Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
IFAC PapersOnLine 55-10 (2022) 139–144
Developing a conceptual business model framework for shared electric-micro-mobility
Developing a conceptualservices:
businessamodel
systematic literature
framework for review
shared electric-micro-mobility
Minli Song, Meng Meng, Li Zhou1, Petros Ieromonachou
services: a systematic literature review
Faculty of Business, University of Greenwich, London, SE10 9LS, UK (Tel: 075-6895-1165; e-mail:
Minli
Minli Song,
Song, Meng
Meng Meng,
Meng, Li
Li Zhou1,
Zhou1, Petros
Petros Ieromonachou
Ieromonachou
minli.song@gre.ac.uk )
Faculty
Faculty of Business,
of Business, University
University ofof Greenwich,
Greenwich, London,
London, SE10
SE10 9LS,
9LS, UK
UK (Tel:
(Tel: 075-6895-1165;
075-6895-1165; e-mail:
e-mail: )
Faculty of Business, University of Greenwich, London, SE10 9LS, UK (; e-mail: Li.Zhou@greenwich.ac.uk
minli.song@gre.ac.uk ))
minli.song@gre.ac.uk
School of Management, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK (e-mail: mm3042@bath.ac.uk )
Faculty
Faculty of
of Business,
Business, University
University ofof Greenwich,
Greenwich, London,
London, SE10
SE10 9LS,
9LS, UKUK (;(; e-mail: Li.Zhou@greenwich.ac.uk ))
e-mail: Li.Zhou@greenwich.ac.uk
Abstract: Different fromSchool
School of Management,
conventional Shared
of Management, University of
Micro-mobility
University Bath, Bath,
of Bath,Services BA2
Bath, BA2 7AY,
(SMS), UK
7AY, such (e-mail: mm3042@bath.ac.uk
as bike and
UK (e-mail: scooter, Electric-SMS
mm3042@bath.ac.uk )) (ESMS)
involves more stakeholders, higher capital investment, and potentially more constraints like safety and charging network. How to
Abstract:
Abstract: Different
develop anDifferent frombusiness
innovative
from conventional Shared
modelShared
conventional Micro-mobility
that can prompt the Services
Micro-mobility services (SMS),
Services such
and ensure
(SMS), as
as bike
such the and
and scooter,
sustainable
bike Electric-SMS
development
scooter, Electric-SMS (ESMS)
of ESMS
(ESMS) is
involves
involves more
challenging.
moreOurstakeholders, higher
higher capital
research objective
stakeholders, investment,
is twofold.
capital First, and
investment, potentially
to obtain
and more
more constraints
an in-depth
potentially understanding
constraints like
like safety
of ESMS
safety and charging network.
through anetwork.
and charging How to
comprehensive
How to
developofan
review
develop anliterature
innovative
innovative business
andbusiness
practices;model that to
Second,
model that canextend
can prompt
prompt the
thethe services
existing
services and ensure
Business
and ensure theCanvas
modelthe sustainable development
(BMC)development
sustainable that better fitsof ESMS
of ESMS
the newis
is
challenging.
development Our
challenging. Our research
of ESMS objective
withobjective
research a focus onis twofold. First,
e-scooter.First,
is twofold. to
The to obtain
original
obtainBMCan in-depth understanding
design tool
an in-depth of ESMS
are used toofframe
understanding ESMS through
thethrough a comprehensive
selectiona and analysis of
comprehensive
review of literature
the literature and practices;
and practices. Second,
The finding to extend
suggests theThe
that: (1) existing
businessBusiness
model of
Business model Canvas
Canvasis (BMC)
the ESMS
model increasing,
(BMC) that better
thatand fits
fits the
optimized,
better new
the more
new
development
development of
of ESMS
ESMS with
with a
a focus
focus on
on e-scooter.
e-scooter. The
The original
original BMC
BMC design
design tool
tool are
are used
used to
to frame
frame the
the
focused on consumers. (2) Lending privately owned vehicles to other customers are the development trend of urban public selection
selection and
and analysis
analysis of
of
the
the literature
literature and
and practices.
practices. The
The finding
finding suggests
suggests that:
that: (1)
(1) The
The business
business model
model of
of the
the ESMS
ESMS is
is increasing,
increasing, and
and
transportation. (3) Long-term rental service is better off than short-term rental services, which is also a cost-saving strategy. As aoptimized,
optimized, more
more
focusedtheon
focused
result, onextended
consumers.
consumers.
