As the offer of digital services in transport expands, understanding users’ digital engagement and how it developed over time is important to make informed policy decisions. In particular, we lack an understanding of how both PT (public transport) and car users access and engage with digital technologies and perceive them to be necessary to travel. This article aims at bridging this gap, using a 2022 survey of representative samples from both populations in the Netherlands. There is clear evidence of travellers getting more used to digital technologies over time. In 2022, at most 80% of car and PT users relied at least from time to time on their smartphone to look for travel information. As expected, higher digital skills correlate positively with the likelihood of using smartphone-based travel information. It is worth noting that PT users report higher digital skills than car users, while these samples do not differ significantly in terms of age and education levels. As such, low (perceived) digital skills might be a barrier to switching from the car to public transport. Almost 75% of car and PT users think that travelling is more difficult nowadays without a smartphone, demonstrating a radical shift in societal expectations within a decade and a half. Alternatives like public information displays exist and are still used by the majority, but traditional communication channels are not deemed sufficient anymore to travel worry-free. These perceptions can contribute to shaping reality and may put those with a lower digital access at a disadvantage.

Introduction: Special Transport Services (STS), a.k.a. paratransit, help keep people with an impairment mobile. Yet these services face financial and organisational challenges. Public transport (PT) is usually seen as a way to alleviate some of these burdens. In fact, the discussion around the potential for PT to substitute STS has been on the agenda of policymakers in the Netherlands for years. Methods: In this paper, we relied on survey data and STS trip registrations to analyse the extent to which STS can be substituted with regular PT in the Netherlands. Using the Capability Approach as a conceptual framework, we link conversion factors to individuals’ opportunity to use PT. We then provide a range of the substitution potential of STS with public transport. Results: Virtually all STS users have difficulties that make travelling independently challenging. The first and last mile and getting in and out of vehicles are main obstacles for PT use. Many passengers rely on STS because of a lack of support from their network. Besides, long walking distances and travel times for PT trips compared with door-to-door STS trips can deter people from switching mode. Lastly, STS seem to be particularly important during bad weather conditions, emphasizing their role as safety nets rather than go-to options. In the current state of affairs, 0%–16% of STS trips in the Netherlands could be done by public transport instead. The upper limit of 16% is likely an overestimation as it does not account for many factors like health and weather. Conclusions: Our results show that STS play an important role in people's mobility, especially at times when and for destinations where no other option exists. This study confirms that, despite efforts to make public transport more accessible, it is not a panacea for people with an impairment.

As digitalisation is making its way into public transport (PT) services, policy approaches to ensure that such services remain inclusive are at best fragmented, at worst inexistant. This study pieces together existing initiatives and lessons learnt in the transport sector itself, and takes inspiration from other fields with a more mature understanding of digitalisation. We interviewed twenty-two experts working either in the PT sector or in other sectors such as healthcare and public administration to present an overview of possible measures to foster inclusion in PT in the digital era. We used both triangulation and a two-step respondent validation process to improve results’ trustworthiness. We conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all, but a series of complementary strategies to address digital inequality. A focus on an inclusive design from the start, courses, showing the added value of digital tools, specialist products and non-digital alternatives are building blocks to foster a more inclusive PT system in the era of digitalisation. The role of the public transport staff ought not to be underestimated in digital transformations. Importantly, securing the issue of unequal access to public transport due to digitalisation at a decision-making level is essential. Nevertheless, there is only so much that the transport sector can do. Tackling more systemic issues that often underlie digital barriers like poverty and low literacy is crucially relevant. While the present study was conducted in the Netherlands, the presented measures can be applied in other countries by stakeholders working on inclusive digital transformations in (public) transport services.

Digitalisation in public transport has become pervasive over the past decade, especially in urban areas. While it benefits many, it also leaves some behind. Previous research shows that older adults, people with a lower education level, people with impairments and people with a migration background are more likely to be negatively impacted by digitalisation in transport services. In order to uncover mechanisms behind digital inequality in public transport, we interviewed 39 people belonging to these groups. They experience difficulties due to low digital skills, not using digital technologies on-the-go, not possessing the right devices and due to a complex design of technologies, among others. Many participants reap some benefits of digitalisation though. In fact, individuals can experience benefits on one aspect and difficulties on another. Nevertheless, experiencing difficulties with digitalisation does not necessarily equal to exclusion from public transport thanks to coping strategies like support from one's social network. Still, many coping strategies come with pitfalls such as hidden work and costs. Digital technologies facilitate a self-service approach that paradoxically makes some people more dependent on others. This study can support practitioners and researchers in developing a better understanding of the (sometimes insidious) consequences of technological innovations on individuals.

Digitalisation in transport services offers many benefits for travellers. However, not everyone is willing or able to follow the new, more or less formal requirements digitalisation has brought along. Existing reviews on the intersection between Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and mobility cover a range of vantage points, but the perspective of how various levels of engagement with digital technologies affect access and navigation of transport services has not been addressed yet. In communication science, studying disparities in terms of ICT appropriation and their consequences is known as digital inequality research. This review paper aims at shedding light on what digital inequality in the context of transport services consists of and what its consequences are. To do so, we define and use a conceptual framework for the analysis of digital inequality in transport services. The review of the twenty-five papers, as selected in our systematic literature search, shows that there is a burgeoning interest in this topic. Vulnerability to digitalisation in transport services exists along dimensions of age, income, education, ethnicity, gender and geographical region. We find that motivations and material access get more attention than digital skills and effective usage. Nevertheless, literature acknowledges that having material access to technology does not mean that people benefit from what technology has to offer. Furthermore, the characteristics of ICTs impact one’s possibilities to access digital technologies, such as how user-friendly a technology is. Data-driven and algorithm-based decision-making present a particularly pernicious form of digital exclusion from transport services. As digital technologies are progressively becoming indispensable to navigate the world of transport services, low levels of digital engagement may create a new layer of transport disadvantage, possibly on top of existing ones. Although digitalisation can be part of the solution to transport disadvantage, it can also be part of the problem. With network effects at play, what might start as a relative disadvantage may turn into an absolute disadvantage. Given the nascent state of research on digital inequality in transport services, much remains to be understood. Suggested research avenues include mechanisms of digital exclusion from transport services, the contribution of digital inequality to transport disadvantage, and importantly, solutions to mitigate its impacts.

The concept of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) is rapidly gaining momentum. Parties involved are eager to learn more about its potential uptake, effects on travel behaviour, and users. We focus on the latter, as we attempt to reveal the profile of groups within the Dutch population that have a relatively high likelihood of adopting MaaS in the near future, apart from the actual supply side. MaaS is a transport concept integrating existing and new mobility services on a digital platform, providing customised door-to-door transportation options. Based on common denominators of MaaS as found in the literature, we have established five indicators to identify early adopters: innovativeness, being tech-savvy, needing travel information, having a multimodal mindset, and wanting freedom of choice. These five indicators are the building blocks of our Latent Demand for MaaS Index (LDMI), and were constructed using 26 statements and questions from a special survey conducted in 2018 among participants of the Netherlands Mobility Panel (MPN). The features derived from the MPN serve as independent variables in a regression analysis of the indicators used to ascertain the profile of early adopters. The results of our model indicate that early adopters are likely to be highly mobile, have a high socio-economic status, high levels of education and high personal incomes. Young people are more eager to adopt MaaS than older adults. Early adopters are healthy, active and frequent users of trains and planes. The characteristics of MaaS's early adopters overlap in numerous ways with those of innovative mobility services users and with the general characteristics of early adopters as found in innovation studies.