] suggested that the minimum non-probability sample size for semi-structured interviews should be between five and twenty-five people, which this study has significantly exceeded. However, it is important to note that the methodology did not focus on conducting a specific number of sessions, but rather on reaching the saturation point, which is when the data collected began to provide little, if any, new information [100].

3.2.2. Semi-Structured Interviews Procedure

The interviews took place from February 2021 to September 2021. All the sessions were conducted in Spanish and tentatively lasted from 30 min to 1 h. They were developed face-to-face at the participants’ workplace or exceptionally by video or phone call. In line with prior research [101], the interviews followed a semi-structured template whose theoretical framework was based on the literature review developed in Section 2. As detailed in Appendix A, an interview guide was designed to improve consistency between the sessions, structured in five parts: (i) introduction of the study; (ii) confidentiality statement and participant information; (iii) open question (“What do you expect from the arrival of MaaS in our cities?”); (iv) core discussion to explore the implications that MaaS might bring to the six dimensions of the SC; and (v) closure of the interview. Some flexibility was allowed in the questioning approach to obtain richer data. Participants were encouraged to freely express their opinions and views and were asked to add any aspects not considered in the template.

The reliability of the results was ensured by including triangulation procedures: one researcher guided and organised the interviews, while another took notes in case the recorder failed [102]. All interviews were fully recorded to ensure the accuracy of the insights and to facilitate the subsequent assessment.

3.2.3. Data Analysis

Based on the thematic analysis approach [103], this study followed the systematic line of work of [104]. Thematic analysis is an evaluation method for identifying, organising, and offering insights into patterns of themes across items of qualitative data. It has been widely used in transport research, e.g., [105,106,107], and consists of the following four steps: (i) full transcription of the recordings of the sessions; (ii) familiarisation with the written data and identification of codes; (iii) search, revision, and definition of themes; and (iv) generation of findings.

Each of the 42 interviews was transcribed and fully coded, with some data extracts falling under more than 1 code. A spreadsheet was used to organise the codes and match the data extracts—conserving the surrounding data in order to maintain the context—into a manageable format. Then, the codes and related extracts were analysed and combined repeatedly to outline a set of overarching themes that responded to the aim of the study. It should be noted that the themes were not developed by looking for a wealth of textual evidence, but by identifying structures with explanatory capacity within the data [107]. These themes were linked to the theoretical literature after—not before—the evaluation.

The analysis was carried out by a research team consisting of one transport engineer, one urban planner, and one psychologist. This multidisciplinary perspective guaranteed more comprehensive results. To ensure reliability and avoid potential bias, the three academics evaluated the data independently at the coding stage, and then compared and synthesised their assessments to create a single “bigger-picture” narrative. During the synthesis, a consensus of 85–90% was obtained on the codes that eventually formed the building blocks of the themes—this very high inter-code reliability helped validate the work. Throughout the process of identifying the themes, some of the codes matched more than one. In addition, some of the topics seemed interconnected.

The objective of this methodology was not to find generic truths. The researchers did not attempt to infer from the data anything other than what was explicitly stated. When writing up, the main considerations were to provide “a concise, coherent, logical, non-repetitive, and interesting account of the story the data tell” [103] (p. 23) and to illustrate the prevalence of the themes by showing the most characteristic responses [104].

A cross-tabulation matrix of the defined themes and the SC “areas of action” was developed in order to explore the interdependence between the six SC dimensions. The findings were also summarised via tag clouds (Section 4.1, Section 4.2, Section 4.3, Section 4.4, Section 4.5 and Section 4.6) [108], which provide a simple and effective means to visually communicate the most frequent words in text documents. Different font sizes were used to represent the frequency with which the themes appeared during the interviews.

4. Findings: Implications of MaaS Implementation in the Context of the SC

This section presents the results of the semi-structured interviews with urban stakeholders. Dissimilar interpretations of MaaS were detected among them, which should be considered when interpreting the findings.

The interviews revealed a set of 35 implications that MaaS might bring to our cities (

Table 4. Implications of MaaS implementation in the context of the SC.