BMC (2)isLending
(2) Lending
developed privately
privately owned
owned
and several vehiclesare
vehicles
initiatives to proposed
to other customers
other customers are the
are
to promote the development
the development
managers from trend
trend of urban
of
the ESMS urban public
public
sector to
transportation.
better understand
transportation. (3) Long-term
(3)different
Long-term rental
rental service
business models.is
service is better
better off
off than
than short-term
short-term rental
rental services,
services, which
which isis also
also aa cost-saving
cost-saving strategy.
strategy. AsAs aa
result,
result, the
the extended
extended BMC
BMC is is developed
developed andand several
several initiatives
initiatives are
are proposed
proposed to to promote
promote the the managers
managers fromfrom the
the ESMS
ESMS sector
sector to
to
better understand different business models.
better understand different business models. Copyright © 2022 IFAC
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Keywords: Shared micro-mobility; electric micro-mobility;
Copyrightbusiness
© 2022 model;
IFAC literature review.
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)Copyright © 2022 IFAC
Keywords:
Keywords: Shared
Shared micro-mobility;
micro-mobility; electric
electric micro-mobility;
micro-mobility; business
business model;
model; literature
literature review.
review.
1. INTRODUCTION stakeholders and suppliers in identifying opportunities to
reduce costs and maximise efficiencies; Offering ideas for the
Recently, Electric Shared 1. Micro-mobility Services (ESMS)
1. INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION stakeholders and
and suppliers
future sustainability
stakeholders of ESMSin
suppliers identifying
inbusiness
identifying opportunities
opportunities to
models. to
have emerged in cities, such as e-scooter, e-bike and e- reduce
reduce costs and maximise efficiencies; Offering ideas
costs and maximise efficiencies; Offering ideas for
for the
the
Recently, Electric SharedthereMicro-mobility Services
such (ESMS) 2. BACKGROUND
skateboards.
Recently,
have emerged
However,
Electric
in
Shared
cities,
are several barriers,
Micro-mobility
such as e-scooter,
Services
e-bike
as: high
(ESMS)
and
future
future
e-
sustainability ofAND
sustainability of ESMS
ESMS FUNDAMENTAL
business models. THEORIES
business models.
capitalemerged
have investment, limitedsuch
in cities, products range, battery
as e-scooter, e-bike issues
andande-
skateboards.
insufficient However,
skateboards. However, there
charging there are several
infrastructure barriers,
(Shalender,
are several barriers, such
such as:as: high
2018),
high The
2. shared mobility service
2. BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND AND are a non-traditoinal
AND FUNDAMENTAL
FUNDAMENTAL mode of
THEORIES
THEORIES
capital
capital investment,
investment, limited
limited products
products range,
range,
preventing ESMS service suppliers from start-up, growth battery
battery issues
issues and
and transport between private modes and public transport and can
insufficient charging infrastructure (Shalender, 2018), The
The
be shared mobility
shared
considered mobility
as an service component
service
important are aa non-traditoinal
are non-traditoinal
of a mode of
mode
comprehensive of
insufficient charging infrastructure
sustainability (Xiaotao, Qianzhi and Linlin, 2018). Existing (Shalender, 2018),
preventing ESMS service suppliers from start-up, growth and transport
transport between
between private
private modes
modes and
and public
public transport
transport
and efficient transport system in urban areas (Machado et al., and
and can
can
preventing
studies on the ESMSESMS service suppliers
has mainly from
focus onstart-up,
the single growth
modesand of
sustainability (Xiaotao, Qianzhi and Linlin,
Linlin, 2018). Existing be
be considered
considered
2018). Shaheen as et
as an al.,
an important
important component
(2019)component
proposed key of aa areas
of comprehensive
comprehensive
of shared
travel, such as(Xiaotao,
sustainability bike-sharing and e-scooter
Qianzhi and sharing
2018). (van Waes
Existing and efficient transport system in1.urban
urban areas (Machado
(Machado et al.,
al.,
studies on
et al., 2018).
studies the
on the FewESMS
ESMS has
studies mainly focus
focus focus
has mainly on both on the single
on bike-sharing
the single modes modes of
and of
e- mobility,
and as
efficient shown
transport in Figure
system in It includes
areas car-sharing;
et e-
travel, such as bike-sharing and e-scooter sharing (van Waes 2018).
scooter
2018). Shaheen
sharing;
Shaheen et
et al.,
bicycle
al., (2019)
sharing;
(2019) proposed
van
proposed key
sharing,
key areas
and
areas of
of shared
ride-sharing
shared
scootersuch
travel, sharing as well as ESMS
as bike-sharing business sharing
and e-scooter model. The (vanaimWaesof mobility, as
et
etthisal., 2018).
al.,study
2018). is Few studies
twofold.
