Sustainability and scalability

This chapter explores the evidence, learning points and knowledge gaps from the MaaS pilots around the Sustainability and Scalability of MaaS in Scotland. The key themes explored are Financial Sustainability, Resourcing and implications for a National Roll Out. In each case the topics are considered in turn through the lens of the evidence presented in the final reports provided for each pilot, perspectives from the consultation with MaaS leads, and the engagement with transport operators and beneficiaries.

Financial Sustainability

Evidence from Reports

The pilot reports are in agreement that MaaS would require significant subsidy to operate on a continuing basis. Go-Hi stated that, based on a review of international literature, “Some business models rely on government funding for pilot projects, and their ability to achieve sustained economic viability remains unproven”. Tactran ENABLE reported that income streams will not cover the costs of delivering a MaaS project and that a viable commercial model is unlikely to emerge.

The GetGo Dundee pilot quantified the costs required for maintaining the app and keeping it live at £102,900 annually, which did not represent good value and saw the app withdrawn at the conclusion of the pilot project.

Estimates for the cost of further extension of each pilot were generated. However, it is recognised that estimating the monetised benefits of any of the pilot projects (the monetary value of the benefits generated by the pilot) was a challenge and, as such, none of the pilot projects were able to place an estimate of the ‘social return on investment’ that would be associated with a further roll out of MaaS.

Engagement with MaaS Leads

Stakeholder discussions with project leads found that a key concern about the commercial operation of the platform was the reliance on annual public sector grant funding, which does not provide the certainty required to confidently invest in the app. The GoSEStran app for example secured £100,000 of Smarter Choices Smarter Places funding for 2023/4 and 2024/5 to secure development and upkeep of the app but further funding will need to be secured on an annual basis.

Engagement with MaaS Leads indicated that in order to achieve financial sustainability – by either selling advertising or by adding a small booking fee – a ‘critical mass’ of users would be required and, in order to achieve this critical mass, a large proportion of the budget (more than 50%) would be required to be spent on marketing alone.

Due to low numbers, rural users were said to be unlikely to sustain a subscription-based model required for commercial sustainability, while recruitment of a broad urban user base was said to be challenged by the presence of commercial competitor apps such as Lothian Buses and City Mapper in Edinburgh for example. More widely, industry literature indicates that there is no clear, commercial business model for MaaS products even in the private sector. MaaS leads suggested that a subsidised MaaS app would be most useful at correcting for market failure (DRT services not being advertised on commercial apps for example) by ensuring the transport needs of all members of society are met. A clear example of this is rural settings where smaller bus operators or DRT services are often not shown on commercial apps, where free government subsidised bus travel has little benefit, or where services such as Uber are not commercially viable to operate.

Engagement with Operators and Beneficiaries

The MaaS pilots delivered as part of Tactran ENABLE sought to differentiate from other, market driven products by focusing on personalisation and catering to a specific need. The LLTNP app for example, offered suggested hillwalking routes and car park locations for the walk, enabling users to plan their trip and alleviate pressure on the most popular locations. However, LLTNP noted that the only way a MaaS app could be financially sustaining is if it includes a greater level of personalisation and ticket selling functions, otherwise it is not unique enough to compete with what is available for free elsewhere through either Traveline Scotland or Google Maps. Operators discussed the ongoing annual cost of maintaining and updating app functionality and API integration on both the side of the MaaS provider and the public transport operator. The share of this cost would need to be covered for both parties in order for it to become sustainable.

Dundee and Angus College said they would likely not be able to continue funding the upkeep of the app if this cost is passed onto them (currently this is funded through Tactran) due to wider financial pressures in the higher education sector. Beneficiaries also stressed that, in terms of transport, the focus needs to be on delivering transparent, reliable bus time information, as opposed to the full MaaS offer initially. It was noted that the Bus Open Data (BOD) regulations now oblige bus operators in England to make this information openly available.

Key Learning Points

From the evidence gathered, the following key learning points have been identified.

The lack of financial sustainability and commitment to longer term funding for MaaS may have also been a factor in the lack of buy-in from some operators, who would be reluctant to upgrade their payment systems for a short-term trial with no guarantees of continued support for the platform. One pilot project felt that if ongoing financial support was not given to MaaS, developed apps would have to be discontinued which would erode trust of both transport operators and partner organisations involved with the branding/promotion of the platform.

