This document summarizes a presentation given by Yohei Fujigaki on mobility as a service (MaaS). It discusses three ways of thinking that lead to MaaS: 1) improving local public transportation, 2) utilizing new ICT-driven mobility services, and 3) introducing fully autonomous vehicles. It also presents examples of MaaS packages from Finland and an analysis framework called the "multi-cycle model" to evaluate MaaS demand, efficiency, and pricing/contract policies over multiple cycles of user and supplier decisions.

1. Univ. of Tsukuba & Univ. of Tokyo
Joint Seminar 2017
2017/8/3
東京大学大学院
University of Tokyo
藤垣 洋平
Yohei Fujigaki
Mobility as a Service
- Three ways of thinking leading to MaaS-

2. 2
Education
• Mar. 2012 Bachelor of Engineering, The University of Tokyo
• Mar. 2014 Master of Engineering, The University of Tokyo
• Oct. 2015- Ph.D candidate at The University of Tokyo
Yohei FUJIGAKI
藤垣洋平
Ph.D candidate at The University of Tokyo,
Department of Urban Engineering
JSPS Research fellow (DC2)
Work Experience
• Apr. 2014 - May. 2016 KOZO KEIKAKU ENGINEERING Inc.
Engineer and Consultant
Self-Introduction

3. 3
Three ways of thinking
leading to MaaS

4. 4
Mobility as a Service (MaaS)
Rail Bus
Taxi
Sharing
Shared-Taxi
Monthly
Fixed Price
Month
Searching,
Booking,
Payment
in one App.

5. 5
Examples of MaaS Package
*Sampo Hietanen: ‘Mobility as a Service’ – the new transport model?, Eurotransport ,
volume12, issue2, 2014
Example of Package, according to Sampo Hietanenm*
■ Urban Commuter Package for 95€/month
• Free public transport in home city area
• Up to 100 km free taxi
• Up to 500 km rental car
• Domestic public transport 1500 km
■ 15 minutes package for 135 €/ month:
• 15 minutes from call to pick up by shared taxi
• EU wide roaming for shared taxi at 0,5 €/km
• Free public transport in home city,
• Domestic public transport 1500 km

6. 6
MaaS Package Provided in Helsinki, Finland
MaaS Global Oy ” Whim app”
https://whimapp.com/fi-en/

7. 7
Three Ways to Explain
Why MaaS?
Three ways of thinking
leading to MaaS
From three different “village” of engineering
MaaS

8. 8
R1: Local Public Transportation Route
Why MaaS?
MaaS
Local Public
Transportation
-地域公共交通-

9. 9
Restaurant
MENU
Restaurant served by
First-Class Chef of Italian & Japanese Foods
Italian Japanese
Special Courses by
First-Class Chef
Course A: ¥10,000
Course B: ¥5,000
Course C: ¥3,000
Plain Rice ball
何も入ってないおにぎり
¥100
Loosing potential customers who wanted to have
a wide variety of high quality Japanese cuisines
I wanted to have high quality
Japanese cuisine even with 10,000

10. 10
Local Public Transportation
Mobility
A residential area with 1000 residents
*Half of them are over 65-
If you own and drive a car If you don’t want to drive a car
Vehicle, Tax, Fuel…
¥10,000 ～ ¥50,000
/month
Bus every 2 hours
¥100/trip
(¥6000/month)
Loosing potential customers
who wanted to have high quality mobility service
even if it cost as same as vehicle ownership cost
I wanted to have high quality mobility
services even with ¥20,000/month

11. 11
Only for “The weak”?
I’m not “Weak”
ワシ、弱者じゃないし。
それなら運転するわい。
Targeting only this segments,
results low LOS with subsidy
Positive Drivers
who loves driving
Passive Driver
Who don’t‘ want to drive if possible
Non-
Driver
Positive Drivers
who loves driving
Passive Driver
Who don’t‘ want to drive if possible
Non-
Driver
Loosing customers like this
このような客を逃している
How about targeting here again, using state-of-art technologies

12. 12
Current
Cover all trips
(¥30,000/month)
Poor Services
I HAVE TO drive for
daily activity….
But I can drive
@ Suburban Residential Area
Schedule
11時 市民病院 ◯
14時 絵手紙の会 →バスが無い
18時 夕食会 →バスが無い
Schedule
11am. Hospital→ Bus Available
2 pm. Club →No bus
6 pm. Dinner with friends
→No bus

13. 13
MaaS –Senior Deluxe Plan-
Rail Bus Shared-Taxi
UNLIMITED
8 trips/ month
Senior Deluxe Plan
¥ 23,000/ month
If such a plan is available…
Taxi

14. With MaaS –Senior Deluxe Plan-
MaaS Deluxe Plan
Freedom of Mobility
with almost same cost as auto
*Taxi, and Shared-taxi can cover trips
that cannot covered by bus services
I no longer have to
drive
for daily activity!!
Schedule
11am. Hospital →Bus
2 pm. Club →Taxi
6 pm. Dinner with friends
→Shared-Taxi