Few studies focus
First,
focusto on
on both
both bike-sharing
provide insight into ESMS
bike-sharing and
and e-
e- mobility, as shown
shown in
(i.e., carpooling). in Figure
Figure 1. 1. It
It includes
includes car-sharing;
car-sharing; e-e-
scooter sharing as well as ESMS business model. The aim of scooter
scooter sharing;
sharing; bicycle
bicycle sharing;
sharing; van
van sharing,
sharing, and
and ride-sharing
ride-sharing
through sharing
scooter a comprehensive
as well as ESMS reviewbusiness
of literature model. and The practice.
aim of (i.e.,
this
this
Second,study
study is twofold.
is
to extendtwofold. First, to
First,
the existing to provideModel
provide
Business insight
insight into (BMC)
into
Canvas ESMS
ESMS (i.e., carpooling).
carpooling).
through
through a
a comprehensive
comprehensive review
review of
of literature
literature
to make it more suitable for new developments in ESMS, with and
and practice.
practice.
Second,
Second,
a focus to to extend
onextend the existing
the
e-scooters. existing Business
This Business
study fills Model
Modela gap Canvas
Canvas (BMC)
for a(BMC)better
to
to make it
understanding
make it more
moreofsuitable
suitable for new
new developments
the micro-mobility
for developments
business model in ESMS,
in ESMS, with
andwith
has
aaimportant
focus
focus on e-scooters.
onimplications
e-scooters.for This study
study fills
follow-up
This research.
fills aa gapgap forfor aa better
better
understanding
understanding of of the
the micro-mobility
micro-mobility businessbusiness model model and and has
has
The subsequent
important section
implications is
for organised
follow-up
important implications for follow-up research. as follows.
research. Section 2 is
the background and fundamental theories, aims to identify the
The
The subsequent
existing theory section
subsequent of ESMS.
section is
is organised
Section as
organised 3 is
as follows. Section
Section 22 is
the methodology,
follows. is
the
the background
background and
and fundamental
fundamental theories,
theories,
including the research framework and review process. aims
aims to
to identify
identify the
the
Section
existing
existing theory
theory of ESMS.
of ESMS.model Section
Section 33 isis (BMC)
the methodology,
the methodology, Figure 1. Key areas of shared mobility (Shaheen et
4, evaluate the business canvas theory and
including
including the research framework
framework and review
review process. Section
Section al., 2019)
analyse thethe research
bike-sharing and
business model process.
and e-scooter-sharing Figure 1. Key areas of shared
4, evaluate themodel.
business model canvas (BMC) theory andand Figure 1. Key areas of shared mobility
mobility (Shaheen
(Shaheen et et
(ESS)
4, business
evaluate the business Section
model 5, we design
canvas (BMC)a platform-centric
theory al., 2019)
al., 2019)
analyse the
ESMS business
analyse bike-sharing business
model based
the bike-sharing business model
onmodel
the BMC and e-scooter-sharing
and analyse the
and e-scooter-sharing The term ESMS as part of the Shared Micro-mobility Services
(ESS)
(ESS) business
business model.
main components of the
model. Section
model.
Section 5,
5, we
we design
Section
design 6, aa platform-centric
summarise the
platform-centric (SMS) first appeared in 2017 and refers to vehicles that are
ESMS
findingsbusiness model andbased on The term ESMS as part
part of thedesigned
Shared Micro-mobility
Micro-mobility Services
ESMS of the study
business model on the
provides
based BMC
potential
the BMC areas and
and analyse the
for further
analyse the The
lightterm
(lessESMS
than 500 as kg) ofandthe Shared for short distances Services
(less
main
research. components
Three main of the model.
benefits Section 6, summarise the (SMS)
(SMS)
than 15 first
first appeared
appeared
kilometres) in
in
(Liao2017
2017andand
and refers
refers
Correia, to
to vehicles
vehicles
2020). ESMS thatmay
that are
are
main components of the model.arising
Sectionfrom this research
6, summarise the
findings
findings of
of the
the study
study and
and provides
provides
include: Deepening understanding of ESMS; Assist potential
potential areas
areas for
for further
further light
cover
light (less
a
(less than
wider
than 500
range
500 kg)
kg)of and designed
micro-mobility,
and designed for
for short
such
short distances
as E-bikes,
distances (less
E-
(less
research. Three
research. Three main
main benefits
benefits arising
arising from from this this research
research than
than 1515 kilometres)
kilometres) (Liao (Liao andand Correia,
Correia, 2020).