In order for a MaaS app to be commercially sustainable it will require a critical mass of users through delivering a broad user base in both urban and rural areas. To achieve this would require the development of a MaaS platform capable of competing with existing apps developed by transport operators or the private sector, particularly in urban areas.

Some of the pilots felt that there is the greatest potential for MaaS in rural and poorly served areas, where there is greatest need for services like DRT and community transport which are not advertised on existing commercial apps. However it should be noted this function may be at odds with commercial sustainability and would require significant public subsidy to achieve it. MaaS apps would inevitably be competing against well-established commercial apps such as Google Maps and City Mapper which have similar journey planning functions, albeit for a more limited selection of modes for which they have chosen to include based on existing commercial relationships, or to maximise their number of users/user satisfaction.

Resourcing

Evidence from Reports

All pilot projects recognised that upkeep of a MaaS app would require ongoing resource to ensure it is kept functional, up to date and well promoted.

All pilots outsourced project management and monitoring at some point, and in some cases coordination of marketing activities. For some of the pilots resourcing the roll-out of a MaaS platform proved to be an unanticipated challenge, with the GoSEStran pilot reporting that the application process itself for the MIF was very resource intensive.

The lack of direct support from local authorities was also raised, with St Andrews MaaSterplan suggesting that local authorities should have a dedicated officer who can work to implement MaaS solutions in their area.

The Tactran ENABLE pilot which relied heavily on external ‘service leads’ as the branding for the platform felt that a possible threat would be competing priorities of these organisations and the lack of an embedded MaaS resource/officer to keep interest up in the app.

Engagement with MaaS Leads

The University of St Andrews MaaSterplan project team encountered a lack of procurement expertise with this project, which they described as “unchartered territory” for them as an organisation. Such points were echoed by the GoSEStran project team. Given the level of legal investment required to draw up the contract, the delivery of a contractual model that can be rolled out elsewhere was considered a key contributor to the value delivered by the pilot. Go-Hi specifically emphasised the importance of having a dedicated project manager as part of the pilot in the discussion.

Engagement with Operators and Beneficiaries

Brompton Bike Hire noted an ongoing resource is required to keep APIs updated to ensure the app can offer the full-service capabilities of the operator. They suggested this would be an annual cost to both the operator and MaaS provider.

Key Learning Points

From the evidence gathered, the following key learning points have been identified.

Pilot projects reported that keeping the app online would require ongoing and dedicated resources both in terms of finance and staffing to ensure apps continued to host the correct information about modes, had compatibility with the most commonly used mobile devices, and marketing effort to keep awareness of the apps high among the target audience.

None of the pilot apps which are still live were delivered directly by local authorities, with the GetGo Dundee pilot app being withdrawn due to a lack of funding at the city council to continue support. Although some level of engagement with local authorities was attempted by pilots, this largely exposed the fact that local authorities are not well placed to deliver MaaS in term of the financial and staffing resource they could dedicate to the platform.

National Roll Out

Evidence from Reports

The trials opened up considerations regarding which level of the transport hierarchy could most effectively develop, operate and promote a MaaS app. Although the pilots were in five distinct areas, three of the pilots gravitated towards the same back-end platform which could support a hypothesis that an app is best delivered nationally with a single back-end system in order to reduce duplicate effort. However the most successful pilots in terms of user reach were Go-Hi and Tactran ENABLE which were branded and promoted at a hyperlocal level.

The Tactran ENABLE pilot felt that MaaS should continue to be supported and the pilot apps should stay live, as a break in the delivery of MaaS would erode the trust of operators, who may have spent time and resources on updating their systems to integrate with an app, and any partner organisations involved with the branding and promotion of the app.

Other insights included the fact that MaaS is not a ‘silver bullet’ to peoples’ transport needs and problems with GetGo Dundee stating that “it should be viewed as a tool that complements government initiatives to reduce car usage”. Evident across all the pilots is that the success of MaaS is reliant on a set of high-quality transport options being available. For the GoSEStran pilot the key learning was that transport modes should be in place and operating as intended before ‘overlaying’ the MaaS platform. The Go-Hi report stated that “MaaS is well placed to be one of the pillars of travel behaviour change” but both the GoSEStran and St Andrews MaaSterplan pilots found that the 12-month pilot was not long enough to see substantial behaviour change. This may have been exacerbated by the lack of a unified evaluation framework across all five pilot projects. Further support for MaaS, and its success is largely dependent upon being able to demonstrate benefits in a range of policy areas, something which remains a knowledge gap from the pilot projects.

