Cities love to pilot shared mobility.
Across the world, new carsharing programs, micromobility trials, and on-demand transit services are launched with enthusiasm and optimism. There’s a ribbon-cutting. A press release. A promise of innovation.
And then, quietly, they fade.
Budgets shift. Councils change. Political priorities move on. The pilot ends, not because it failed, but because it was never designed to last.
Meanwhile, developers keep building parking.
At movmi, we see this pattern again and again. Shared mobility is treated as an experiment. Something temporary, optional, and easy to roll back. But mobility isn’t a nice-to-have. It’s critical urban infrastructure, shaping how people live, work, and access opportunity. And if we want it to endure, it needs to be embedded into policy, planning, and development from day one.
In this article, we explore how shared mobility policy, when embedded into planning and development decisions, can move cities beyond fragile pilots toward lasting, scalable systems.
TL;DR
Cities around the world continue to launch shared mobility pilots, but without stable policy frameworks, most fail to last. British Columbia offers a different approach. By embedding carsharing into land-use planning, development approvals, and Transportation Demand Management policies, BC municipalities are creating durable, scalable shared mobility systems. This post explores what works, why pilots fail, what happened to Zipcar in the UK, and how policy-led mobility can shape more equitable, resilient cities.
Article Content
Why New Developments Matter for Shared Mobility
New residential and commercial developments are one of the most powerful and underused levers cities have to shape long-term mobility outcomes.
Once a building is constructed, its mobility impact is largely locked in for decades. Parking supply, curb access, and travel behaviour become structural features, not short-term choices. Development approvals are one of the few moments when cities can intervene in a meaningful way.
When municipalities and developers work together, developments can:
- Reduce unnecessary and expensive parking
- Improve multimodal access from day one
- Fund shared mobility directly through development approvals and TDM requirements
- Decrease long-term reliance on private vehicles
- Support more equitable, people-first communities
The opportunity is clear. What is often missing are the policy models to make this standard practice. Many cities still rely on short-term pilots or voluntary operator partnerships. These approaches lack durability, consistency, and scale.
Until now.
Lessons from British Columbia: Moving Beyond Shared Mobility Pilots
movmi was recently engaged to evaluate municipal carsharing and Transportation Demand Management policies across British Columbia and compare them with leading international examples.
The objective was straightforward. Identify which policy measures enable reliable, long-term carsharing services, and which do not.
The analysis examined both supply-side and demand-side interventions, supported by real-world case studies and performance indicators where available. Together, these findings reveal a clear pattern. Where carsharing is treated as infrastructure, it performs like infrastructure.
Supply-Side Policies Enabling Long-Term Carsharing
On the supply side, effective policies focus on giving carsharing services the physical and regulatory foundations they need to operate reliably over time.
Supply-side measures that enable long-term carsharing include:
- Secure parking permits and discounted curb access
- Dedicated on-street and off-street carsharing stalls
- Integration of carsharing into development approvals and TDM requirements
- Public support for fleet electrification and EV charging
- Mobility hubs that integrate shared mobility with transit and active transportation
When these elements are in place, operators can plan, invest, and grow with confidence. Without them, services remain vulnerable to policy shifts and rising operating costs.
Demand-Side Policies That Drive Carsharing Use
Strong supply-side policy alone is not enough. Cities also need to make carsharing easy, affordable, and visible for residents.
Demand-side measures that support uptake include:
- Free or discounted parking during carsharing trips
- Equity and access programs using third-party payment systems
- Vehicle scrappage programs paired with mobility budgets
- Ongoing public outreach and communications
- Partnerships with employers, schools, and public institutions
These interventions help translate infrastructure into everyday use, especially for households seeking alternatives to private car ownership.
Demand-Side Policies That Drive Carsharing Use
Across jurisdictions, policy stability and consistency emerged as the strongest predictors of carsharing success.
Municipalities that combine:
- Secure parking access
- Integration into development regulation
- Some level of public-sector co-investment
consistently show stronger fleet growth, higher membership uptake, and greater long-term service reliability.