2020). ESMS
ESMS may may
2405-8963 Copyright © 2022 The Authors. This ofis an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
cover license .
include:
include: Deepening
Peer review Deepening
understanding
understanding
under responsibility of International of ESMS;
ESMS;
Federation
Assist
of Assist cover aa wider
Automatic Control. wider range
range of of micro-mobility,
micro-mobility, suchsuch as as E-bikes,
E-bikes, E-E-
10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.629
140 Minli Song et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 55-10 (2022) 139–144

scooters and some riding devices such as e-skateboards, kick paper, and identified 17 publications that were beyond the
scooters (Tuncer et al., 2020), one-wheeled balancing boards scope of this research. Similarly, 13 papers were excluded
and four-wheeled micro-vehicles are also considered as micro- based on the non-compliance of ESMS based on the content
mobility rides (Oeschger, Carroll and Caulfield, 2020). of the publication. This scoping narrows our set to 807 papers.
Parkes et al., (2013) point out that ESMS systems have been
divided into four generations, with dock-based systems
considered to be the most recent update of the first two
generations. The third generation has improved bicycle
designs, electronic bicycle locking, sophisticated docking
stations and payment systems. The emergence of the fourth
generation of ESMS has brought a revolution in the ESMS
market due to the widespread public debate on sharing Figure 2. System literature review process (Lavallée,
economy and sustainable transport. Si et al., (2019) argue that Robillard and Mirsalari, 2013)
the dockless vehicle sharing programs in the world as the fifth
generation. However, it has not received sufficient attention
due to the lack of technology to address the shortcomings of
the system decades ago. Users preferred to accept dock-based
bike-sharing because it was more reliable compared to
dockless bike-sharing. Recently, new technologies have
emerged such as dockless bike-sharing systems which are easy
to install, have a less complex integrated system of traffic
smart cards and have advanced power assist features, are
ensuring the flexibility and reliability of dockless vehicle-
sharing far exceeds users' expectations (Shen, Zhang and Zhao,
2018).
Although ESMS are a good way to optimise urban mobility,
there are many limitations. For example, in a dockless system,
the speed and distance an E-scooter can travel is limited by the
battery level (Zhu et al., 2020). ESMS are growing rapidly in
Figure 3. Systematic review article screening process and
some European countries, which is widely used on public
results for screens
roads, it often causes annoyance and conflicts with the safety
of ordinary pedestrians (Howe, 2018). Some complaints came 4. EXTENDED BUSINESS MODEL CANVAS
from non-users, especially pedestrians feeling infringement on
their public space (Tuncer and Brown, 2020). In addition, 4.1 Review the business model of the ESMS
some of the key policy issues and regulations affecting ESMS
include: infrastructure; safety management plans and after- The Business Model Canvas (BMC) developed by
sales service issues, etc (Ma et al., 2021). Considering all the (Osterwalder, Pigneur and Tucci, 2005) consists of nine
challenges and obstacles experienced with traditional ESMS interconnected building blocks, i.e., value proposition, target
systems, large-scale improvements and modifications are customer, distribution channel, customer segments, key
needed to compensate for the shortcomings in this area activities, resource, partner network, cost structure, and
(Elhenawy et al., 2020). Currently, there are many areas of revenue model. as shown in Figure 4. It visually explicates the
ESMS research that have gaps to be filled, particularly in the interdependent activities, resource considerations in line with
study of ESMS sustainable business models, as well as the value proposition, customer relationship management in
infrastructural, cultural and legislative issues, all of which various channels, and revenue sources. Based on BMC,
require significant further research. Lindgren, Taran and Boer (2010) changed the unit of analysis–
the network of organisations instead of the single company.
3. METHODOLOGY They proposed four pillars to define a network-centric
business model, include product, customer interface,
3.1Review process infrastructure management, and financial and non-financial
This study used a systematic literature review (SLR) to aspects.
evaluate and analyse relevant literature on the ESMS business
model. The SLR process as shown in Figure 2, it includes
identifying, describing, analysing, interpreting and critically
evaluating the existing knowledge about ESMS and business
model. Papers collected 104 paper from Science Direct, 243
papers from Scopus, 539 papers from WoS, equating to 886 in
total. The process of search and screening is shown in Figure
3. Through the screening of 886 papers, 49 duplicate articles
were eliminated. Then, reviewed the title and abstract of the
 Minli Song et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 55-10 (2022) 139–144
Figure 4 Business model canvas (Osterwalder, Pigneur and
Tucci, 2005)
In addition, Joyce and Paquin (2016) proposed the The Triple
Layered Business model Canvas (TLBMC), which is a
practical tool for coherently integrating environmental,
economic, and social issues into the overall view of an
organisation’s business model. Bocken, Schuit and
Kraaijenhagen (2018) proposed a sustainable business model
canvas, As shown in Figure 5. They suggest ‘value’ is the
essence of sustainable business model innovation.
