The MDMS Regulation: is the EU missing the train to a multimodal Europe?
(2024) JAEM01 20241Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- In a digital age where travellers are increasingly looking for the cheapest, fastest or most sustainable way to travel, comparing different modes of transport efficiently becomes a challenge. The internet offers a wide range of websites and travel providers, fragmenting information and forcing travellers to navigate inefficiently between different platforms and websites.
Multimodal Digital Mobility Services (MDMS) can facilitate this comparison process by bringing together different transport options, ticket prices and other travel arrangements on a single platform. This allows travellers to easily find the best travel options that match their preferences and needs. However, the potential success of these MDMS platforms is hampered by... (More) - In a digital age where travellers are increasingly looking for the cheapest, fastest or most sustainable way to travel, comparing different modes of transport efficiently becomes a challenge. The internet offers a wide range of websites and travel providers, fragmenting information and forcing travellers to navigate inefficiently between different platforms and websites.
Multimodal Digital Mobility Services (MDMS) can facilitate this comparison process by bringing together different transport options, ticket prices and other travel arrangements on a single platform. This allows travellers to easily find the best travel options that match their preferences and needs. However, the potential success of these MDMS platforms is hampered by the anti-competitive behaviour of transport operators towards MDMS operators and vice-versa. Transport operators may choose not to share essential data with MDMS platforms, although this data is crucial for the latter to provide their services. On the other hand, MDMS platforms may engage in self-preferencing by using biased rankings or by simply denying access to their platform to certain transport providers.
Chapter 2 therefore examines the extent to which Article 102 TFEU can adequately tackle these competition concerns. However, it appears that this Article is not always effective in addressing the anti-competitive tactics. Chapter 3 will reveal that EU legislation also falls short in addressing differential treatment and refusal to provide data in MDMS. The Commission has recently acknowledged this legislative gap and, as a result, has initiated the drafting of an MDMS Regulation.
Chapter 4 consequently outlines some policy recommendations that can be incorporated into the MDMS Regulation to address these issues, including imposing a neutral display obligation on MDMS platforms, extending the CRS Code of Conduct to all ‘CRS-like’ players, making data sharing reciprocal and mandating access to real-time dynamic data for transport operators.
In summary, while the EU’s recent efforts to draft an MDMS Regulation are encouraging, the path forward for this Regulation is still uncertain. Hopefully, the EU embraces this opportunity and moves forward steadily towards a more integrated European transport landscape. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9155154
- author
- Deruyck, Luca Anna LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- JAEM01 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- H1 - Master's Degree (One Year)
- subject
- keywords
- MDMS Regulation Multimodal Digital Mobility Services (MDMS)
- language
- English
- id
- 9155154
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-25 11:56:53
- date last changed
- 2024-06-25 11:56:53
@misc{9155154,
abstract = {{In a digital age where travellers are increasingly looking for the cheapest, fastest or most sustainable way to travel, comparing different modes of transport efficiently becomes a challenge. The internet offers a wide range of websites and travel providers, fragmenting information and forcing travellers to navigate inefficiently between different platforms and websites.
Multimodal Digital Mobility Services (MDMS) can facilitate this comparison process by bringing together different transport options, ticket prices and other travel arrangements on a single platform. This allows travellers to easily find the best travel options that match their preferences and needs. However, the potential success of these MDMS platforms is hampered by the anti-competitive behaviour of transport operators towards MDMS operators and vice-versa. Transport operators may choose not to share essential data with MDMS platforms, although this data is crucial for the latter to provide their services. On the other hand, MDMS platforms may engage in self-preferencing by using biased rankings or by simply denying access to their platform to certain transport providers.
Chapter 2 therefore examines the extent to which Article 102 TFEU can adequately tackle these competition concerns. However, it appears that this Article is not always effective in addressing the anti-competitive tactics. Chapter 3 will reveal that EU legislation also falls short in addressing differential treatment and refusal to provide data in MDMS. The Commission has recently acknowledged this legislative gap and, as a result, has initiated the drafting of an MDMS Regulation.
Chapter 4 consequently outlines some policy recommendations that can be incorporated into the MDMS Regulation to address these issues, including imposing a neutral display obligation on MDMS platforms, extending the CRS Code of Conduct to all ‘CRS-like’ players, making data sharing reciprocal and mandating access to real-time dynamic data for transport operators.
In summary, while the EU’s recent efforts to draft an MDMS Regulation are encouraging, the path forward for this Regulation is still uncertain. Hopefully, the EU embraces this opportunity and moves forward steadily towards a more integrated European transport landscape.}},
author = {{Deruyck, Luca Anna}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{The MDMS Regulation: is the EU missing the train to a multimodal Europe?}},
year = {{2024}},
}