Abstract
This paper focuses on how cities can use climate action plans (CAPs) to ensure that on-demand mobility and autonomous vehicles (AVs) help reduce, rather than increase, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and inequitable impacts from the transportation system. We employed a three-pronged research strategy involving: (1) an analysis of the current literature on on-demand mobility and AVs; (2) a systematic content analysis of 23 CAPs and general plans (GPs) developed by municipalities in California; and (3) a comparison of findings from the literature and content analysis of plans to identify opportunities for GHG emissions reduction and mobility equity. Findings indicate that policy and planning discussions should consider the synergies between AVs and on-demand mobility as two closely related emerging mobility trends, as well as the key factors (e.g., vehicle electrification, fuel efficiency, use and ownership, access, and distribution, etc.) that determine whether the deployment of AVs would help reduce GHG emissions from transportation. Additionally, AVs and on-demand mobility have the potential to contribute to a more equitable transportation system by improving independence and quality of life for individuals with disabilities and the elderly, enhancing access to transit, and helping alleviate the geographic gap in public transportation services. Although many municipal CAPs and GPs in California have adopted several strategies and programs relevant to AVs and on-demand mobility, several untapped opportunities exist to harness the GHG emissions reduction and social benefits potential of AVs and on-demand mobility.
Highlights
A three-pronged research strategy was employed to answer the research question involving: (1) a thorough analysis of the current literature on on-demand mobility and autonomous vehicles (AVs); (2) a systematic content analysis of 23 climate action plans (CAPs) and general plans developed by municipalities in California; and (3) a cross-comparison of f indings f rom the literature and content analysis of plans to identif y opportunities for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction and mobility equity through adoption of on-demand mobility and AVs.By offering strategies to integrate AVs and on-demand mobility into local CAPs, this research can help local governments in California and elsewhere take a more holistic approach to transportation planning that aligns with multiple environmental and social equity goals
Municipal general plans were far less likely to include explicit interventions to ensure that AVs and on-demand mobility help communities reduce GHG emissions
Since climate action planning and policy inventions are constantly engaging with the notion of just and equitable communities, existing or common measures utilized by CAPs can be strengthened to guide the equitable distribution and use of AVs and technology-enabled on-demand mobility
Summary
A three-pronged research strategy was employed to answer the research question involving: (1) a thorough analysis of the current literature on on-demand mobility and AVs; (2) a systematic content analysis of 23 CAPs and general plans developed by municipalities in California; and (3) a cross-comparison of f indings f rom the literature and content analysis of plans to identif y opportunities for GHG emissions reduction and mobility equity through adoption of on-demand mobility and AVs.By offering strategies to integrate AVs and on-demand mobility into local CAPs, this research can help local governments in California and elsewhere take a more holistic approach to transportation planning that aligns with multiple environmental and social equity goals. Examples of benefits associated with these two trends include better road utilization; increased saf ety for pedestrians and passengers; reduced traffic; increased in road capacity; enhanced access to jobs, services, and amenities f or low-mobility individuals; reduced parking needs; improved equity; and reduced energy consumption.. Examples of benefits associated with these two trends include better road utilization; increased saf ety for pedestrians and passengers; reduced traffic; increased in road capacity; enhanced access to jobs, services, and amenities f or low-mobility individuals; reduced parking needs; improved equity; and reduced energy consumption.1 These technologies carry risks and, under certain scenarios, may even exacerbate, as opposed to relieve, mobility problems such as increased Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT), high cost of transportation, and diminished support for public transportation investments.. Examples of benefits associated with these two trends include better road utilization; increased saf ety for pedestrians and passengers; reduced traffic; increased in road capacity; enhanced access to jobs, services, and amenities f or low-mobility individuals; reduced parking needs; improved equity; and reduced energy consumption. these technologies carry risks and, under certain scenarios, may even exacerbate, as opposed to relieve, mobility problems such as increased Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT), high cost of transportation, and diminished support for public transportation investments. it has been argued that there are other potential trade-of f s, where GHG emissions from AV production is expected to be higher than internal combustion vehicles, but the lif ecycle costs have a lower net GHG cost to the environment. to maximize the benef its and minimize the risks, these technological developments should be accompanied by a holistic vision of vehicle lif e cycles, greater interoperability among transportation services, and stronger policy support for shared and low-carbon mobility.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
