How cities use regulation for innovation: the case of Uber, Lyft and Sidecar in San Francisco

How do government actors facilitate or hinder private innovation in urban mobility, and how does local context mediate this relationship? In this paper we examine the regulatory response to on-demand ride services—or “ridesourcing”—through a case study of San Francisco, CA. The entry of Lyft, Sideca...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Transportation research procedia (Online) 2017, Vol.25, p.3756-3768
Main Authors: Flores, Onesimo, Rayle, Lisa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
innovation
regulation
ridesharing
taxis
Transportation Network Company (TNC)
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:How do government actors facilitate or hinder private innovation in urban mobility, and how does local context mediate this relationship? In this paper we examine the regulatory response to on-demand ride services—or “ridesourcing”—through a case study of San Francisco, CA. The entry of Lyft, Sidecar, and UberX in San Francisco in 2012 raised serious questions about the legality of ridesourcing, and sparked significant conflict within regulatory agencies. After sustained debate, regulators decided to welcome the services provided by new companies and crafted a new regulatory framework that legalized the provision of for-profit, on-demand ride services using personal vehicles. We ask, given strong arguments on each side, what motivated public officials in each city to facilitate, rather than hinder, the new services? How did they achieve regulatory reform?
ISSN:2352-1465
2352-1465
DOI:10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.232