Engagement with MaaS Leads

ENABLE and Go-Hi felt that for further roll out of MaaS, a single base platform would be the most beneficial and effective method to take forward for the whole of Scotland but noted that having separate apps branded by destinations/partner organisations has helped with uptake. This is a model which St Andrews MaaSterplan felt could be beneficial with local authorities and community based projects that could feed into a national MaaS app in a ‘bottom up’ approach, with the development of modes (including peer to peer car share/car clubs) occurring at a hyper local level in some cases and forming the building blocks of any MaaS system.

GoSEStran emphasised the importance of ensuring that a national MaaS solution works effectively and serves rural areas, as well as urban areas, and that getting suitable transport modes set up in rural areas may require more time and attention.

Interviewees noted the Finland model of MaaS regulation may be a viable approach for developing MaaS in Scotland on a national scale, where operators are required to sign up to a MaaS platform and provide compatible APIs to enable integration of journey planning and ticketing systems. They noted this approach may encounter acceptability concerns from operators which could be overcome by better demonstrating/evidencing the benefits of MaaS to operators in terms of increased passenger numbers/profits.

Go-Hi discussed the potential to hold the National Entitlement Card on the app, through the ITSO environment, though noted some compatibility issues with Apple devices. They also felt that a future application of MaaS could be business travel planning which was trialled in their pilot by HITRANS with interest expressed by Shetland Islands Council.

Engagement with Operators and Beneficiaries

Operators noted that fragmentation of the MaaS landscape presents an issue for them, as not all MaaS platforms have the same compatibility with standard APIs, meaning operators need budget to generate bespoke APIs for different platforms. Operators involved in the Go-Hi pilot felt that the platform should be given wider geographical coverage which would result in efficiencies in not needing to integrate with multiple platforms covering different geographical areas. There were reflections from operators that the MIF programme possibly awarded funding to too many pilots, leading to a fragmented MaaS landscape in Scotland with three competing platforms developed.

For beneficiaries, Dundee and Angus College felt that the Tactran ENABLE platform they used should be rolled out to other further education institutions in order to provide economies of scale and mutual benefit.

East Lothian Council involved in the GoSEStran pilot felt the best solution would be an integrated journey planner containing all public transport operators and suggested the ongoing Transport Scotland DTDS project or measures similar to the DfT’s Bus Open Data regulations as a way that this could be achieved, stating there is currently too much fragmentation in the availability of public transport data. Expanding the role of Traveline Scotland as a MaaS provider would integrate with their existing work in the DTDS project.

Beneficiaries engaged in this evaluation supported the review of the MIF and suggested that, rather than continue to fund a particular solution, that the opportunity exists to gather all the learning from the pilots in order to draw up a service specification for an open tender into a Scotland-wide solution.

Key Learning Points

From the evidence gathered, the following key learning points have been identified.

The most successful pilots in terms of user reach were those branded and promoted at a hyperlocal level, and there is value in a ‘bottom-up’ approach in creating/growing modes such as bike hire and car share which are the ‘building blocks’ to a successful MaaS app. However it is also clear that people travel outside of one local authority or region for their travel, and a patchwork of different MaaS apps with coverage of specific areas would not be desirable. Therefore a blend of approaches, with engagement from a range of national and local stakeholders is important to facilitate the successful implementation of MaaS.

A key learning point has emerged that a MaaS platform is only as good as the transport modes that it hosts. For most of the pilots the key takeaway was that MaaS could only complement the transport modes in place and is not enough of a behavioural change pull factor on its own. MaaS is not a ‘silver bullet’ to people’s transport needs and problems but could be effective as part of a suite of measures. Its success needs to be supported by complementary policies which prioritise safe access to sustainable transport and discourage the use of the private car.

Different approaches for future delivery of MaaS

Different parties involved with the pilot projects made suggestions for the different ways in which MaaS could be rolled out in the future in Scotland. These approaches could include developing one of the pilot apps into a national platform, or as a beneficiary suggested, tendering on the open market, and drawing up a detailed service specification taking on board the learning points gathered from the pilots to address the difficulties encountered with modal integrations and monitoring.