15. 15
R2: ICT-driven Mobility Services
The most common route
to explain MaaS
MaaS
ICT-driven
Mobility
Services
ICT活用型の
新モビリティサービス

16. 16
New Mobility Services- DRT
Demand Responsive Transport
（Shared-Ride Taxi, On-Demand Bus）
 Door to Door : Convenient
 Shared-Ride : Efficient
 Services has started in urban area
• Kutsuplus（Helsinki）
• UberPool （Cities in US）
• SAVS (Hakodate)
画像出典：
（右） Helsinki Regional Transportation Authority: Kutsuplus – Final Report, HSL Publications, 2016
（左）藤垣洋平が撮影

17. 17
New Mobility Services- Sharing
Flexible and Efficient Mobility Services
are Emerging
Car Sharing
Bike Sharing
▲画像出典：Times Car PLUS http://plus.timescar.jp/tcph/

18. 18
 Each service has its strength and weakness
 By combining independent service,
weakness of one service can be covered
Bus
DRT
Taxi
Sharing
◯High Speed,
Good for Concentrated Demand
●Low Flexibility
◯High Flexibility
●Bad for Concentrated demand
Rail
◯Low cost
●So bad for Concentrated demand
◯Good for Concentrated
Demand
●Low Flexibility
Strength and Weakness

19. 19
Let’s Integrate via ICT
Timetables, Real-time Location Booking

20. 20
R3: Fully Autonomous Vehicle
MaaS
Fully
Autonomous
Vehicle
完全自動運転
The latest & widest route

21. 21
Shared Autonomous Vehicle
If “fully autonomous vehicle” is available,
(=Lv.4 of NHTSA, Lv.5 of SAE)
 Shared Vehicle → Shared Autonomous Vehicle (SAV)
 Taxi → Autonomous Taxi
Fully Autonomous vehicles
 Easy to Share
 Expensive
: able to drive by themselves
to next customer
SAV

22. 22
MaaS with SAV
Even if SAV become so popular, Rail/Bus services has
advantage on speed or capacity. →MaaS
Rail Bus
Taxi
Sharing
Shared-Taxi
Monthly
Fixed Price
Month
Searching,
Booking,
Payment
in one App.
SAV
Autonomous
Mini Bus

23. 23
Paradigm Shift brought by SAV
The majority of people
Own
And
Drive
The majority of people
Use
The best mobility service
for each trip
That’s “MaaS”
I’m not “weak”
ワシ、弱者じゃないし。
And non-drivers are “weak”.

24. 24
Analysis Framework
“Multi-Cycle Model”

25. 25
The Aim of Analysis Framework
To find:
• The price that maximize profit or social welfare
• What kinds of service to included
• What types of contract should be used
• Impact on residential location choice
Interactions between
“users’ choices” and “operators’ choices” needs to be modeled
Factors to be considered in modeling framework for MaaS
 Different Modes including DRT and Taxis
 Consideration of Operation Policy of Mobility Operator
 Mobility Bundle and “Package” Choice of Users

26. Multi-Cycle Model
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
[Mobility Operator]
Service Package
Design
[Service Producer]
Single Service
Adjustment
Users’ DecisionsSuppliers’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Cycle 4
Cycle 3
Package
Revenue
Adjust
Cost, Revenue
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Contract
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
Purchase

27. Cycle Trigger:
 Daily activity and
travel choice
Feedback:
 LOS resulting from
movement of users
and vehicles
Multi-Cycle Model - Cycle 1
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
Users’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
Purchase

28. Cycle Trigger:
Cycle 2-a:
Service package
choice
Cycle 2-b:
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Feedback
Cumulative Experience,
Expectations of LOS
Multi-Cycle Model - Cycle 2
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
Users’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
Purchase

29. Trigger: Service Operation Adjustment
Feedback: Change of Cost & Revenue
Multi-Cycle Model - Cycle 3
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
[Mobility Operator]
Service Package
Design
[Service Producer]
Single Service
Adjustment
Users’ DecisionsSuppliers’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Cycle 4
Cycle 3
Package
Revenue
Adjust
Cost, Revenue
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Contract
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
Purchase

30. Trigger: Service Package Design
Feedback: Change of Revenue
Multi-Cycle Model - Cycle 4
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
[Mobility Operator]
Service Package
Design
[Service Producer]
Single Service
Adjustment
Users’ DecisionsSuppliers’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Cycle 4
Cycle 3
Package
Revenue
Adjust
Cost, Revenue
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Contract
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
Purchase

31. Multi-Cycle Model
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
[Mobility Operator]
Service Package
Design
[Service Producer]
Single Service
Adjustment
Users’ DecisionsSuppliers’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Cycle 4
Cycle 3
Package
Revenue
Adjust
Cost, Revenue
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Contract
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
PurchaseIf only Cycle1&3 are considered…
Change of auto ownership and
MaaS membership cannot be considered

