Paris: Citizens vs. Consumers
The future of mobility once resided with large metropolitan areas and the political organizations that ruled them – city councils and mayors. When entrepreneurs and venture capitalists got a whiff of the opportunities in moving people in new ways – with scooters and e-bikes and ride hailing, car sharing, and autonomous vehicles, everything changed.
Multi-modal mobility mayhem ensued, particularly after the pandemic caused travelers to turn away from public transportation (not everywhere!). Add thousands of Amazon, FedEx, DHL, and UPS delivery vans to the mix and you have an unhinged urban transportation landscape descending into chaos.
At the forefront of this change (pre-COVID) was Uber, its CEO Travis Kalanick, and a coterie of lobbyists and operatives that stood up campaigns such as “Rolling Thunder” in Washington, DC, to rally customers in order to overwhelm legislators and regulators. As detailed in “Disrupting DC: The Rise of Uber and the Fall of the City,” Uber successfully presented itself as the innovative alternative to a poorly regarded and highly fragmented taxi industry and declining mass transit.
In this telling of the tale, Uber successfully presented itself as the answer to all urban ills: discrimination, income inequality, poor mass transit, and a lack of innovation. The DC campaign weaponized consumer sentiment to overcome the power of elected officials tasked with protecting the rights of the citizens.
The DC campaign came to be regarded as the playbook for subverting legislators and regulators elsewhere in the U.S. and around the world. The hallmarks of these efforts were public protests along with emailed and mailed communications to local authorities designed to intimidate and pushback against limitations on Uber’s (or insert any local TNC's) operations.
Just as Uber and Lyft had arrived on the scene with rule-breaking inclinations, e-scooter operators emerged in cities across the U.S. and around the world. Though initially caught off guard, cities responded initially with bans and sanctions, transitioned to trial periods, and ultimately evolved regulatory regimes for two-wheeled mobility offerings in most cases.
E-bikes arrived in a more coordinated fashion usually inaugurated by tender offers for networks of e-bikes with supporting infrastructure for parking and charging. Car sharing operators typically had to finagle agreements with cities regarding parking. Mile Mobility’s woes in Berlin (an ongoing investigation into $30M in unpaid parking fees) are an unfortunate example of what can go wrong.
Robotaxis have been welcomed in a few dozen cities around the world not without incident and not without limitations. The resistance in the form of legal objections that has emerged in San Francisco of late is emblematic of what autonomous vehicle operators may ultimately be facing in other municipalities around the world.
Which brings us to Paris and the recent vote to triple parking fees for large consumer vehicles like SUVs. Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo, who already led a referendum in 2023 to banish e-scooters from the French capital as a nuisance to pedestrians and four-wheeled vehicle drivers, has now succeeded once again with a low turnout vote in favor of sanctioning larger vehicles that threaten pedestrians and the environment.
The vote on the e-scooter ban in April produced a 90% affirmative vote from a 7.5% voter turnout. By August 2023, all 15,000 scooters were removed from Paris streets. The vote for the increase in parking fees was not as one-sided, with 54.5% voting for the increase, with a turnout of 5.7% of eligible voters. The new fees will apply to all cars that weigh more than 1.6 metric tons if they have traditional combustion engines or are hybrids, or more than 2.0 metric tons if they are electric.
Consumers with those vehicles will have to pay 18 euros for the first hour of public parking in central Paris and 12 euros in the outer neighborhoods. For additional hours, drivers of these larger vehicles will pay more than $240 for six hours, for example.
The measure provides exemptions for Paris residents parking in their own neighborhoods, taxis or other professional vehicles, or people using larger vehicles because of a disability.
The significance of the vote and the strategy is the creation of a counterpoint to the consumer-centric tactics of VC-funded transportation startups like Uber and other TNCs. As described in “Disrupting DC,” cities have few tools or funds to manage their transportation infrastructure. The leaders of many cities have been forced to focus on attracting investment with tax abatements, propping up growth but leaving city services of all kinds underfunded.
Cities have limited means to improve the quality of life of residents. TNC operators such as Uber, then, have presented their services as a panacea for all that ails the city even offering to supplement or completely replace mass transit.
Mayor Hidalgo’s initiative is intended to empower city residents to affirm their rights as superior to and superceding those of commercial operators or, as in this case, the interests of visiting tourists and their outsized vehicles. In fact, some consider the Mayor’s tactics to be underhanded or unfair.
As the New York Times reports: “But Ms. Hidalgo’s opponents — motorist groups, and her centrist and right-wing political opponents on the City Council — complained that the debate was skewed.
“On Sunday, voters were asked if they were ‘against the creation of a specific parking rate for heavy, cumbersome, polluting private cars?’
“ ‘Given how biased the question was, the result is a snub for the mayor,’ said Philippe Nozière, the president of 40 Million Motorists, a motorist lobbying group.
“Mr. Nozière said the new fees would unfairly affect tourists, residents of the capital’s suburbs and Parisian families. Sport utility vehicles and similar crossover cars have only become more popular because of increasing safety norms, he said.”
The NYTimes reports that the referendum showed a divide between wealthier western neighborhoods that voted against the new parking fees and the city’s more working class and socially diverse eastern ones that voted in favor.
Fair or not, Mayor Hidalgo has weaponized democracy in the interest of the citizens and residents of the city. Other cities around Europe and globally have sought ways to limit the use of vehicles motivated by concerns over congestion and emissions.
These movements have been particularly pronounced in Europe where mass transit is more widely deployed and used. The not so subtle message from the Mayor is “leave your car at home.” It is no surprise that the wealthy would be opposed to or put out by the measure.
The alternative to referendum-based regulation is to rule by fiat from a regulatory authority or legislature. In the case of Washington, DC, where Uber developed and refined its manipulative playbook, efforts to limit Uber’s operations from hours to fares to inspections to handicapped user provisions were all turned back by Uber's customer-centric protests.
But a referendum can be a two-edged sword. Uber demonstrated its own democratic chops in funding the successful effort to pass Proposition 22 in California, allowing TNC operators to classify their “employees” as independent contractors.
Mayor Hidalgo won a narrower victory in this second referendum impacting transportation priorities. It may well serve as a model for other cities seeking to manage their transportation challenges – by elevating the concerns of citizens over those of consumers. It may also mark the end of the road for such efforts considering the narrower victory and even smaller voter turnout. The Mayor likely has a job as an international transportation consultant waiting for her when she leaves office.
Absolutely fascinating topic! 🌟 As Henry Ford once said, “Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success.” It sounds like Paris is on the brink of revolutionizing urban mobility with Uber, Lyft, e-scooters, and robotaxis. 🚗🛴 Let's embrace this collaborative spirit for a greener, more connected future! 💚✨ #UrbanMobility #Innovation
Senior Analyst, Global Automotive Practice - TechInsights
10moThe fact of the matter is delivery logistics (whether food, goods, e-commerce, etc.) is critical to the modern economy. Are these vehicles exempted? I'm not completely opposed to anti-congestion measures if they're pragmatic and realistic. If they're motivated by political grandstanding and naïve idealism, not so much.
EMODE Outdoors: Electric Mobility Development for Outdoor Recreation Destinations and On-Site
10moSO good, so important Roger! These efforts are important for trying anything to affect change. But, boy, this would never fly most anywhere in the U.S. Just keep giving consumers and citizens choices I guess and let natural evolution occur. I do however want to see road infrastructure development accommodating more multi-modal transport, for "Active" transportation especially.