Regulierungsansätze für plattformgestützte Mobilitätsdienste – Reformbedarf und Reformbestrebungen
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Regulierungsansätze für plattformgestützte Mobilitätsdienste – Reformbedarf und Reformbestrebungen
Fehling, Michael | Schröter, Nico
Die Verwaltung, Vol. 53 (2020), Iss. 3 : pp. 381–420
Additional Information
Article Details
Pricing
Author Details
Prof. Dr. Michael Fehling, LL.M. (Berkeley), Bucerius Law School, Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht mit Rechtsvergleichung Jungiusstraße 6, 20355 Hamburg
Nico Schröter, LL.M. (LSE), Bucerius Law School, Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht mit Rechtsvergleichung, Jungiusstraße 6, 20355 Hamburg
Abstract
The widespread use of smartphones has given rise to numerous new mobility services, commonly described as ride sharing and/or ride pooling. Such services allow for a spontaneous and more flexible coordination of supply and demand, and thus promise to be a more efficient and ecological alternative to traditional modes of local transport. However, these services may also come to compete with public (and publicly funded) transport services. Further, the business models associated with these services may pose problems both for workers’ rights and in terms of consumer protection. The current legal framework, namely the German Passenger Transportation Act [Personenbeförderungsgesetz – PTA] only allows the provision of services according to certain pre-defined categories (i. e. line haul services, taxi services and vehicles for hire). Each of the categories enjoys specific privileges but is also subject to specific obligations. This regulatory regime is intended to guarantee a continuous and comprehensive supply with a variety of mobility services but turns out to be ill-equipped to accommodate new modes of transport which do not fit into any of the pre-defined categories. In Germany, this has led to several legal disputes about their permissibility. Recent plans to reform the PTA, put forward by the Federal Ministry of Transport and a multipartisan reform commission, involve some deregulation of transport services while retaining the overall regulatory system. Most importantly, they intend to incorporate ride pooling services both as part of the public transport system and as independent services. While the reform proposals point in the right direction, there is a need for more comprehensive reform. This would, firstly, entail a critical assessment whether the rigid regulatory system in its current form is still feasible. Secondly, ecological requirements should play a greater role when tendering and licensing transport services. As to that, the possibilities to award special compensation in accordance with EU-Regulation 1370/2007 should be used more widely. A more comprehensive reform would, thirdly, also consider the way (esp. municipal) authorities can plan transport services. Not only would such planning have to include different (new) mobility services. One should also aim at better synchronising different planning tools to integrate a multitude of mobility services. Finally, new mobility services pose further challenges that, however, are typical for the digital and platform economy, such as dynamic and individual pricing, issues of data protection and a possible need for regulated self-regulation.
Table of Contents
Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
---|---|---|---|
Michael Fehling/Nico Schröter: Regulierungsansätze für plattformgestützte Mobilitätsdienste – Reformbedarf und Reformbestrebungen | 381 | ||
I. Einführung | 381 | ||
II. Bestandsaufnahme: Erscheinungsformen und Probleme | 382 | ||
III. Defizite des vorhandenen Regulierungsrahmens im Personenbeförderungsgesetz | 384 | ||
1. Hintergrund: Rechtsstreitigkeiten um neue Mobilitätsdienste | 385 | ||
2. Einzelne signifikante Schwächen des aktuellen Personenbeförderungsgesetzes | 387 | ||
3. Überholtes Grundkonzept des geltenden Personenbeförderungsgesetzes | 381 | ||
IV. Punktuelle Reformüberlegungen der Politik | 381 | ||
1. Einbeziehung von (App-basierten) Vermittlungsdiensten in die Unternehmensdefinition | 381 | ||
2. Freistellung nicht geschäftsmäßiger Personenbeförderung | 381 | ||
3. Modifizierung der Rückkehrpflicht für Mietwagen mit Fahrer | 381 | ||
4. Zulassung von Ridepooling-Diensten mit Differenzierung zwischen solchen innerhalb und außerhalb des ÖPNV | 381 | ||
5. Arbeitnehmerschutz im Nahverkehrsplan | 382 | ||
6. Ermächtigung zu landesrechtlichen Regelungen bezüglich Fahrzeugemissionen | 382 | ||
V. Weiterreichender Reformbedarf zur Förderung eines nachhaltigen städtischen Mobilitätsangebots | 382 | ||
1. Zukunftsfähigkeit des Typenzwangs mit Öffnungsklauseln | 382 | ||
2. Potentiale gemeinwohldienlicher Marktgestaltung durch strategische (Umwelt-)Vorgaben | 383 | ||
3. Weiterentwicklung der Nahverkehrsplanung | 383 | ||
4. Spezifischer Regulierungsbedarf der Digital- und Plattformökonomie | 383 | ||
VI. Fazit | 383 | ||
Abstract | 383 |