nach oben

Erschienen in:

2020 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Some Public Procurement Challenges in Supporting and Delivering Smart Urban Mobility: Procurement Data, Discretion and Expertise

verfasst von : Albert Sanchez-Graells

Erschienen in: Smart Urban Mobility

Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter explores three of the challenges that public buyers face when designing public tenders to support smart urban mobility initiatives and when supervising the execution of the relevant contracts. First, the chapter covers emerging issues around access and re-use of transport data that may be hindering ‘outside of the box’ thinking and the deployment of artificial intelligence in this area. Second, it discusses some well-known ‘inside the box’ regulatory issues around the exercise of discretion in the choice of sustainable technological solutions, the constraints surrounding certain types of complex and collaborative procurement, and the difficulties in monitoring contract compliance clauses. Third, the chapter arrives at the realisation that the main challenges in delivering and supporting smart urban mobility through procurement relate to the higher-level or cross-cutting challenges of the professionalisation of the procurement workforce and the need to bridge significant (and growing) knowledge gaps. It thus explores existing policy interventions aimed at the professionalisation and networking of procurement officials. The chapter concludes with some overall reflections, and a call for a more active role to be taken by the new Von der Leyen Commission.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Local Leadership and Its Limits in the Deployment of Sustainable Mobility Policies

Nächstes Kapitel Governing Smart Spaces Through Autonomous Vehicles

See, eg CIVITAS, ‘Procuring Sustainable Mobility Solutions’ (CIVITAS 2016) <https://civitas.eu/content/civitas-guide-procuring-sustainable-mobility-solutions> accessed 13 February 2020. See also, Smart procurement for better transport (SPICE), ‘D 3 SPICE Analysis and Recommendations’ (SPICE 2018) <http://spice-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2019/03/SPICE-D-3-Analysis-and-Recommendations-FINAL.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020; or Frederic Rudolph and Stefan Werland, ‘Public Procurement of Sustainable Urban Mobility Measures’ (European Platform on Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans 2019) <www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/public_procurement_of_sustainable_urban_mobility_measures.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020.

For extended discussion, see Sanja Bogojevic, Xavier Groussot and Jörgen Hettne (eds), Discretion in EU Public Procurement Law (Hart 2019).

The 2014 EU Public Procurement Package comprises: Parliament and Council Directive 2014/23/EU of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts Text with EEA relevance [2014] OJ L94/1, Parliament and Council Directive 2014/24/EU of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Council Directive 2004/18/EC Text with EEA relevance [2014] OJ L94/65 (Public Procurement Directive), and Parliament and Council Directive 2014/25/EU of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC Text with EEA relevance [2014] OJ L 94/243 (Utilities Procurement Directive).

Commission, ‘Making Public Procurement Work in and for Europe’ (Communication) COM (2017) 572 final.

For discussion, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘EU Public Procurement Policy and the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Pushing and Pulling as One?’ (2019) <https://ssrn.com/abstract=3440554> accessed 13 February 2020.

For discussion, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘Data-Driven and Digital Procurement Governance: Revisiting Two Well-Known Elephant Tales’ (2019) 24 Communications Law – Journal of Computer, Media and Telecommunications Law 157.

As discussed in eg Commission, ‘Towards clean, competitive and connected mobility: the contribution of Transport Research and Innovation to the Mobility package’ (Staff Working Document) SWD (2017) 223 final.

A recent example concerns the redesign of public school bus routes in Boston by an MIT team, see Kara Baskin, ‘Creating Better Bus Routes With Algorithms’ (MIT Sloan blog, 31 July 2017) <https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/creating-better-bus-routes-algorithms> accessed 13 February 2020. For examples based on the Singaporean experience, see Mariusz Maciejewski, ‘To Do More, Better, Faster and More Cheaply: Using Big Data in Public Administration’ (2017) 83(1S) International Review of Administrative Sciences 120, 128-129. More generally, see ARUP, ‘Urban Mobility in the Smart City Age’ (ARUP, 2014) <www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/urban-mobility-in-the-smart-city-age> accessed 13 February 2020. For a technical account of the possibilities of machine learning use cases to improve transportation and its environmental impact, see David Rolnick and others ‘Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning’ (2019) 13ff <https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.05433> accessed 13 February 2020.

See Jean-Noé Landry and others, ‘How Can We Improve Urban Resilience With Open Data?’ (OpenData for Development, 2016) <www.ccmdesign.ca/files/od4d-resilient-cities.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020.