Smart Governance (SG) Implications		SC “Areas of Action” (Section 2.1)
IG1	Define a new regulatory framework based on innovation.	SG1, SG2, SG6, SG7, SP5
IG2	Define new governmental levels (i.e., new roles) with new commitments and responsibilities within the MaaS ecosystem	SG1, SG5, SG6, SC4, SP2, SP5
IG3	Define an interconnected network of governmental levels (multi-level network) for a collaborative production of services related to MaaS.	SG1, SG3, SG4, SG5, SG6, SG7, SC1, SC4, SM2, SP2, SP5
IG4	Define an integrated network of governmental levels to ensure seamless and efficient management of MaaS.	SG1, SG3, SG4, SG5, SG6, SG7, SC1, SC4, SM1
IG5	Design an open-government model that simultaneously guarantees transparency and security.	SG1, SG2, SG3, SG6, SG7, SM1, SM3, SP1, SP5, SL1, SL2
IG6	Provide innovative channels (based on digitalisation) to facilitate communication between stakeholders and citizens.	SG1, SG3, SG7, SM3, SP1, SP2, SP5, SL1, SL2
Smart Economy (SC) Implications		SC “Areas of Action” (Section 2.1)
IC1	Design new business models based on innovation: MaaS mobility bundles or packages.	SG1, SG2, SG6, SC1, SC2, SC3, SC4, SM2, SM3, SP2
IC2	Define new business roles based on innovation.	SG1, SG6, SC1, SC4, SP2
IC3	Explore new market niches and customer segments in relation to MaaS.	SC1, SC4, SC5, SP2, SP4
IC4	Ensure entrepreneurial environments that facilitate accessibility to the labour market.	SG1, SG2, SC1, SC4, SP1, SP2, SL1, SL5
IC5	Define a new taxation framework based on innovation.	SG2, SC1, SC3,
Smart Mobility (SM) Implications		SC “Areas of Action” (Section 2.1)
IM1	Design a multimodal mobility network that integrates all mobility services (public transport, shared mobility, parking, etc.) to provide door-to-door solutions.	SG1, SG2, SG6, SM2, SM3, SM5, SM6, SE2, SP4, SL7
IM2	Promote less car-oriented lifestyles in favour of alternative mobility options.	SM2, SM7, SE1, SE2, SP4, SL1
IM3	Facilitate smart management of the urban mobility network through real-time data.	SG2, SG3, SG7, SM1, SM2, SM3, SP1, SP4, SL1, SL2
IM4	Ensure data quality, accuracy, and reliability through mobility applications (travel planners, parking applications, etc.).	SG2, SG3, SG5, SG7, SM2, SM3, SM6, SE1, SP1, SL1, SL2
IM5	Ensure data security as travellers become data sources.	SG2, SG3, SG5, SG7, SM2, SM3, SM6, SE1, SP1, SP5, SL1, SL2
IM6	Implement integrated e-ticketing and payment systems across all mobility services through a single digital interface.	SG2, SG3, SG5, SG7, SC1, SM2, SM3, SM6, SE1, SP1, SL1, SL2
IM7	Ensure data communication between mobility service providers: standardisation of data formats and APIs.	SG1, SG2, SG3, SG5, SG7, SC1, SM2, SM3, SE1, SP1, SL1, SL2
Smart Environment (SE) Implications		SC “Areas of Action” (Section 2.1)
IE1	Ensure sustainable travel behaviours (reduce car dependence) to mitigate negative externalities (pollution, congestion, etc.).	SM2, SM7, SE1, SP1, SP2, SP4, SL8
IE2	Incorporate awareness-raising strategies in MaaS to encourage more environmentally friendly and active travel choices.	SM3, SM7, SE1, SE2, SP1, SP2, SP4, SL8
IE3	Include environmental monitoring services in MaaS applications.	SG5, SM3, SE1, SP4, SL8
IE4	Define sustainable urban planning strategies aligned with transport planning (reduction in parking spaces, design of multimodal urban hubs, etc.)	SG2, SM3, SE1, SE4, SL6, SL8
IE5	Promote energy efficiency within the transport sector (new fuels, electrification, carbon neutrality, etc.)	SG2, SM3, SM7, SE1, SE3, SP3, SL5, SL8
Smart People (SP) Implications		SC “Areas of Action” (Section 2.1)
IP1	Ensure informed mobility choices for end users to promote sustainability.	SG1, SG3, SM2, SM7, SP1, SP4, SL1, SL2, SL5, SL8
IP2	Ensure the design of attractive and user-friendly platforms.	SG7, SM3, SM6, SP1, SP2, SP4, SL1, SL2
IP3	Promote a behavioural transition from “owning” to “using”, i.e., overcome the culture of private vehicle travel.	SC1, SM6, SM7, SP1, SP4, SL7
IP4	Ensure an appropriate degree of equity and non-discrimination in access to smart mobility services for certain groups (elderly people, low-income individuals, etc.)	SG2, SG4, SM5, SP3, SP5, SL3, SL5, SL7
IP5	Promote public participation strategies in which end users take an active part in the design and development process of MaaS.	SG1, SG3, SC4, SP2, SP5, SL5
Smart Living (SL) Implications		SC “Areas of Action” (Section 2.1)
IL 1	Guarantee personal safety.	SG2, SM2. SM3, SE4, SL3, SL8
IL 2	Guarantee physical and digital accessibility to MaaS services.	SG2, SG3, SM2. SM3, SM5, SE4, SL1, SL2, SL8
IL 3	Adapt the public space to MaaS services and other innovative initiatives.	SG2, SC4, SM3, SE4, SL5, SL6
IL 4	Ensure personal privacy and security in a framework of free-flow data.	SG2, SG3, SG7, SM3, SP1, SL1, SL2
IL 5	Ensure the affordability of MaaS services.	SG4, SC1, SC2, SC3, SP3
IL 6	Ensure the generation of public value from individual choices.	SG1, SC4, SP2, SP5, SL5
IL7	Enhance communication procedures in a hyper-connected scenario.	SG1, SG3, SG7, SM3, SP1, SP2, SP5, SL1, SL2

