How it works:
The city contracts a single company or consortium that covers all aspects of launching and operating new tech-driven mobility services: operations planning, procurement of vehicles, hiring drivers & operations staff, technology deployment, vehicle operations and maintenance (possibly marketing & outreach as well).

• Generally, a company operates transparently under the city’s brand, through co-branding.
• Many companies offer both tech-only service (“software as a service”/SaaS) and full turnkey operation (“transportation as a service”/TaaS) to answer different needs and capacity levels among cities.
• Besides micro-mobility, many early deployments/pilot projects of Autonomous vehicles (AV) also follow this model.

Advantages:

• Also suitable for smaller cities, those with less staff capacity and don´t own existing solutions.
  
• A turnkey business often already has a proven successful business model and merely requires investment from the public sector.
• Stronger data reporting than more private-sector services (ride-hail especially), as operations are all under the agency’s contractual umbrella.

Disadvantages:

• The mobility provider designs and develops the solution, which minimizes the client's ability to control project details and interfere with the solution development.

How it works:

Cities subsidize private rides that support public goals but have little commercial viability. This is used to avoid undercutting transit and is often focused on specific populations (e.g. low-income people without vehicle access) or specific applications:

• First/last mile solutions to dedicated areas (e.g. hospitals, university, business parks, etc.).
• People with disabilities or the elderly.
• Travel in suburbs/low-density areas where fixed-route transit can’t be productive.
• Late-night trips/travel at times/in areas where transit doesn’t run.
• Occasional, unexpected trips (guaranteed ride home), as part of a larger package of transportation services.
• There is a variety of subsidy structures with differing budget implications:
  • Entire cost; up to a certain amount with customer covering the difference.
  • The inverse; specific amount after initial fare.

Advantages:

• Taking advantage of the popularity & flexibility of ride-hail & taxis.
• Easy to set requirements to a provider.
• Great way to make sure shared mobility is also accessible for low-income households. By subsidising the mobility provider, the lower-income household can ride for a lower price.
• Makes it more attractive for mobility providers as it takes away some of their risk of operation.

Disadvantages:

• It can be hard measuring the success and to what degree the subsidies are helping.
• Requires financial involvement from the city

Example: 
The city of Paris is trying to encourage e-bike usage by subsidising both private purchase and subscriptions to the Veligo program. The latter allows residents to rent e-bikes long-term - for up to 6 months - at a rate of €40 a month, half of which can be covered by one's employer.

How it works:

The city is mainly involved in engaging customers and making the private rides more attractive for the inhabitants through marketing and e.g. integrating it into a larger MaaS platform.

• Takes advantage of large crossover between transit & new mobility customer bases, mutually advantageous to link services in riders’ minds.
• Incorporating service info into trip planning apps.
• Promotion of discounts from mobility providers.

Advantages:

• Least demanding partnership approach from a city perspective.
• Shows the city´s commitment to innovation & attracting new riders and better serve current ones, while limiting risk.
• Little investment or risk beyond staff time.

Disadvantages:

• Increased chances of losing control over the mobility-provider and its operations.

Example: 
TIER / Munich (Europe’s leading mico-mobility provider) partners with cities and local public transport providers so they can get e-scooters on the streets. The cities brand/market it as an eco-friendly last-mile solution and are often integrated into the urban MaaS applications.

How it works:
The city uses its regulatory and policy power to encourage the presence of private services seen as worthwhile (and discourage bad behavior).

• The city uses control over public space (e.g. roads, curbs, parking) which private companies need to access.
• Areas near transit stations in dense downtowns are the greatest premium: access can be exchanged for commitment to serve less appealing areas.

Advantages:

• No public investment nor risk beyond staff time.
• Can help manage competition among private operators, encourage socially beneficial outcomes.
• Fleet operators (dockless micromobility) can qualify for higher fleet caps/lower fees through performance-based permitting (good behavior → higher caps)

Disadvantages:

• If the city does not put down any restrictions/requirements, one can be faced with an overload of suppliers.
• Since mobility is a low-profit business, a market without city intervention and support will be less attractive for mobility providers, especially start-ups with less financial security (it is risky for them).

Example: 
One way to encourage private market presence while still keeping some control of what is happening is through licencing. This means that the city gives a mobility provider the permission to use public space for its operations if they comply to certain pre-established requirements. The city of Leuven is giving 2-3 year licences for mobility providers to operate. This is in order to give them certainty. However, if they do not comply with the pre-esablished requirements, they will not be allowed to operate anymore. Amongst the requirements in Leuven is that they cover the whole city (also less attractive areas), they have to prove a minimum service level and have a minimum standard of quality.