SWD (2017) 223 final 64. Similarly, in relation to transport automation, the document stresses that ‘Optimised use of internet of things, big data and innovative data management and governance needs to be researched for increasing the performance and efficiency of automated transport technologies, transport systems, mobility and freight delivery services. This includes data mining, access to and innovative uses of data sources, data analytics, innovative business models, and visualisation’ (ibid 13).

ARUP (n 8) 36.

ibid 29.

ibid 37.

SPICE (n 1) 5 and 24.

For an in-depth analysis of an ideal open data architecture, though premised on the assumption that there are no data protection issues to address, see Pieter Colpaert, ‘Publishing Transport Data for Maximum Reuse’ (2017) <https://phd.pietercolpaert.be/> accessed 13 February 2020. For related discussion, see also Laurence Folliot-Lalliot and Peter T McKeen, ‘Procurement and Smart Cities: Exploring Examples on Both Sides of the Atlantic’ in Gabriella M Racca and Christopher R Yukins (eds), Joint Public Procurement and Innovation. Lessons across Borders (Bruylant 2019).

Parliament and Council Directive 96/9/EC of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases [1996] OJ L77/20 (Database Directive), art 7.

Parliament and Council Directive 2016/943/EU of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure [2016] OJ L157/1 (Trade Secrets Directive).

Database Directive, art 9(c).

See eg Commission, ‘Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases’ (Staff Working Document) SWD (2018) 146 final.

Parliament and Council Directive 2019/1024/EU of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information [2019] OJ L172/56 (Open Data Directive).

Open Data Directive, art 1(6).

For an overview of debates on data ownership, see Thomas Hoeren, ‘A New Approach to Data Property?’ (2018) 2 AMI: Tijdschrift voor Auteurs, Media and Informatierecht 58 <www.itm.nrw/wp-content/uploads/AMI-%e2%80%93-tijdschrift-voor-auteurs-media-en-informatierecht-Nummer-20182-A-New-Approach-to-Data-Property.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020. See also Alberto Alemanno, ‘Big Data for Good: Unlocking Privately-Held Data to the Benefit of the Many’ (2018) 9 European Journal of Risk Regulation 183.

Loi n° 2016-1321 du 7 octobre 2016 pour une République numérique, in particular arts 17-19. See also Jean-Bernard Auby, ‘Public Contracts and Smart Cities’ in Racca and Yukins (n 15) 187, 190-191.

For related discussion of four alternative models, see Geoffrey Delcroix, ‘Smart Cities and Innovative Uses for Personal Data: Scenarios for Using Data to Restore the Balance between Public and Private Spheres’ (2017) Field Actions Science Reports 75 <https://journals.openedition.org/factsreports/4489> accessed 13 February 2020.

SPICE (n 1) 80. Generally, on data issues related to intelligent transportation systems, see ibid 93.

Public Procurement Directive, art 70; Utilities Procurement Directive, art 87.

SPICE (n 1) 18. See also SPICE (n 1) 19ff for discussion of the role of public authorities in a data-driven ecosystem.

For discussion in the context of procurement prior to the execution of the public contracts, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘Transparency and Competition in Public Procurement: A Comparative View on a Difficult Balance’ in Kirsi-Maria Halonen, Roberto Caranta and Albert Sanchez-Graells (eds), Transparency in EU Procurements: Disclosure within public procurement and during contract execution (Edward Elgar 2019) 33-56.

Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) 679/2016 of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) [2016] OJ L119/1 (GDPR).

Thus, these issues will not be discussed in any further detail, due to space constraints. See eg Alessandro Mantelero, ‘Data Protection, E-Ticketing, and Intelligent Systems for Public Transport’ (2015) 5 International Data Privacy Law 309. The interested reader will find relevant analysis in other contributions to this book.

See European Data Portal, Analytical Report 11: Re-use of PSI in the Public Sector (Publications Office of the European Union 2018). For comparative discussion, see Teresa Scassa, ‘Public Transit Data through an Intellectual Property Lens: Lessons about Open Data’ (2014) 41 Fordham Urban Law Journal 1759.

It is notable that open transport data is amongst the OECD priorities, as stressed in the OECD ‘OURdata Index’ (OECD, 2019) <www.oecd.org/gov/digital-government/open-government-data.htm> accessed 13 February 2020.

SPICE (n 1) 18.

Open Data Directive, art 1(1)(a).