). These implications were classified according to the six SC dimensions, and then compared with the forty “areas of action” recognised in Section 2.1. In response to the systemic and interrelated nature of the SC, each implication was simultaneously related to several “areas of action” and hence to different SC dimensions.

The following sub-sections assess the results, structured according to the six SC dimensions. The findings are supported by the statements of the participants, identified by their professional profiles.

4.1. MaaS and Smart Governance

In assessing the potential implications of MaaS for the smart governance dimension, three main aspects were recognised: (i) the re-organisation of the government structure and its roles; (ii) the re-definition of the collaboration among the different actors of the network; and (iii) the re-design of the regulatory framework, which should support innovation.

Interviewees were especially concerned about cooperation between the public and private sectors involved in MaaS, given that the new model requires strong and active synergies, as well as the establishment of a common vision [3,109]. Lack of collaboration was identified as a supply-side barrier, which could also lead to other challenges within the MaaS network, such as unfair competition and monopolisation. On the one hand, participants from the public sector mainly discussed the need to clearly define the competences of private actors, who are driven by commercial interests. On the other hand, participants from the private sector were primarily worried about data sharing with public entities, as it may pose a risk to their competitive advantage.

“…MaaS integrates all modes of transport and their tickets. This integration is not a technical challenge, but an organisational and legal one…//Who can sell each ticket?//… the regulatory framework should be re-defined to avoid the intrusion of competences between the different mobility service providers…”.

—Public transport operator.

“MaaS actors need to establish effective mechanisms for sharing data…//Sharing data does not mean freely exchanging all available data…”.

—Private transport operator.

Given that MaaS is based on a user-centric model [104], the role of the citizens was also extensively discussed. Academics pointed out that MaaS brings the opportunity to provide citizens with an innovative channel to facilitate their interaction with the other actors in the ecosystem. The rapid development of ICTs has transformed online communication processes in the public sphere, and urban authorities can take advantage of this new framework to encourage citizen participation in urban planning, as well as in political and social affairs.

“…instead of spending on advertising campaigns, urban authorities can take advantage of MaaS platforms to raise awareness on issues that the public needs to know about. They can also use them to explore citizens’ perspective and get their feedback on regulations, initiatives...”.

—Academic.

Most of the academics suggested that the deployment of MaaS applications as participatory tools might offer two simultaneous advantages. First, it would allow urban authorities to share responsibilities with citizens, which facilitates the building of public trust. Second, it would help to humanise governments’ brand, offering an opportunity to remind the public that they are also human. Citizens often forget that there are real people behind these institutions.

Some academics also proposed that these new channels of interaction could allow consumers to become prosumers [110]. In the management literature, “prosumption” is explained as the “co-creation of value” [111], which means that consumers move from being passive recipients of information to active interpreters and co-producers, expressing their empowerment and leading to more egalitarian relationships between producers and consumers.

