An Optimized Operational Model for the Development of Micromobility Systems in Metropolitan Areas (Case Study: Tehran)

Akhbari, Kamran; Naderan, Ali; Khaksar, Hassan

doi:10.22119/ijte.2026.577725.1726

An Optimized Operational Model for the Development of Micromobility Systems in Metropolitan Areas (Case Study: Tehran)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Kamran Akhbari ¹

Ali Naderan ²

Hassan Khaksar ³

¹ PHD Candidate of Transportation Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

² Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

³ Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, N.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

10.22119/ijte.2026.577725.1726

Abstract

Micromobility has emerged as a flexible, low-emission alternative for short urban trips, attracting growing interest in densely populated cities. This study evaluates the financial viability of implementing a shared micromobility network in Tehran from the perspective of a private or institutional investor. Employing a discounted cash flow (DCF) model over a 2024–2029 evaluation horizon, the analysis considers direct monetary flows, including capital expenditures (CAPEX), operating expenditures (OPEX), and revenues generated through trip-based fare structures. Demand is disaggregated by trip-duration categories and monetized using calibrated fare multipliers aligned with duration-sensitive usage patterns. A real discount rate of 46.5% is applied to reflect local economic conditions and investment risk. The results indicate that the system operates below cost-recovery levels during the initial deployment years, but reaches operational breakeven in 2026, after which annual revenues exceed annual costs. By 2029, the model estimates total annual revenue of 49,279,481 million rials and total annual costs of 5,060,766 million rials, resulting in a final-year net operating surplus of 44,218,715 million rials, equivalent to approximately 44.22 trillion rials. These findings suggest that, under the assumed demand, pricing, and cost conditions, shared micromobility can become financially viable after the initial capital-intensive phase. The study provides a replicable framework for evaluating clean transport investments in emerging urban contexts characterized by inflation, demand uncertainty, and high operational risk.

Keywords

Micromobility Infrastructure

Urban Transport Investment

Financial Feasibility Analysis

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Modelling

Electric Bicycle Sharing

Operating and Capital Expenditures (CAPEX &‌ OPEX)

- OECD/ITF. (2020). Safe Micromibility. International Transport Forum.

- ITDP. (2019). The Micromobility Revolution: The Introduction and Adoption of Electric Scooter in the United States. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy.

- WHO. (2017). Heath and Environment: Urban Transport and Heath. World Health Organization.

- NACTO. 920200. Shared Micromobility Playbook. National Association of City Transportation Officials.

- Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2), 73-80.

- Pojani, D., Stead, D. (2015). Sustainable urban transport in the developing world: Beyond megacities. Sustainability, 7(6), 7784-7805.

- Lubitow, A., Rainer, J., Basset, M. (2021). The policies of pop-up infrastructure: Public engagement and tactical urbanism in transportation planning. Journal of American Planning Association, 87(2), 174-187.

- Hensher D. A., Ho. C. Q., Reck, D. J. (2020). Mobility as a Service (MaaS): The importance of transport planning frameworks. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 178-190.

- Preprints.org (2023). A visual conceptualization of micromobility.

- IPCC. (2022). IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. Chapter 10: Transport. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

- Ehrenberger, S., Dasgupta, I., Brost, M., Gebhardt, L., & Seiffert, R. (2022). Potentials of light electric vehicles for climate protection by substituting passenger car trips. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 13(10), 183.

- Cairns, S., Behrendt, F., Raffo, D., Beaumont, C., & Kiefer, C. (2017). Electrically-assisted bikes: Potential impacts on travel behaviour. Transportation Research. Part A, Policy and Practice, 103, 327–342.

- McQueen, N., Psarras, P., Pilorgé, H., Liguori, S., He, J., Yuan, M., Woodall, C. M., Kian, K., Pierpoint, L., Jurewicz, J., Lucas, J. M., Jacobson, R., Deich, N., & Wilcox, J. (2020). Cost analysis of direct air capture and sequestration coupled to low-carbon thermal energy in the United States. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(12), 7542–7551.

- Philips, I., Anable, J., & Chatterton, T. (2022). E-bikes and their capability to reduce car CO₂ emissions. Transport Policy, 116, 11–23.

- De Bortoli, A. (2021). Environmental performance of shared micromobility and personal alternatives using integrated modal LCA. Transportation Research. Part D, Transport and Environment, 93(102743), 102743.

- Good to go? Assessing the environmental performance of new mobility. (2020). Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD).

- Guan, X., van Lierop, D., An, Z., Heinen, E., & Ettema, D. (2024). Shared micro-mobility and transport equity: A case study of three European countries. Cities (London, England), 153(105298), 105298.

- Oeschger, G., Caulfield, B., & Carroll, P. (2023). Investigating the role of micromobility for first- and last-mile connections to public transport. Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research, 1(100001), 100001.

- Hamerska, M., Ziółko, M., & Stawiarski, P. (2022). A sustainable transport system—the MMQUAL model of shared micromobility service quality assessment. Sustainability, 14(7), 4168.

- Ecer, F., Küçükönder, H., Kayapınar Kaya, S., & Faruk Görçün, Ö. (2023). Sustainability performance analysis of micro-mobility solutions in urban transportation with a novel IVFNN-Delphi-LOPCOW-CoCoSo framework. Transportation Research. Part A, Policy and Practice, 172(103667), 103667.

- Reck, D. J., Martin, H., & Axhausen, K. W. (2022). Mode choice, substitution patterns and environmental impacts of shared and personal micro-mobility. Transportation Research. Part D, Transport and Environment, 102(103134), 103134.