Open Data Directive, art 1(1)(b). That is, transport services procured either under the rules of the Utilities Procurement Directive or Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) 1370/2007 of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road [2007] OJ L315/1. There are other rules concerning air and sea transport, although these are less likely to be relevant in the context of urban mobility and will thus not be discussed in detail. The analysis in this and later sections, however, applies across all procurement governed by these different sets of EU rules, as their substantive standards are largely coordinated.

Cf Open Data Directive, art 1(2)(a).

Cf Open Data Directive, art 1(2)(b).

Open Data Directive, art 1(1)(a).

Open Data Directive, art 1(2)(c).

Open Data Directive, art 1(2)(d)(iii).

Open Data Directive, art (1)(2)(h).

There are, of course, more exceptions to the obligations under the Open Data Directive, but these seem to be those of more direct relevance in the context of our discussion.

Open Data Directive, art 1(6).

Open Data Directive, art 3(1).

Open Data Directive, art 5(1).

Open Data Directive, art 5(2).

Open Data Directive, art 5(5).

Open Data Directive, art 5(6).

Open Data Directive, art 5(7).

Open Data Directive, Annex I, para 6, in relation to art 13(1).

Open Data Directive, art 14(1).

Open Data Directive, art 14(3).

Open Data Directive, art 14(5).

Open Data Directive, recital (68).

Open Data Directive, art 6(1).

This should be an opportunity to overcome the barriers to publication of open data that remain despite the improvements introduced by the Open Data Directive. For broad analysis, see Melanie Dulong de Rosnay and Katleen Janssen, ‘Legal and Institutional Challenges for Opening Data across Public Sectors: Towards Common Policy Solutions’ (2014) 9(3) Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 1.

Along the same lines, ARUP (n 8) 30.

See Commission, ‘Building a European data economy’ (European Commission) <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/policies/building-european-data-economy> accessed 13 February 2020.

Commission, ‘Mid-Term Review on the implementation of the Digital Single Market Strategy A Connected Digital Single Market for All’ (Communication) COM (2017) 228 final.

See Commission, ‘Better Regulation - Action 7: Access and reuse of private sector data of general interest by the public authorities’ (European Commission) <https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/digital-transition/better-regulation-action-7-access-and-reuse-private-sector-data-general-interest> accessed 13 February 2020.

ibid.

See Commission, ‘Guidance on private sector data sharing’ (European Commission) <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/guidance-private-sector-data-sharing> accessed 13 February 2020.

Commission, ‘Towards a common European data space’ (Communication) COM (2018) 232 final. See also the accompanying Commission, ‘Guidance on sharing private sector data in the European data economy, accompanying the document Communication’ “Towards a common European data space” (Staff Working Document) SWD (2018) 125 final.

See Begoña Gonzalez Otero, ‘Evaluating the EC Private Data Sharing Principles. Setting a Mantra for Artificial Intelligence Nirvana?’ (2019) 10 JIPITEC 65 para 1 <www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-10-1-2019> accessed 13 February 2020. See also Emmanuel Letouzé and Nuria Oliver, ‘Sharing is Caring. Four Key Requirements for Sustainable Private Data Sharing and Use for Public Good’ (Data-Pop Alliance, November 2019) <http://datapopalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/DPA_VFI-SHARING-IS-CARING.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020; and OECD, Enhancing Access to and Sharing of Data: Reconciling Risks and Benefits for Data Re-use across Societies (OECD Publishing, 2019).

See Commission, ‘Meetings of the Expert Group on Business-to-Government Data Sharing’ (European Commission) <https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/meetings-expert-group-business-government-data-sharing> accessed 13 February 2020.

Relatedly, see European Data Portal, ‘Analytical Report 12: Business-to-Government Data Sharing’ (European Data Portal 2019) <www.europeandataportal.eu/sites/default/files/analytical_report_12_business_government_data_sharing.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020. See also GovLab, ‘Eight phases of B2G data sharing’ (Data Collaboratives) <http://datacollaboratives.org/canvas> accessed 13 February 2020; and International Data Corporation / Lisbon Council, ‘Update of the European Data Market SMART 2016/0063, Story 1 – Opening Up Private Data for Public Interest’ (11 November 2017) <http://datalandscape.eu/sites/default/files/report/Story_1_New_format.pdf> accessed 13 February.

Public Procurement Directive, art 32(2)(b).

Public Procurement Directive, art 40.

For further discussion and references, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘Truly Competitive Public Procurement as a Europe 2020 Lever: What Role for the Principle of Competition in Moderating Horizontal Policies?’ (2016) 22 European Public Law Journal 377.