Furthermore, Coenegrachts et al. (2021) proposed Centric
Network-centric business model design tool. which is based
on Osterwalder’s BMC and Lindgren’s four pillars network-
centric business model.
Figure 5 Sustainable business model canvas (Bocken, Schuit
and Kraaijenhagen, 2018)
The ESMS business model has also been transforming and
evolving in the last decade. Boons and Lüdeke-Freund (2013)
develop a framework of business models for sustainability
(BMfS), consisting of four business model building blocks:
value proposition, supply chain, customer interface, and
financial model. Remane et al., (2016) divided the ESMS
business model into 7 clusters according to the vehicle offer,
the operation model and type of access; Sarasini, Sochor and
Arby (2017) suggest ESMS business model can generate
sustainable value, which is related to mobility services, data-
based services, environmental technology and material
recycling. Ebrahimi, Sharmeen and Meurs (2017) classify the
ESMS architecture based on the integration of the provided
mobility services and the (dis)integration of distribution and
marketing channels. Akyelken, Banister and Givoni (2018)
point out that there are two different business models, the
back-to-base scheme, and the fully flexible scheme. Münzel et
al. (2018) suggest that the key elements for conceptualising the
business model are value proposition to the customers and the
firm’s value capture model. Si et al., (2020) suggest that the
ESMS business model has a strong relationship with
innovation, and most business models in the sharing economy
can be evaluated as open innovation business models. Bike-
sharing and E-scooter sharing as the two fastest-growing and
most popular ESMS, are yet fully accepted by the public, but
are the hottest investment direction in the capital market. This
research will take bike-sharing and E-scooter sharing as
representatives to analyse the ESMS business model.
4.2 Bike-sharing business model
As a representative of ESMS, bike-sharing has become one of
the fastest-growing transport innovations in many countries.
Bike-sharing users use bicycles for one-way or roundtrips
141
needed. It has three business models. (1) site-based bike-
sharing, (2) dockless, and (3) hybrid bike-sharing systems
(Shaheen et al., 2019). These systems currently use both
motorless bicycles or E-bikes. There are also closed campus
and P2P bike-share systems in some specific areas (Danciu,
2013). Closed campus bike-sharing systems are deployed in
universities and office areas and are only available to the
specific campus community they serve (e.g., students).
The development of bike-sharing has primarily solved the
obstacles of short-distance travel, better helped commuters to
solve the commuting time, and also made remarkable
contributions to environmental protection. Most bike-sharing
systems in the world are public, and anyone can obtain a bike
for a nominal fee (use a credit /debit card). In a site-based bike
share system, users access a bike through an unattended station
that provides one-way service (Mounce and Nelson, 2019). In
a dockless bike-sharing system, users can obtain (unlock) a
bike and park it anywhere. In a hybrid bike-sharing system, a
user can check out a bike from a station and end their trip by
returning it to a station or an off-site location, or a user can
pick up any dockless bike and return it to a station or an off-
site location.
4.3 E-scooter sharing business model
The introduction of this E-scooter-sharing (ESS) has only
recently appeared, although its development speed has
increased exponentially in many places (Button, Frye and
Reaves, 2020). McKenzie (2019) suggested that ESS services
are being used for recreation, leisure, and tourism purposes
rather than commuting. Although research on ESS rarely
focuses on the ESS business model, there are still pieces of
literature that have contributed to this field. For example,
Sadler (2019) points out ESS business model has three
characteristics: Personalisation, usage-based pricing, and
enabling the public to contribute to battery charging.
Elhenawy et al. (2020) proposed a novel business model for
the ESS system. This new model consists of three entities, the
supplier, the customer and the management, which is
responsible for receiving, renting, booking and matching
demand with the resources provided. The ESS business model
will continue to evolve and innovate as the global supply chain
evolves with technology.
5. Platform-based ESMS business model
Becker et al., (2020) proposed a welfare-centric approach for
the shared-mobility system. He suggested vehicle operators
should maximise social welfare instead of minimizing
operational costs. According to Osterwalder’s BMC and
welfare-centric business model approach, we design a
platform-based ESMS business model. The main goal of this
business model is to optimal assignment maximize the social
welfare of all users and ensure the stability and feasibility of
the user-vehicle profit allocation.
