This question struck me as an output from the SINFONICA arranged workshop during the ITS European Congress. The workshop focused on inclusion and automated public transport. Attendees were divided into groups, led by an expert from ICOOR PNO, ERTICO, PAVE Europe FIT Consulting and Etelätär. Each group was tasked with considering the needs of a different persona, how automated vehicles might serve them and policy recommendations. The design of the personas was based on SINFONICA’s user profiles and mobility needs mapping.

The workshop considered five personas:

  • Maria, 29, single mother of a child with physical disabilities, depends on adapted vehicles.
  • Sofia, 38, migrant worker, low-income, night shifts, high digital skills.
  • Karim, 82, retired teacher, lives alone in a suburban area with limited public transport. Recently he lost his driver’s license.
  • Luka, 19, non-binary student with a cognitive disability, enthusiastic about tech but anxious about travel.
  • Elena, 54, caregiver, physically active but digitally excluded. She struggles with online mobility services and fears misuse of technology and personal data.

In my group, we were tasked with considering the needs of Elena. As a caregiver, Elena travels to her client locations, which means she has no fixed working times or patterns. Elena also only has access to a basic mobile phone, so can’t access smartphone features. Our group felt that she would currently struggle to find out information about services, particularly during disruption.

Regarding automated services, her varied work travel requirements could suit an on-demand type service, but without a smartphone, she could not use an app. An SMS or a call centre-based ordering system could be required. Although there were comments about whether automatic voice response systems used by call centres would be a barrier.

Elena’s distrust of technology means that she would need reassurance about using automated services. She would most likely need some form of social interactions with people to build trust, as she would struggle with communications through digital channels. Electronic signage at stops / pickup locations would be helpful.

Our group also then had a wider discussion about whether a CCAM service provides a good solution for Elena and the policy implication. This leads to further questions about whether the use of a smartphone should be mandatory for CCAM but also whether services would need an attendant on board to cater for someone with Elena. If there’s an attendant on-board, it affects the business case for the CCAM technology. It could be that cities might need to mandate a percentage of services with staffing

One participant noted that the session focused on vulnerable groups, who often use public transport already (although this can be a forced choice due to lack of other options). They also pondered whether there also needs to be a focus on groups that don’t use public transport currently, particularly men. Maybe this could be a consideration for future automated public transport projects?

Author: John Paddington, ERTICO.