Overall, the main message detected during the sessions was that MaaS does not appear to mesh well with current institutional arrangements. Therefore, participants called for policy reform to pave the way and make room for this mobility innovation. In agreement with [20], most of the interviewees considered that the transition towards new models, such as MaaS, needed to simultaneously pay attention to the “who” (the network of players and their roles), the “what” (the rules of the game), the “why” (the purpose), and the “how” (the way in which the public is engaged and the liability and transparency are preserved) of the governance scheme. Figure 3 summarises the key findings related to the smart governance dimension.

4.2. MaaS and Smart Economy

The interviewees mainly discussed four MaaS implications within the smart economy dimension: (i) the emergence of new economic opportunities based on innovation (i.e., new market niches and new services or products); (ii) the promotion of an entrepreneurial mindset; (iii) the need for new business models that are viable in the long-term; and (iv) the necessity of a new taxation framework committed to the goals of urban sustainability.

As already highlighted by some authors [20,31,112,113], the interviewees agreed that MaaS requires the definition of a user-centric business model based on innovation that contributes to the full materialisation of the concept, underpins its development by organising the relationships between service providers and end users, and facilitates its acceptance by the public. This business model should consider the wide network of entities involved in MaaS and regulate the economic basis to foster both cooperation and competition between them.

The participants also expressed significant concerns about taxation. On the one hand, private transport operators discussed the need to re-define the tax regime for MaaS to ensure an inclusive market with equal opportunities for all service providers. On the other hand—and based on the aim of MaaS to promote a “greener” mobility model [68]—many of the academics suggested the possibility of designing new financial measures that reduce or limit the use of mobility options with a lower “sustainability level”.

“Driven by digitalisation, MaaS has the potential to stimulate the emergence of new services and products that respond to the desires of individual travellers…//This scenario of innovation fosters entrepreneurship and creativity, bringing new opportunities for the city and its inhabitants…”.

—Urban authority.

“…the regulatory framework should ensure a fair scenario of cooperation and competition for service providers. In this sense, the review of tax policies can provide an opportunity to bridge the gap between the public and private sectors”.

—Academic.

“Today, tax policies act as a barrier to the deployment of innovative mobility solutions (such as MaaS), as they are still on the process of being reconciled with the concept of servitisation…//…it seems key to rapidly adjust these policies to ensure a balanced scenario that promotes fair conditions for the different actors”.

—Private transport operator.

“…traditional measures, such as congestion pricing, access restrictions, and parking and traffic control, remain at the forefront of options to tackle car use. However, they do not seem sufficient in the new mobility scenario, which calls for alternative or even additional approaches to tax the negative externalities of our travel behaviours and to avoid the trend towards a growing disregard for environmental degradation…//…MaaS is based on a digital platform that can set prices according to time of day, location, modal efficiency, etc. One possibility would be to associate this pricing scheme with the achievement of sustainability goals, including taxes that penalise the abusive occupation of road space, inappropriate travel behaviours, etc. For example, a surcharge could be imposed on zero-occupancy vehicles to discourage this type of travel conduct…”.

—Academic.

Figure 4 includes the key topics found within the smart economy dimension.

4.3. MaaS and Smart Mobility

Interviewees’ discussions on the implications of MaaS for the smart mobility dimension focused mainly on three aspects: (i) the combination of all the mobility services available in the city; (ii) the smart management of the mobility network through real-time data; and (iii) the offer of an attractive range of mobility alternatives that encourage a behavioural change towards less car-oriented lifestyles, while increasing individuals’ satisfaction.

MaaS is based on three fundamental pillars aimed at ensuring seamless and efficient multimodal experiences: (i) mobility services integration; (ii) e-ticketing and payment integration; and (iii) ICT integration [28]. In this regard, all participants agreed that technological advances are already prepared for MaaS. However, they pointed out significant doubts about the effective combination of different mobility services due to the lack of collaboration between the public and private sectors involved in the new scheme, given the differences in their interests, motivations, and expectations.

“…close collaboration between the public and private sectors can help to address service limitations. On the other hand, lack of cooperation could lead to inefficiency and uncertainty in the network…”.

—Academic.

Some transport operators (both public and private) discussed the possibility of incorporating an entity responsible for organising the integrated network, balancing competing interests, and stimulating public participation when necessary. However, who should this entity be? A key point in the debate was whether this role should be undertaken by a public or private actor. In this regard, academics addressed both scenarios.

“…MaaS requires a (regulatory) entity to ensure collaboration between the public and private sectors…//…but who should this entity be? Public actors (particularly public transport operators) are best positioned from a social perspective but may lack resources. On the other, private actors would have more incentive to create profit and innovative services but less incentive to fulfil societal goals…”.