The platform-centric ESMS business model includes the two
main vehicle models that are currently dominant in the
transport mode, Bike-sharing and E-scooter sharing. In this
business model, users and consumers are both consumers. As
shown in Figure 6, which has three forms of circular
relationships: ESMS platform, product provider and users.
142 Minli Song et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 55-10 (2022) 139–144
Users who own E-scooter or bikes can sign a contract to sell
or lease their mini-vehicles to the platform on a long-term
basis. Then the ESMS platform rents these vehicles to users
with flexible leases. The platform does not actually own the
micro-vehicle, but serves as a medium to connect the owners
and users. This Platform-based ESMS business model is
different from the traditional business model. It is based on the
user-centric environment and provides customized services
based on the user. Its greatest advantage is the maximum
integration of resources and achieving sustainable
development.
Figure 6 Platform-based ESMS business model
5.1 Users
Users with unused bicycles or scooters are encouraged to enter
into long-term rental agreements with the ESMS platform to
rent or sell their vehicles. This has the benefit of reducing the
cost of the platform buying a large number of vehicles from
the supplier at once and also reduces wasted resources. This
will enable individuals to reduce travel costs, reduce the
number of vehicles on the road, improve commuting
efficiency and have a positive impact on the environment.
(Galatoulas, Genikomsakis and Ioakimidis, 2018). At the
moment, due to the development of the global supply chain,
the competitive vehicle manufacturers can offer ESMS firms
a large number of low-cost micro-vehicles, This has led to the
fact that there is no business model for rental micro-mobility
on the European market. The recycling of ESMS will be an
innovative point in the business model.
5.2 ESMS platform
The ESMS platform is mainly responsible for processing user
reservations, including (apps, web pages, calls, self-service
machines). Users place orders in various ways, and the
platform needs to deal with a large number of needs every day.
Due to the difference between ESMS and other travel modes,
such as the number of shared cars, the number of micro-
vehicles is far greater than other shared vehicles. Besides,
there is operational revenue management, including the
deposit for user registration, the fee that the user pays for each
use, and the profit-sharing of the partner's advertising. The
large number of deposits made by users creates a pool of
financial investments, which also contributes to the revenue of
the ESMS platform.
5.3 infrastructure management
Infrastructure management involves managing a large fleet of
equipment to meet users' requirements, including
leasing/purchasing, launching, maintenance and recycling (Lu,
2016). The loss of micro-mobility is greater than that of shared
transport, which also leads to higher maintenance and recovery
costs for the platform. However, if platforms are leased or
purchased from a number of users, the cost of producing or
purchasing products from suppliers can be significantly
reduced (Zhang, Lin and Mi, 2019).
However, several factors with a claimed impact on the
development and implementation of ESMS were revealed.
These factors included legislative issues, cultures of
collaboration, and assumed roles and responsibilities within
the ESMS ecosystem. Karlsson et al., (2020) suggest that one
of the reasons preventing legislation on ESMS is that public
transport authorities cannot work with specific private firms
without procurement. This also reflects the fact that the roles
and responsibilities of ESMS in public transport are in a
relationship of mutual influence. Also, roles are related to
organisational culture, which may differ between public and
private organisations. The main objective of public transport
organisations is to manage the regional public transport system,
while the main objective of private ESMS providers is to make
a profit. The platform-centric business model takes into
account both the profitability and the role and responsibility of
ESMS firms in society, and it has an important role to play in
shaping sustainable cities.
6. CONCLUSION
In this study, we analysed the evolution of the business model
and review the ESMS business model, including the bike-
sharing and e-scooter sharing business models. Based on the
BMC, we developed the platform-based ESMS business
model. The main significance of the Platform-based ESMS
business model is that it not only promotes a sustainable cycle
of public transport but also balances the co-demand
relationship in the public transport chain. With user-centric,
the digital platform-dominated business model will use the
advantages of big data, building a good ecosystem will be the
future trend of the ESMS business model.
At present, public transport is under enormous pressure in
terms of demand. In some areas, such as urban areas, schools,
hospitals and other densely populated areas, the demand for
commuters is greater than the supply of public transport, and
the choice of ESMS as a means of transport from home to work
can effectively reduce commuting times and provide
commuting efficiency. Besides, lending private micro-
vehicles to the ESMS platform is a novel way, offering
attractive opportunities for future ESMS providers.
The following suggestions can provide ideas for the future
sustainable development of the shared vehicle business model.
First, Platform-based ESMS can provide flexible rental
services, can enhance its competitive advantages and a new
business model that meets the immediate needs of customers.