- Pazzini, M., Cameli, L., Lantieri, C., Vignali, V., Dondi, G., & Jonsson, T. (2022). New micromobility means of transport: An analysis of E-scooter users’ behaviour in Trondheim. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12), 7374.

- Schwinger, F., Tanriverdi, B., & Jarke, M. (2022). Comparing micromobility with public transportation trips in a data-driven spatio-temporal analysis. Sustainability, 14(14), 8247.

- Fazio, M., Giuffrida, N., Le Pira, M., Inturri, G., & Ignaccolo, M. (2021). Planning suitable transport networks for E-scooters to foster micromobility spreading. Sustainability, 13(20), 11422.

- Manout, O., Diallo, A. O., & Gloriot, T. (2024). Implications of pricing and fleet size strategies on shared bikes and e-scooters: A case study from Lyon, France. Transportation.

International Journal of Transportation Engineering

Volume 14, Issue 1 - Serial Number 53
Summer 2026
Pages 2453-2472

XML

PDF 924.91 K

Article View 169
PDF Download 44

International Journal of Transportation Engineering

An Optimized Operational Model for the Development of Micromobility Systems in Metropolitan Areas (Case Study: Tehran)

- OECD/ITF. (2020). Safe Micromibility. International Transport Forum.

- ITDP. (2019). The Micromobility Revolution: The Introduction and Adoption of Electric Scooter in the United States. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy.

- WHO. (2017). Heath and Environment: Urban Transport and Heath. World Health Organization.

- NACTO. 920200. Shared Micromobility Playbook. National Association of City Transportation Officials.

- Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2), 73-80.

- Pojani, D., Stead, D. (2015). Sustainable urban transport in the developing world: Beyond megacities. Sustainability, 7(6), 7784-7805.

- Lubitow, A., Rainer, J., Basset, M. (2021). The policies of pop-up infrastructure: Public engagement and tactical urbanism in transportation planning. Journal of American Planning Association, 87(2), 174-187.

- Hensher D. A., Ho. C. Q., Reck, D. J. (2020). Mobility as a Service (MaaS): The importance of transport planning frameworks. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 178-190.

- Preprints.org (2023). A visual conceptualization of micromobility.

- IPCC. (2022). IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. Chapter 10: Transport. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

- Ehrenberger, S., Dasgupta, I., Brost, M., Gebhardt, L., & Seiffert, R. (2022). Potentials of light electric vehicles for climate protection by substituting passenger car trips. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 13(10), 183.

- Cairns, S., Behrendt, F., Raffo, D., Beaumont, C., & Kiefer, C. (2017). Electrically-assisted bikes: Potential impacts on travel behaviour. Transportation Research. Part A, Policy and Practice, 103, 327–342.

- Philips, I., Anable, J., & Chatterton, T. (2022). E-bikes and their capability to reduce car CO2 emissions. Transport Policy, 116, 11–23.

- De Bortoli, A. (2021). Environmental performance of shared micromobility and personal alternatives using integrated modal LCA. Transportation Research. Part D, Transport and Environment, 93(102743), 102743.

- Good to go? Assessing the environmental performance of new mobility. (2020). Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD).

- Guan, X., van Lierop, D., An, Z., Heinen, E., & Ettema, D. (2024). Shared micro-mobility and transport equity: A case study of three European countries. Cities (London, England), 153(105298), 105298.

- Oeschger, G., Caulfield, B., & Carroll, P. (2023). Investigating the role of micromobility for first- and last-mile connections to public transport. Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research, 1(100001), 100001.

- Hamerska, M., Ziółko, M., & Stawiarski, P. (2022). A sustainable transport system—the MMQUAL model of shared micromobility service quality assessment. Sustainability, 14(7), 4168.

- Ecer, F., Küçükönder, H., Kayapınar Kaya, S., & Faruk Görçün, Ö. (2023). Sustainability performance analysis of micro-mobility solutions in urban transportation with a novel IVFNN-Delphi-LOPCOW-CoCoSo framework. Transportation Research. Part A, Policy and Practice, 172(103667), 103667.

- Reck, D. J., Martin, H., & Axhausen, K. W. (2022). Mode choice, substitution patterns and environmental impacts of shared and personal micro-mobility. Transportation Research. Part D, Transport and Environment, 102(103134), 103134.

- Pazzini, M., Cameli, L., Lantieri, C., Vignali, V., Dondi, G., & Jonsson, T. (2022). New micromobility means of transport: An analysis of E-scooter users’ behaviour in Trondheim. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12), 7374.

- Schwinger, F., Tanriverdi, B., & Jarke, M. (2022). Comparing micromobility with public transportation trips in a data-driven spatio-temporal analysis. Sustainability, 14(14), 8247.

- Fazio, M., Giuffrida, N., Le Pira, M., Inturri, G., & Ignaccolo, M. (2021). Planning suitable transport networks for E-scooters to foster micromobility spreading. Sustainability, 13(20), 11422.

- Manout, O., Diallo, A. O., & Gloriot, T. (2024). Implications of pricing and fleet size strategies on shared bikes and e-scooters: A case study from Lyon, France. Transportation.

Volume 14, Issue 1 - Serial Number 53Summer 2026Pages 2453-2472

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics

- Philips, I., Anable, J., & Chatterton, T. (2022). E-bikes and their capability to reduce car CO₂ emissions. Transport Policy, 116, 11–23.

Volume 14, Issue 1 - Serial Number 53
Summer 2026
Pages 2453-2472