—Academic.

Another relevant focus of discussion was data and their management. MaaS represents a complex array of networks containing a wide variety of real-time information, such as personal data (e.g., payment details, travel records), business data (e.g., costs, fees, subsidies), and transport data (e.g., timetabling, location, accessibility). In particular, IT developers noted the need to define data-related regulations and agreements that ensure the trust of all the actors involved in these solutions.

“…in digital solutions such as MaaS, it is key to ensure both data quality and security…//…from the end-user perspective, there is a risk that personal and payment information could be accessed by malicious entities. This could lead to issues relating to personal or financial security...//…for mobility services providers, there are concerns that intellectual property could be breached, and the business could lose its competitive advantage…”.

—IT developer.

Figure 5 shows the outcomes for the smart mobility dimension.

4.4. MaaS and Smart Environment

The interviewees expected MaaS to have the following three main implications for the smart environment dimension: (i) promoting a shift towards sustainable travel behaviours based on informed decisions; (ii) enhancing the integration of transport and urban planning strategies; and (iii) monitoring the environmental externalities caused by individuals’ mobility patterns in order to create awareness and trigger a “green conscience”.

By definition, MaaS aims to promote a behavioural shift towards more sustainable travel choices, supporting the reduction in private car dependence and its subsequent (negative) externalities [55,87]. In line with this, the main topic of discussion was the potential of MaaS to transform end users’ habits. Academics highlighted the relevance of integrating user-adaptive systems into MaaS applications to provide personalised persuasive strategies that effectively enhance an attitudinal change.

“…the integration of personalised persuasive strategies—that respond to each individuals’ expectations and desires—are key to effectively enhance a behavioural shift towards more sustainable choices”.

—Academic.

“MaaS technologies should monitor travellers’ behaviours: modal share, travel time and distance, origin and destination of trips, etc. This will make it possible to define different persuadability profiles. Based on them, MaaS can generate personalized strategies that nudge each individual to adopt more sustainable travel habits, while improving his/her experience”.

—Academic.

“…MaaS provides the opportunity to recognise different users’ profiles based on their individual characteristics and travel behaviour. This information can help to define personalised recommendations to make travellers aware of the environmental impacts of their choices...”

—Academic.

In particular, academics discussed three types of personalised persuasive strategies: (i) self-monitoring strategies, which provide insights into the behaviour of each traveller; (ii) comparison strategies, which present information comparing the behaviour of different travellers; and (iii) suggestion strategies, which offer smart guidance for sustainable travel behaviours. MaaS should deliver these strategies in the form of customised messages that stimulate “greener” choices. Three types of messages were discussed during the sessions: recommendations, reminders, and compliments.

“…personalised daily, weekly, or monthly reminders can encourage individuals to use MaaS in order to, for example, improve their physical activity. As well as to keep them motivated when they are struggling to reach their physical activity goals...”.

—Academic.

“MaaS could propose personal (individual) or collaborative (collective) challenges to persuade users to reduce the emissions caused by their mobility choices”.

—Academic.

According to some of the IT developers, MaaS technologies should persuade their end users through dynamic and implicit techniques that do not require their explicit involvement.

“…MaaS could promote greener alternatives through visual stimuli—for example, displaying colour changes in the background graphics of end-users’ smartphones—when making sustainable choices such as reducing driving, adopting active modes, etc.”.

—IT developer.

Figure 6 summarises the findings related to the smart environment dimension.

4.5. MaaS and Smart People

The interviewees discussed three major MaaS implications within the smart people dimension: (i) the user-centric nature of MaaS services; (ii) the behavioural change required for MaaS to be widely adopted; and (iii) the need to ensure social equity in access to these multimodal solutions.

By definition, MaaS should be designed according to end users’ needs and preferences [67,114]. In line with this assumption, interviewees agreed that a precondition for the successful deployment of this model is therefore its “public acceptance”. This is a repeated concern when an innovative service is introduced in the market, given that historically many innovations “have failed to achieve a widespread diffusion due to their inadequacy to address real end-user needs and preferences” [112] (p. 125). Previous studies have already shown the relevance of understanding the (latent) factors and mechanisms underlying the willingness to uptake MaaS in order to design successful individual-oriented solutions that meet the expectations of different end users’ profiles [115,116]. However, at the same time, interviewees considered that citizens should be prepared for the arrival of MaaS. In this regard, academics pointed out that education is key to inducing the behavioural transition from an “ownership” to a “usership” regime.

