Exploring transport
and urban governance
in a platform-driven world
by Kevin Webb
@kvnweb
The “platform” questions we’re grappling with today are fundamentally about how “connectivity” shapes our communities.
Let’s unpack connectivity three ways...
?
MaaS
Connectivity is not the “the Internet”
We’ve dealt with the impact of connective technologies before.
Proximity is a form of connectivity
Cities are fundamentally
a connective technology
New connective technologies change how we experience proximity
They lessen our dependence on spatial proximity, allowing us to organize around new forms social and conceptual proximity
Connective technologies change more than just how we connect or move: they reorganize the spatial, social, and economic structures of how we live
Connectivity is infrastructural:
its purpose is to enable others to do more
Businesses that operate infrastructure raise unique questions:
While railroads laid the foundation for modern infrastructure regulation, communications technology has changed the mechanics and role of connective infrastructure
We moved from supply coordination via control of physical infrastructure, to the coordination of demand as form of infrastructure
Supply-side vs demand-side coordination
Infrastructure coordinates supply
Supply-side vs demand-side coordination
Infrastructure
coordinates demand
The turning point from supply to demand coordination: airline ticketing
Global Distribution Systems (GDSs)
and “Screen Bias”
As airline ticketing evolved it developed two market-coordinating superpowers:
Demand-side market coordination and “personalization” techniques pioneered by the airline industry now define the modern Internet economy
Why should the urban policy community think about evolving forms of market power?
The “map” is at the core of emerging forms of urban connectivity and coordination
But the word “map” is inadequate for describing the thing we’re actually building...
It’s part
yellow pages...
(discovery infrastructure?)
It’s part social network..
(coordination infrastructure?)
It’s part sales channel...
(distribution infrastructure?)
[Hypothesis:] we need to move the urban policy discourse from “maps” to “markets”
Changes in connective technologies, and emergent connective business models force us to confront these questions:
If we frame urban policy questions around understanding of market power...
...none of these problems are new.
We already have the tools to address this type of challenge.
What regulatory tools can we use to shape the impact of platform technologies in cities?
Existing leverage points:
Physical infrastructure
Existing leverage points:
People,
Vehicles
& Goods
Existing leverage points:
Existing leverage points:
Markets &
Business
structures
Existing leverage points:
Existing leverage points:
Regulation of infrastructure/space
Existing leverage points:
Regulation of business/markets
Existing leverage points:
Important (but narrow) tools
Expansive (yet under discussed) tools
Fair pricing, transparency, and competition:
Limit rent-seeking, pricing discrimination, and ensure markets allow open competition wherever possible
We need innovation in pricing regulation
Industrial-era pricing regulations are focused on supply-side coordination and reducing power of supplier trusts. Today we need demand-side pricing regulation.
Create new kinds of public utilities
Ensure that core infrastructure, particularly where there there are efficiencies from centralization, or opportunities for capture
We need a more dynamic approach to infrastructure regulation, and innovation in governance
Picking the right layers of infrastructure is crucial, as is knowing when/how to unwind
Complex, tightly integrated systems are capturable
Instead of top-down “platforms” we need bottom-up infrastructure, that enables everyone to do (and understand) more.
Labor protection/regulation is a powerful lever
Today’s emergent urban technologies have redefined labor obligations, just like past
High-tech algorithm for reducing VMT:
Require that all businesses carry their full labor costs on-balance sheet
Privacy regulations are consumer protection regulations
They reduce information asymmetries, amplify pricing regulation, and enable transparent, open competition.
As part of defining our right to personal privacy, we need to define a right to collective action and agency through shared information. These are two sides of the same coin.
Emerging forms of algorithmic governance depend on collective insight and data. If we build those systems on privacy-protecting approaches to measurement, everyone can participate.
We need to make bold public technical investments in that commodify core infrastructure, ensuring it serves as a building block for others, and prevents capture.
The opportunity: we have the tools we need to understand and manage the power of “connective platforms”
The risk: we miss the forest for the trees, and treat today’s challenges as a technical problems