Research Report, Policy Insights,
5 July 2021
- Anchor the governance of Mobility as a Service in a strategic vision, applied to the whole functional urban area and informed by effective digital monitoring
- Seek greater understanding of how Mobility as a Service can add value for the user
- Guide Mobility as a Service where necessary to achieve agreed societal outcomes
- Adopt a flexible and light-handed regulatory approach towards Mobility as a Service platforms
- Adopt a predictable regulatory approach and allow for evolution
- Enhance public transport authorities’ and operators’ ability to negotiate terms of sale and re-use of tickets with Mobility as a Service providers
- Base data-sharing frameworks on the principle of “as open as possible, as closed as necessary”
- Build data portability into the MaaS ecosystem by default
- Consider common building blocks for sharing data
- Establish data-reporting requirements that are proportionate and targeted to outcomes
- Adopt complementary policies in other areas to ensure that the Mobility as a Service ecosystem contributes to desired policy outcomes
- Invest in the built environment and interchange facilities
- Skill sets will need to evolve to improve the public authority’s capacity to regulate and assess digital markets
Corporate Partnership Board Report, Policy Insights,
26 February 2021
- Make regulations more flexible to accommodate the use of Blockchain and other Distributed Ledger Technologies.
- Use regulatory sandboxes to promote innovation while minimising risks.
- Actively engage with transport industry initiatives around Distributed Ledger Technologies
- Require some level of open data access for transport applications of Distributed Ledger Technology
- Make transport policies machine-readable
- Run pilot projects to identify use cases for Distributed Ledger Technologies in the public sector
Research Report, Policy Insights,
23 February 2021
- Governments should adopt a strategic approach to infrastructure planning. This should be communicated clearly via an explicit, detailed and periodically updated strategic infrastructure plan.
- Strategic infrastructure plans should be linked to explicit infrastructure funding envelopes, with project pipelines identified, at least in broad terms.
- Governments should consider the merits of establishing independent infrastructure advisory bodies to provide transparent, expert advice on long-term, cross-sectoral infrastructure strategy, planning and policy development, as well as priorities for medium-to-longer-term infrastructure investment.
- Arrangements for the establishment of independent bodies should address key governance principles, such as those identified in the OECD’s Principles for the Governance of Regulators.
- Infrastructure project appraisal should, as far as possible, be based on a consistent and transparent methodology.
- The OECD/ITF should publish a review of government and private sector infrastructure-related responses to the Covid‑19 pandemic.
- A formal policy framework should guide decisions on the stewardship of major infrastructure assets.
- Governments should review their infrastructure regulatory frameworks.
- Ex post performance assessment should be undertaken for all major projects.
- National infrastructure institutions and statistical agencies should co‑ordinate internationally to develop consistent infrastructure performance measures.
- Where cross-border infrastructure projects are adopted, they should be managed by a specific-purpose body with all parties represented. Policy objectives and performance standards should be clearly specified and governance, funding and accountability mechanisms established.