“…MaaS is driven by the global trend of servitisation and its success is linked to the transition from a “modal-centric” to a “user-centric” mobility model, where individuals have to change their behaviours and overcome the traditional culture of private vehicle hegemony…”.

—Academic.

Social inclusion was also considered a central point of debate when addressing the smart people dimension as a requirement to guarantee equity. Some of the interviewees agreed that if MaaS becomes the unique point of access to the transport network, there will be a need to reflect particularly on the people who are excluded from the “system” [88] due to factors such as disagreement, dissatisfaction, affordability, and technology aversion.

“…the reliance of MaaS on digitalisation might exclude certain social groups with difficulties in handling new technologies. For example, there is evidence that older age cohorts are not entirely comfortable with the use of applications on smartphones, and often have anxieties about online transactions…”.

—Transport operator (private).

Figure 7 summarises the key outcomes for the smart people dimension.

4.6. MaaS and Smart Living

Within the smart living dimension, the discussion on MaaS implications focused on three aspects: (i) improving citizens’ quality of life and satisfaction; (ii) adapting public spaces to the new services and activities; and (iii) individuals’ contribution to the public sphere in today’s hyper-connected society.

MaaS aspires to bring innovative opportunities to our cities, while enhancing the living conditions of their inhabitants [40,117,118]. In practice, it combines all the available forms of mobility into a single interface [28]. In other words, it acts as a digital gateway to multiple mobility services, which also need to be physically integrated to become attractive and accessible to citizens. As a result, the urban scenario should be ready to embrace the new multimodal solutions. Academics were particularly concerned about the planning of the public space and its ability to integrate the changes fostered by MaaS. In this regard, urban authorities discussed the potential of designing smart urban hubs that offer visibility to the different options.

“…we need to prepare our cities for the arrival of MaaS: public space must be ready to accommodate the dynamic changes associated with these innovative solutions…”.

—Academic.

“…an example of physical integration is to provide parking spaces or bike rental points at public transport stations (bus stations or train stations). This can encourage multimodal behaviours…”.

—Urban authority.

“…the success of MaaS partly depends on the physical integration of modes, routes, and schedules…//…route integration refers to the implementation of transfer points at strategic locations that ensure sufficient coverage of the network...//…schedule integration refers to the harmonisation of the schedules of all mobility services so that connections between modes can be made on time and with minimal waiting-time…”.

—Academic.

The main objective of the multimodal integration that characterises MaaS is to reduce car dependence by providing attractive alternatives. The interviewees agreed that if MaaS was able to promote this reduction, the demand for urban space dedicated to car infrastructure would decrease, and different opportunities for innovative activities and services would emerge in the freed-up areas.

“…the success of MaaS will lead to fewer cars on the road, with much less demand for parking, freeing up space in cities for pedestrians and cyclists…”.

—Academic.

Most of the academics were also concerned with the rapid arrival of app-based mobility services and their impact on the urban public space. They highlighted the need to define a set of regulations to manage the implementation of these solutions in order to prevent unintended negative effects (e.g., anarchic occupation of public spaces, traffic accidents, intensified vandalism, etc.) and even increased costs for cities.

“…the implementation of new mobility services must be supported by a regulatory framework in order to avoid negative impacts…//…for example, a maximum number of vehicles per operator could be established in order to control the use of public space…”.

—Academic.

“…the implementation of micro-mobility services (such as scooters) should be guided by clear rules on where and how these vehicles could be used to prevent conflicts over the use of public space, in particular the use of pavements…”.

—Academic.

Figure 8 summarises the results of the smart living dimension.

5. Discussion

Analysis of the results confirms that the assessment of urban stakeholders’ perspectives is fundamental for understanding the potential implications that MaaS might bring to our cities, with the aim of promoting sustainable and smart futures.

Governance was identified as a key pain point in the procedure of making MaaS a reality in Madrid (Spain). Furthermore, although this concern has been recently assessed, further research appears to be required due to the complex and extensive ecosystem of actors involved in the transport network of the case study, which combines public transport services with a wide variety of app-based mobility services. Today, and despite the multiple travel-planning applications (developed by both the public and private sectors) that currently exist in Madrid to integrate all these alternatives, none of them offer the full range of services that correspond to MaaS. Even the most promising platform (“MaaS Madrid”) still seems a multimodal aggregator, which has to be further developed. As indicated by [26], multimodal journey planners are considered level 1 of MaaS solutions.