In contrast, cities that rely primarily on short-term pilots or operator-led market expansion experience volatility. Over time, this often leads to service contraction rather than growth.
| Policy Area | Short-Term Pilot Approach | Policy-Led Approach (BC Examples) |
|---|---|---|
|
Parking Access |
Temporary or time-limited permits |
Secure, long-term permits embedded in policy |
|
Development |
Voluntary or ad hoc agreements |
Mandatory TDM and development conditions |
|
Funding |
Operator-funded pilots |
Developer-funded infrastructure and mobility credits |
|
Governance |
Fragmented rules and approvals |
Standardized, city-wide frameworks |
|
Equity |
One-off or informal programs |
Structured access and payment models |
|
Longevity |
High risk of service withdrawal |
Predictable, scalable operations |
If you’re working on policy, planning, or development decisions right now, the full report goes deeper into what this looks like in practice. Enter your email to receive the final Carshare TDM report when it’s released.
What Happened to Zipcar in the UK: A Policy Failure, Not a Market Failure
The recent exit of Zipcar from the UK illustrates this dynamic clearly.
At its peak, Zipcar operated roughly 3,000 vehicles serving more than 320,000 members. This was clear evidence of demand. For many users, Zipcar was their primary alternative to car ownership. It enabled car-free living while supporting everyday needs such as school runs, medical appointments, moving house, and travel beyond public transport coverage.
So why did it fail?
Not because carsharing does not work, but because the policy environment made viable operations extremely difficult.
Key challenges included:
- Uneven parking economics, where private cars benefited from subsidized curb access while shared vehicles faced significantly higher permit costs
- Fragmented governance across London’s 33 boroughs, each with different rules, fees, and processes
- Revenue conflicts, where local councils relied on parking income, creating disincentives to support carsharing even though wider benefits accrued regionally
- Cost pressures from rapid electrification requirements without aligned infrastructure support
The result was rising costs, suppressed demand, and shrinking margins, despite strong public value.
Users expressed shock and frustration, with many fearing a return to private car ownership. The lesson is clear. Without stable, aligned policy, even successful services can collapse.
From Pilots to Policy: How BC Is Setting a New Standard
British Columbia offers a compelling counter-example.
Vancouver has embedded shared mobility into its 20-year Transportation Demand Management policy, requiring developers to fund carsharing infrastructure and offer mobility credits.
Victoria is home to car-free townhomes that replace underground parking with mobility packages.
Saanich is integrating shared modes into lower-density areas, with a focus on equity and private-property governance.
These are not pilots. They are policy frameworks, and they are scalable.
See It in Action: International Study Tour in British Columbia
This April, movmi is hosting a 2.5-day international study tour through Vancouver, Victoria, and Whistler to explore these models firsthand.
If you are a city planner, developer, mobility operator, or researcher or consultant, this program is designed for you.
What You Will Learn
- How to transition from short-term pilots to long-term mobility policy
- Tools for embedding shared mobility in land-use and development planning
- Frameworks for developer-funded mobility infrastructure
- Strategies to balance curbside access and private-property governance
- Insights from EU and Canadian experts, including TransLink, Urban Thrive, and Way to Go
Study Tour Program Snapshot
- Dates: April 14 to 16, 2026
- Locations: Vancouver, Victoria, and Whistler
- Cost: €1,800
- Registration deadline: February 15, 2026
Walk Away With
- Replicable policy and development templates
- Financial and governance planning checklists
- A global peer network of changemakers
- A clearer understanding of what policy-led mobility can achieve
This is not just a tour. It is a chance to bring back actionable strategies that can shape the next decade of mobility in your city or development.
FAQs
A pilot is temporary and often politically fragile. A policy-led approach embeds shared mobility into planning, zoning, and development rules, making services durable and scalable.
Most pilots fail due to inconsistent parking access, lack of long-term funding, fragmented governance, and reliance on voluntary participation rather than regulation.
TDM policies reduce reliance on private vehicles by requiring or incentivizing shared mobility, parking reductions, and mobility credits in new developments.
Parking access determines cost, convenience, and network density. Without secure, affordable parking, carsharing services struggle to operate sustainably.
Zipcar faced high parking costs, fragmented local governance, revenue conflicts, and electrification pressures. The exit reflects policy failure, not lack of demand.
BC municipalities are embedding carsharing into long-term policy frameworks, development approvals, and land-use planning rather than relying on pilots.