32. Multi-Cycle Model
Daily
Activity and Travel
Choice
Daily movement
of vehicles and
people
Cumulative experience,
Expectations
[Mobility Operator]
Service Package
Design
[Service Producer]
Single Service
Adjustment
Users’ DecisionsSuppliers’ Decisions
Cycle 1
Cycle 4
Cycle 3
Package
Revenue
Adjust
Cost, Revenue
Short Term Cycle
Residential Choice,
Private Mobility Choice
Cycle 2-b
Land and
housing
market
LOS
Choice
Service
Package
Market Info.
Market
Contract
Service Package
Choice
Precondition
Info.
Cycle 2-a
Purchase
Purchase
If only Cycle2&4 are considered…
Change of LOS by congestions etc..
cannot be considered

33. 33
 Evaluation of Demand of MaaS
 Evaluation of efficiency of supplier side in MaaS
 Multi-Cycle Model using reliable data regarding:
 Demand-side data (mode choice, willingness to use the package)
 Simulation of shared-ride taxi
 Residential choice
Evaluation of
 Pricing Policy
 Contract Scheme
 Package design
etc..
Future Works (Current works)

34. 34
 Published Papers and Proceedings
 Regarding “high convenience shared-taxi”
• 大都市圏郊外の住宅団地を対象とした高利便性の定額制乗合タクシーの成立可能性に関する分析
（都市計画学会）
• 高利便性乗合タクシーサービスの均衡分析と収益最大化手法 (交通工学研究会)
 Slideshare
 Calculation example of “Multi-Cycle Model” is available in slideshare.
(The contents presented at IP conference 2016 at Nagasaki)
 Latest presentations will be available
See also:
藤垣洋平 jstage
Thank you for your attention!

35. 35
1. Helsinki Regional Transportation Authority: Kutsuplus – Final Report, HSL Publications, 2016
2. Uber Technologies Inc.: Uber Pool, URL: https://www.uber.com/ride/uberpool/（2016年7月14日閲覧）
3. 公益財団法人交通エコロジー・モビリティ財団：わが国のカーシェアリング車両台数と会員数の推移，
http://www.ecomo.or.jp/environment/carshare/carshare_graph2013.2.html（2016年7月14日閲覧）
4. 国土交通省：平成24年度国土交通白書 第2章第3節「動き方の変化」，pp. 769-774，2013.
5. 中島秀之，野田五十樹，松原仁，平田圭二，田柳 恵美子，白石陽，佐野渉二，小柴等，金森亮：バスとタクシーを融合
した新しい公共交通サービスの概念とシステムの実装，土木学会論文集D3 (土木計画学), Vol.71, No.5，2015
6. 藤垣洋平，金森亮，野田五十樹，中島秀之 : SAVS運行実験時の調査データを用いた都市部でのDRTサービス利用意向の
分析，第52回土木計画学研究・講演集(CD-ROM)，2015
7. 池田拓郎，藤田卓志，Moshe E. Ben-Akiva ：Flexibility On Demand:複数の交通サービスへの動的な車両割り当てを特徴
とするオンデマンド交通システムの設計と評価，第49回土木計画学研究・講演集(CD-ROM)，2014
8. Sampo Hietanen: ‘Mobility as a Service’ – the new transport model?, Eurotransport , volume12, issue2, 2014
9. Heikkilä, Sonja : Mobility as a Service - A Proposal for Action for the Public Administration, Case Helsinki， Master Thesis
in Aalto University，2014
10. 藤垣洋平，高見淳史，大森宣暁，原田昇：高利便性乗合タクシーサービスの均衡分析と収益最大化手法，交通工学論文集
（特集号）， 1(2) pp.A_133-A_141，2015
11. 坪内孝太，大和裕幸，稗方和夫：オンデマンドバスのログデータを用いた交通分担シミュレータの開発，土木学会論文集
D3 (土木計画学), Vol.67, No.1，2011
12. Asaf Bar-Yosef, Karel Martens, Itzhak Benenson: A model of the vicious cycle of a bus line, Transportation Research Part
B, vol.54, pp37-50, 2013.
13. Fangni Zhang, Hai Yang , Wei Liu: The Downs–Thomson Paradox with responsive transit service, Transportation
Research Part A, 70, pp244-263, 2014
14. Moshe Ben-Akiva, John L. Bowman, Dinesh Gopinath: Travel demand model system for the information era.,
Transportation 23: 241, 1996
15. Mark Granovetter: Threshhold Models of Collective Behavior, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol83, No.6, pp1420-
1443, 1978.
16. 藤垣洋平，高見淳史，大森宣暁，原田昇：柔軟な公共交通を対象とした利用者数とサービス水準の循環構造モデル，第50
回土木計画学研究・講演集(CD-ROM)，2014
参考文献