As a result, one strategic line of action should be to strengthen the collaboration, cooperation, and coordination between the different actors of MaaS. In this regard, some participants pointed out the need to design a unique roadmap with short and long-term objectives, in which the public and private sectors share the risk of investing in a novel and unproven scheme. This does not mean hindering competition, which in fact drives innovation. However, one topic to be explored is “how governance will need to evolve to ensure competition flourishes where efficient” [119] (p. 1).

From a regulatory point of view, most stakeholders underlined the need for an innovation-driven reform of the current legislative framework. Local and national policies should promote a more flexible scenario that allows for rapid adaptation to changes [120]. Finally, it is worth noting the opportunity raised by some members of the academic community on the “humanisation” of government institutions through MaaS applications, which can become tools to enhance their communication with citizens and build trust. Madrid City Council has already shown its interest in the development of participatory platforms that encourage and facilitate the direct, individual involvement of citizens.

In the economic field, one of the central topics in the MaaS literature is the need to define a new business model characterised by “travel packages” (or “bundles”) [121,122]. Some works have also explored how to regulate the cooperation and competition between the public and private sectors in economic terms. In this study, interviewees discussed these issues, but did not offer detailed considerations, possibly due to the absence of a real-world MaaS pilot in Madrid. However, they agreed that the MaaS business model should be beneficial for all the actors involved in the network, helping both end users and organisations to reduce their transport costs. When addressing the smart economy dimension, stakeholders were significantly interested in taxation policies as a means to ensure an inclusive scenario with equal opportunities for all mobility service providers. In Madrid, where today more than 20 transport operators (public and private) are concentrated [123], these policies appear to be highly relevant. On the other hand, taxation can also be applied to reflect the external costs of transport (e.g., taxes on fuel type, CO₂ emissions, Euro class, or vehicle age). Interviewees raised the opportunity to re-design tax programs within MaaS as a mechanism to promote the sustainability goals envisioned by our cities.

In relation to smart mobility and smart environment, the findings agree with previous research on the ultimate goal of MaaS: the seamless combination of all the forms of mobility available to provide individuals with an attractive palette of alternatives that encourage a behavioural change towards less car-oriented lifestyles, while increasing their satisfaction [71,115]. In general, positive attitudes towards MaaS and its potential to promote sustainable habits were detected during the interviews. However, in contrast to these expectations, some researchers have noted that the new solutions may lead to negative environmental consequences (such as increased travel demand, abuse of shared-mobility services, and neglect of public transport) if they are not properly defined, implemented, and managed [29].

In the case of Madrid, the multimodal integration proposed by MaaS seems of particular interest due to the multiple app-based mobility services that have flooded the city in recent years, and which today co-exist with a well-structured and extensive network of public transport. The results highlight the central role of data in achieving an effective combination of options. Stakeholders underlined that if successful MaaS is to be implemented in Madrid, data should be shared across all the actors involved in the new scheme. The openness, availability, and interoperability of data is key within any innovative mobility service.

It is worth noting that even if MaaS promises to improve end users’ travel experience, stakeholders expressed their concern about the willingness of individuals to embrace the new mobility model and adopt more sustainable habits. When addressing the smart people dimension, the results highlighted the user-centric nature of MaaS and the relevance of its “public acceptance” [112,116]. Interviewees argued that MaaS should be designed in accordance with individuals’ expectations and preferences. At the same time, they recognised that just because new technology—in this case, MaaS—offers opportunities “on paper” does not mean that the public will ultimately accept it. As a result, they brought up the power of education to encourage individuals’ engagement with MaaS as a tool to facilitate a shift towards “greener” attitudes.

Lastly, in relation to the smart living dimension, stakeholders examined the potential implications of MaaS for the public sphere of our cities. Interviewees indicated that it is not only individuals that have to be prepared to embrace this new scheme, but also society. The authors of [26] proposed a well-known topology where the involvement of society is presented as the maximum level of MaaS integration. Today, Madrid seems still far from this goal. Nevertheless, stakeholders expressed their motivation to work towards it in order to improve the liveability of the city and the quality of life of its inhabitants.

Overall, the findings show that the implementation of MaaS is fairly multidimensional. It should be noted that this new model is not intended to prompt a technological revolution within the transport sector, but a socio-technical transition. MaaS does not bring any technological innovation to the table and, although its name is new, it can be seen as a further step in the quest for integrated mobility [124,125,126]. In summary, the paper aims to emphasise that MaaS must be designed holistically, as each urban dimension affects and is affected by the others.