Public Procurement Directive, art 62.

Public Procurement Directive, art 42.

Public Procurement Directive, art 43.

Public Procurement Directive, art 67(2)(a).

Public Procurement Directive, art 68.

Public Procurement Directive, art 70.

Commission, ‘EU Green Public Procurement Criteria for Road Transport’ (Staff Working Document) SWD (2019) 2 final. There is further information in the accompanying JRC Science for Policy Report, Revision of the EU Green Public Procurement Criteria for Transport: Technical Report and Criteria Proposal (Publications Office of the European Union 2019). There is also a much broader library of green public procurement criteria developed by the European Commission, which is accessible at Commission, ‘EU GPP Criteria’ (European Commission) <https://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/eu_gpp_criteria_en.htm> accessed 13 February 2020.

European Commission, Buying Green! - A Handbook on Green Public Procurement (3rd edn, Publications Office of the European Union 2016).

Eg BuyZET, ‘Procuring Zero Emission Delivery of Goods and Services’ (BuyZet Project 2019) <https://civitas.eu/news/guidelines-published-procuring-zero-emission-delivery-goods-and-services-cities> accessed 13 February 2020.

In that regard, some aspects of the guidance are questionable, such as the indication that contracting authorities are free to choose the procedural stage at which to require test reports and the possibility to rely on self-declarations to verify compliance with specific technical specifications. See SWD (2019) 2 final 6 –which it can be argued runs contrary to the principles of the Judgment Case C-14/17 VAR v ATM [2018] EU:C:2018:568, where the CJEU required that certificates attesting compliance with established technical specifications must be submitted already with the tender. This can create some legal uncertainty and, in any case, stresses the importance of the independent assessment of legal compliance by the contracting authority, which compounds the issues surrounding knowledge gaps discussed below (Sect. 4).

Rudolph and Werland (n 1) 20, by reference to the Commission, ‘Europe on the Move: Sustainable Mobility for Europe: Safe, Connected and Clean’ (Communication) COM (2017) 293 final, Annex 1.

See eg Clean fleets, ‘Guide on Procuring Clean and Efficient Road Vehicles’ (Clean Fleets, November 2014) <www.clean-fleets.eu/fileadmin/files/documents/Publications/Clean_Fleets_Guide_screen_version.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020.

Parliament and Council Directive 2009/33/EC of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles [2009] OJ L120/5.

SPICE (n 1) 11.

See Commission, ‘Energy Union: Commission takes action to reinforce EU’s global leadership in clean vehicles’ (European Commission, 11 August 2017) <https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/road/news/2017-11-08-driving-clean-mobility_en> accessed 13 February 2020.

Public Procurement Directive, art 42(1) para 4.

For discussion and further references, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘Some Reflections on the ‘Artificial Narrowing of Competition’ as a Check on Discretion in Public Procurement’ in Bogojevic, Groussot and Hettne (n 2) 79-98. Cf Sanja Bogojevic, ‘Mapping Public Procurement and Environmental Law Intersections in Discretionary Space’ in Bogojevic, Groussot and Hettne (n 2). See also Jason J Czarnezki, ‘EU and US Discretion in Public Procurement Law: The Role of Eco-Labels and Life-Cycle Costing’ in Bogojevic, Groussot and Hettne (n 2).

Public Procurement Directive, art 31.

Commission, ‘Guidance on Innovation Procurement’ (Communication) COM (2018) 3051 final.

Public Procurement Directive, art 40.

Public Procurement Directive, art 40 indeed stresses that ‘contracting authorities may for example seek or accept advice from independent experts or authorities or from market participants. That advice may be used in the planning and conduct of the procurement procedure, provided that such advice does not have the effect of distorting competition and does not result in a violation of the principles of non-discrimination and transparency’.

Public Procurement Directive, arts 41, 57(4)(f).

Public Procurement Directive, art 24.

However, the interaction between the innovation partnership and the EU rules on State aid remains somewhat unclear after the adoption by the Commission ‘Notice on the notion of State aid as referred to in art 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union’ [2016] OJ C262/1. For discussion, see Grith Skovgaard Ølykke, ‘Commission Notice on the Notion of State Aid as Referred to in Article 107(1) TFEU - Is the Conduct of a Public Procurement Procedure Sufficient to Eliminate the Risk of Granting State Aid?’ (2016) 5 Public Procurement Law Review 197-212.