Second, ESMS suppliers can increase the penetration rate in
some target areas with concentrated populations, such as
hospitals, schools, subway stations, etc. Third, ESMS firms
 Minli Song et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 55-10 (2022) 139–144
can build a more collaborative ecosystem to improve
cooperation with supply chain partners, which helps these
bike-sharing firms reduce operating risks and costs. The result
of this can provide customers with more value and reduce
costs for the ESMS firm. Through these improvements, it can
establish a more effective value acquisition mechanism or
profit model to achieve better opportunities to maximise the
value.
REFERENCE
Akyelken, N., Banister, D. and Givoni, M. (2018) ‘The
sustainability of shared mobility in London: The dilemma for
governance’, Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(2), pp. 1–13. doi:
10.3390/su10020420.
Becker, H. et al. (2020) ‘Assessing the welfare impacts of
Shared Mobility and Mobility as a Service (MaaS)’,
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice,
131(September 2019), pp. 228–243. doi:
10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.027.
Bocken, N. M. P., Schuit, C. S. C. and Kraaijenhagen, C. (2018)
‘Experimenting with a circular business model: Lessons from
eight cases’, Environmental Innovation and Societal
Transitions, 28(July 2017), pp. 79–95. doi:
10.1016/j.eist.2018.02.001.
Boons, F. and Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2013) ‘Business models for
sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a
research agenda’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 45, pp. 9–
19. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.007.
Button, K., Frye, H. and Reaves, D. (2020) ‘Economic
regulation and E-scooter networks in the USA’, Research in
Transportation Economics, 84(September), p. 100973. doi:
10.1016/j.retrec.2020.100973.
Coenegrachts, E. et al. (2021) ‘Business model blueprints for
the shared mobility hub network’, Sustainability (Switzerland),
13(12). doi: 10.3390/su13126939.
Danciu, G. (2013) ‘Full implementation and assessment of the
“Electrocampus” transportation system based on light electric
vehicles’, 2013 - 8th International Symposium on Advanced
Topics in Electrical Engineering, ATEE 2013. doi:
10.1109/ATEE.2013.6563415.
Ebrahimi, S., Sharmeen, F. and Meurs, H. (2017) ‘Innovative
Business Architectures ( BAs ) for Mobility as a Service
(MaaS ) – exploration, assessment, and categorization using
operational MaaS cases’, Transportation Research Board 97th
Annual Meeting, (November), pp. 1–15.
Elhenawy, M. et al. (2020) ‘Developing a Novel
Crowdsourcing Business Model for Micro-Mobility Ride-
Sharing Systems: Methodology and Preliminary Results’.
Galatoulas, N. F., Genikomsakis, K. N. and Ioakimidis, C. S.
(2018) ‘Analysis of potential demand and costs for the
business development of an electric vehicle sharing service’,
Sustainable Cities and Society, 42(July), pp. 148–161. doi:
10.1016/j.scs.2018.07.008.
Howe, E. (2018) ‘Global Scootersharing Market Report 2018’,
Innoz . Retrieved from https://
www.innoz.de/sites/default/files/global_scootersharing_mark
et_report_2018.pdf., (November).
Joyce, A. and Paquin, R. L. (2016) ‘The triple layered business
model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business
143
models’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, pp. 1474–1486.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.067.
Karlsson, I. C. M. et al. (2020) ‘Development and
implementation of Mobility-as-a-Service – A qualitative study
of barriers and enabling factors’, Transportation Research
Part A: Policy and Practice, 131(September 2019), pp. 283–
295. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.028.
Lavallée, M., Robillard, P. and Mirsalari, R. (2013) ‘Novices :
An Iterative Approach’, IEEE Transactions on Education,
57(3), pp. 1–7.
Liao, F. and Correia, G. (2020) ‘Electric carsharing and
micromobility: A literature review on their usage pattern,
demand, and potential impacts’, International Journal of
Sustainable Transportation, 0(0), pp. 1–30. doi:
10.1080/15568318.2020.1861394.
Lu, C. C. (2016) ‘Robust Multi-period Fleet Allocation
Models for Bike-Sharing Systems’, Networks and Spatial
Economics, 16(1), pp. 61–82. doi: 10.1007/s11067-013-9203-
9.
Ma et al. (2021) ‘Examining municipal guidelines for users of
shared E-Scooters in the United States’, Transportation
Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 92(October
2020), p. 102710. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102710.
Machado, C. A. S. et al. (2018) ‘An overview of shared
mobility’, Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(12), pp. 1–21. doi:
10.3390/su10124342.
McKenzie, G. (2019) ‘Spatiotemporal comparative analysis of
scooter-share and bike-share usage patterns in Washington,
D.C.’, Journal of Transport Geography, 78(March), pp. 19–
28. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.05.007.