6. Conclusions

Drawing on concepts from the SC literature, this paper provides a novel contribution to the discussion on how MaaS challenges the path to smart and sustainable futures. The key here is that MaaS—often considered a smart mobility strategy [20]—simultaneously impacts all dimensions of the city, requiring the adoption of an integrative and multidimensional approach.

Given the exploratory nature of this study, a qualitative technique was applied in the form of semi-structured interviews with urban stakeholders in Madrid (Spain) to assess MaaS in the context of the SC and its six dimensions: smart governance, smart mobility, smart economy, smart environment, smart people, and smart living [11]. In total, the analysis revealed a set of 35 urban implications that should be considered when designing MaaS. The two literature reviews conducted in Section 2 to establish the theoretical basis for the interviews also contributed valuable insights. The first revision provides a better understanding of the concept and the scope of the SC by identifying forty “areas of action” that conform to its six dimensions. The second yields deepening of the concept of MaaS by detecting the network of actors that play a key role in the new mobility model. In line with the methodology proposed, the relevance of considering the perspective of different MaaS actors is recognised.

Overall, two SC dimensions appear to be significantly critical in this study. The implications related to smart governance were found to be the most defying due to the wide variety of actors involved in MaaS. Stakeholders pointed out that MaaS must be mainly supported by a re-organisation of the government structure, which considers the different roles and responsibilities, and by regulatory reform with policies that help maximise its potential and mitigate its possible drawbacks. These institutional changes can only be achieved through long-term processes based on innovation, characterised by a holistic vision that takes into account each actor and their interactions with others. The results also revealed significant challenges in relation to the smart people dimension. The behavioural transition driven by MaaS, from an “ownership” to a “usership” regime, was highlighted as one of the greatest hurdles when implementing the new mobility model towards less car-oriented lifestyles. This is an area where governance also plays an important role in defining educational initiatives that encourage sustainable awareness among citizens. Innovative technologies are liable to fail if they are not combined with actions aimed at involving individuals [127]. Conceptualised as a socio-technical phenomenon, MaaS needs to be connected with a cultural transition.

Overall, the main message identified is that Madrid has a mobility network with the potential to host MaaS, providing citizens with a wide offer of public and private mobility services. However, there are a number of conditions that currently hinder the implementation of the new model. Local urban stakeholders are aware that the dissemination of MaaS requires more than the mere deployment of technological innovations within the urban scenario. Additionally, although some initial efforts have been detected, they should take into account the findings of this paper when continuing to reflect on these solutions.

At this point, it is important to note that the purpose of this investigation was not to present an exhaustive and static approach to the implications of MaaS for our cities, but rather to provide a basis for discussing and exploring MaaS schemes, their viability, and their effects. The proposed list of implications is far from being complete. Researchers with complementary experience of MaaS are welcome to incorporate their perspectives as MaaS knowledge grows.

In summary, this study takes a further step towards understanding the implications that MaaS might bring to our cities and societies. However, a number of limitations should be recognised in order to interpret the findings consistently. First, MaaS is not currently deployed in Madrid. Therefore, although stakeholders were provided with a definition of MaaS prior to each interview, they may have interpreted the concept differently. Second, the selection of participants might introduce some bias in the results. However, based on the objective and scope of the research, the sample was considered to represent the different urban stakeholders involved in the MaaS ecosystem. On the other hand, the number of interviewees was within the usual range for this type of qualitative technique. Indeed, the main findings were consistent with the literature. Third, it should be noted that stakeholders’ perceptions may change in the future as MaaS becomes a reality in the city.

Even with these limitations, this paper provides some valuable insights into the role that MaaS could play in encouraging smarter and more sustainable metropolis. As a future line of research, it offers an approach that can be replicated to address the deployment of MaaS in other cities. It is key to note that the success of MaaS depends significantly on understanding the particular characteristics of each area of implementation, especially in terms of its transport network. As a further step, the development of a survey with MaaS stakeholders is recommended to complement the qualitative approach applied. Questionnaires and interviews are often used together to achieve deeper and more consistent insights. Finally, it is worth highlighting the potential of simulation models to represent the deployment of MaaS in the real world, yielding the analysis of this new mobility scheme and its effects on the urban environment. Simulation models are commonly used in the transport sector as decision support tools [128].