Public Procurement Directive, art 31(6) last sentence.

For discussion and further references, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘The Emergence of Trans-EU Collaborative Procurement: A “Living Lab” for European Public Law’ (2020) 29 Public Procurement Law Review 16-41.

See eg SPICE, ‘Best Practices. New Approaches to Public Procurement of Innovative Transport and Mobility Solutions within the City Environment’ (SPICE, 2018) <http://spice-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2018/05/Ertico-SPICE-Best-Practice_brochure-20pages-A5-finish_web.pdf> accessed 13 February 2020.

With the exception of cross-border procurement; Sanchez-Graells, ‘The Emergence of Trans-EU Collaborative Procurement’ (n 95).

Public Procurement Directive, art 70. See also Commission, Public Procurement Guidance for Practitioners on Avoiding the Most Common Errors in Projects Funded by the European Structural and Investment Funds (Publications Office of the European Union 2018) 14.

European Commission, Buying Green! (n 77) 62-65.

100

ibid, 66-67.

101

For discussion and further references, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, Public Procurement and the EU Competition Rules (2nd edn, Hart 2015) 390.

102

Commission Recommendation 2017/1805/EU of 3 October 2017 on the professionalisation of public procurement — Building an architecture for the professionalisation of public procurement [2017] OJ L259/28.

103

Available at Commission, Building an Architecture for the Professionalisation of Public Procurement: Library of Good Practices and Tools Accompanying the European Commission Recommendation (Publications Office of the European Union 2017).

104

For discussion, see Pedro Telles, ‘The Commission’s Recommendation on Professionalisation of Public Procurement’ (Telles.eu, 10 Oct 2017) <www.telles.eu/blog/2017/10/10/the-commissions-recommendation-on-professionalisation-of-public-procurement> accessed 13 February 2020; and Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘The European Commission’s Recommendation on Procurement Professionalisation: Show Me The Money’ (How to Crack a Nut, 12 Oct 2017) <www.howtocrackanut.com/blog/2017/10/12/the-commissions-recommendation-on-professionalisation-of-public-buyers-show-me-the-money> accessed 13 February 2020.

105

In particular, as the Recommendation requires that ‘Member States … identify and define the baseline of skills and competences any public procurement practitioner should be trained in and possess, taking into account the multidisciplinary nature of procurement projects, both for dedicated procurement officials and for related functions as well as for judges and auditors’, Commission Recommendation (n 102) 3.

106

Cf the claims made by the UK Government in the recent public consultation: Cabinet Office and Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, ‘Social Value in Government Procurement’ (GOV.UK, 11 March 2019) 9 <www.gov.uk/government/consultations/social-value-in-government-procurement> accessed 13 February 2020, where it promised to ‘train all 4000 commercial buyers in government in how to design procurement to deliver social value effectively and efficiently’; see public consultation document.

107

For related discussion, see Albert Sanchez-Graells, ‘“Screening for Cartels” in Public Procurement: Cheating at Solitaire to Sell Fool’s Gold?’ (2019) 10 Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 199-211.

108

CIVITAS (n 1) 18.

109

CIVITAS (CIVITAS) <https://civitas.eu/about> accessed 13 February 2020.

110

Eg the website of ICLEI, where it is difficult to identify what information is still current; ICLEI, ‘Mobility and Transport’ (ICLEI) <http://iclei-europe.org/topics/mobility-transport/> accessed 13 February 2020.

111

For an overview of existing capacity constraints at Member State level, see PwC, Stock-Taking of Administrative Capacity, Systems and Practices across the EU to Ensure the Compliance and Quality of Public Procurement Involving European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds (Publications Office of the European Union 2016).

112

Taking also advantage of the need to adapt to the new rules on eForms by 14 November 2022; see Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1780 of 23 September 2019 establishing standard forms for the publication of notices in the field of public procurement and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1986 (eForms) [2019] OJ L272/7.

113

Along the same lines, Rolnick and others (n 8) 23.

114

See Commission, ‘Press release: The Von der Leyen Commission: for a Union that Strives for More’ (IP/19/5542, 10 Sep 2019) <https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_5542> accessed 13 February 2020.

Titel: Some Public Procurement Challenges in Supporting and Delivering Smart Urban Mobility: Procurement Data, Discretion and Expertise
verfasst von: Albert Sanchez-Graells
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Buch: Smart Urban Mobility
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-61919-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-662-61920-9

Copyright-Jahr: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61920-9_6