Mounce, R. and Nelson, J. D. (2019) ‘On the potential for one-
way electric vehicle car-sharing in future mobility systems’,
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice,
120(December 2017), pp. 17–30. doi:
10.1016/j.tra.2018.12.003.
Münzel, K. et al. (2018) ‘Carsharing business models in
Germany: characteristics, success and future prospects’,
Information Systems and e-Business Management, 16(2), pp.
271–291. doi: 10.1007/s10257-017-0355-x.
Oeschger, G., Carroll, P. and Caulfield, B. (2020)
‘Micromobility and public transport integration: The current
state of knowledge’, Transportation Research Part D:
Transport and Environment, 89(November). doi:
10.1016/j.trd.2020.102628.
Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. and Tucci, C. L. (2005)
‘Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of
the concept.’, Communications of the association for
Information Systems, 16(1), p.1., 6(1), pp. 7–29. doi:
10.1016/S0046-8177(75)80107-9.
Parkes, S. D. et al. (2013) ‘Understanding the diffusion of
public bikesharing systems: Evidence from Europe and North
America’, Journal of Transport Geography, 31, pp. 94–103.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.06.003.
Remane, G. et al. (2016) ‘Association for Information Systems
AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) DISCOVERING NEW
DIGITAL BUSINESS MODEL TYPES – A STUDY OF
TECHNOLOGY STARTUPS FROM THE MOBILITY
SECTOR’, PACIS 2016 Proceedings, 289.
144 Minli Song et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 55-10 (2022) 139–144

Sadler, H. (2019) ‘Rentable Electric Scooters : A Disruptive 101483. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2020.101483.

Innovation or Merely a Transformative Business Model ?’,
(January), pp. 0–5.
Sarasini, S., Sochor, J. and Arby, H. (2017) ‘What
characterises a sustainable MaaS business model?’, 1st
International Conference on Mobility as a Service (ICOMaaS),
(November), p. 15.
Shaheen, S. et al. (2019) ‘Sharing strategies: Carsharing,
shared micromobility (bikesharing and scooter sharing),
transportation network companies, microtransit, and other
innovative mobility modes’, Transportation, Land Use, and
Environmental Planning, pp. 237–262. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-
12-815167-9.00013-X.
Shalender, K. (2018) ‘Entrepreneurial orientation for
sustainable mobility through electric vehicles: Insights from
international case studies’, Journal of Enterprising
Communities, 12(1), pp. 67–82. doi: 10.1108/JEC-05-2017-
0032.
Shen, Y., Zhang, X. and Zhao, J. (2018) ‘Understanding the
usage of dockless bike sharing in Singapore’, International
Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 12(9), pp. 686–700.
doi: 10.1080/15568318.2018.1429696.
Si, H. et al. (2019) ‘Mapping the bike sharing research
published from 2010 to 2018: A scientometric review’,
Journal of Cleaner Production, 213, pp. 415–427. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.157.
Si, S. et al. (2020) ‘Disruptive innovation, business model and
sharing economy: the bike-sharing cases in China’,
Management Decision. doi: 10.1108/MD-06-2019-0818.
Tuncer, S. et al. (2020) ‘Notes on the practices and
appearances of e-scooter users in public space’, Journal of
Transport Geography, 85(April), p. 102702. doi:
10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102702.
Tuncer, S. and Brown, B. (2020) ‘E-scooters on the Ground:
Lessons for Redesigning Urban Micro-Mobility’, Conference
on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. doi:
10.1145/3313831.3376499.
van Waes, A. et al. (2018) ‘Business model innovation and
socio-technical transitions. A new prospective framework
with an application to bike sharing’, Journal of Cleaner
Production, 195, pp. 1300–1312. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.223.
Xiaotao, Y., Qianzhi, H. and Linlin, L. (2018) ‘How does a
Name Enable the Success of a Business Model? A Case Study
of the Bike-Sharing Business Model and Institutional
Bricolage’, Foreign Economics & Management, 40(10),
pp.139-152., 40(10), pp. 139–152. doi:
10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2018.10.011.
Y. and Boer, H. L. P. T. (2010) ‘From single firm to network-
based business model innovation.’, International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 12(2),
pp.122-137., 12(2), p. 2010.
Zhang, Y., Lin, D. and Mi, Z. (2019) ‘Electric fence planning
for dockless bike-sharing services’, Journal of Cleaner
Production, 206, pp. 383–393. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.215.
Zhu, R. et al. (2020) ‘Understanding spatio-temporal
heterogeneity of bike-sharing and scooter-sharing mobility’,
Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 81(February), p.