Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Electronic Payment and Access Systems: Ensuring Interoperability in Vancouver Transportation Gallop, Christopher 2011

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
SCARP_Nov2010_gradproject_Gallop.pdf [ 2.9MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0102525.json
JSON-LD: 1.0102525+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0102525.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0102525+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0102525+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0102525+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0102525 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0102525.txt
Citation
1.0102525.ris

Full Text

	
  	
   	
  	
   Electronic	
  Payment	
  and	
  Access	
  Systems:	
  Ensuring	
   Interoperability	
  in	
  Vancouver	
  Transportation	
   Researched	
  and	
  Written	
  by	
  Christopher	
  Gallop,	
   M.A.	
  Planning	
  (Candidate)	
  	
  	
   Submitted	
  to	
  the	
  Downtown	
  Vancouver	
  Business	
   Improvement	
  Association,	
  the	
  University	
  of	
  British	
   Columbia’s	
  School	
  of	
  Community	
  and	
  Regional	
   Planning	
  and	
  MITACS	
  Inc.	
  Accelerate	
  British	
  Columbia	
   November	
  2010	
   Acknowledgements	
  This	
   research	
   project	
   was	
   initiated	
   and	
   supported	
   by	
   the	
   Downtown	
   Vancouver	
  Business	
   Improvement	
   Association	
   and	
   MITACS	
   Inc	
   ACCELERATE	
   BC	
   Internship	
  Program.	
   	
   Support	
   was	
   also	
   received	
   from	
   the	
   University	
   of	
   British	
   Columbia’s	
  School	
   of	
   Community	
   and	
  Regional	
   Planning.	
   	
   Special	
  mention	
   should	
   be	
   given	
   to	
  Charles	
  Gauthier,	
  Executive	
  Director,	
  Downtown	
  Vancouver	
  Business	
  Improvement	
  Association	
   and	
  Tom	
  Hutton,	
  Professor,	
  University	
   of	
  British	
  Columbia’s	
   School	
   of	
  Community	
  and	
  Regional	
  Planning	
  for	
  supervising	
  this	
  project.	
  	
  Finally,	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  Downtown	
  Vancouver	
  Business	
  Improvement	
  Association’s	
  Access	
  and	
  Mobility	
  Committee	
   who	
   agreed	
   to	
   be	
   interviewed,	
   and	
   whose	
   input	
   helped	
   to	
   shape	
   this	
  final	
  report.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   ii	
   Executive	
  Summary	
  The	
  purpose	
  of	
  this	
  research	
  project	
  was	
  to	
  explore	
  the	
  possibilities	
  for	
  establishing	
  an	
  integrated	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  for	
  transportation	
  and	
  parking	
  services,	
   one	
   that	
   conducts	
   payment	
   and	
   grants	
   access	
   to	
   transportation	
   and	
  parking	
   services	
  over	
  multiple	
   service	
  providers	
   in	
  multiple	
   jurisdictions,	
   through	
  the	
  utilization	
  of	
  contactless	
  cards,	
  proximity	
  chips	
  and	
  mobile	
  devices	
  rather	
  than	
  coins,	
   tokens,	
   paper	
   tickets	
   and	
   paper	
   passes.	
   	
   The	
   research	
   design	
   supports	
   the	
  collection	
   of	
   sufficient	
   background	
   information	
   on	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
  systems	
   for	
   the	
   purposes	
   of	
   establishing	
   key	
   findings	
   and	
   a	
   discussion	
   of	
   the	
  complexities	
  and	
  challenges	
  related	
  to	
  technological	
  and	
  policy	
  development	
  in	
  this	
  area.	
  In	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  region,	
  Translink	
  has	
  put	
  out	
  a	
  Request	
  for	
  Proposals	
  for	
  a	
  smart	
  card	
   system	
   that	
   would	
   be	
   operable	
   on	
   all	
   transit.	
   	
   In	
   addition,	
   a	
   pay-­‐by-­‐phone	
  parking	
   service,	
   operated	
   by	
   Verrus	
   Mobile	
   Technologies	
   Inc.	
   covers	
   85%	
   of	
   all	
  meter	
   and	
   surface	
   lot	
   spaces.	
   	
   Electronic	
   tolling	
   that	
   utilizes	
   transponders	
   and	
  automated	
   video	
   recognition	
   is	
   in	
   operation	
   on	
   the	
   Golden	
   Ears	
   Bridge.	
   Zipcar,	
   a	
  carshare	
   company,	
   utilizes	
   contactless	
   smart	
   card	
   technology	
   and	
   a	
  mobile	
   phone	
  application	
   to	
   grant	
   users	
   access	
   to	
   vehicles.	
   	
   Finally,	
   the	
   bikeshare	
   model	
   most	
  likely	
  to	
  be	
  adopted	
  by	
  Vancouver	
  would	
  utilize	
  an	
  electronic	
  key	
  card.	
  Canadian	
   and	
   American	
   practices	
   are	
   largely	
   similar	
   to	
   Vancouver,	
   although	
  innovative	
  approaches	
   in	
  Utah	
  and	
  New	
  York	
  City	
   leverage	
   the	
  prepaid,	
  debit	
   and	
  credit	
  contactless	
  cards	
  issued	
  by	
  financial	
  institutions	
  by	
  allowing	
  them	
  to	
  be	
  used	
  as	
  a	
  transit	
  smart	
  card,	
  directly	
  at	
  the	
  farebox.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  prepaid,	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  contactless	
  cards	
  are	
  being	
  deployed	
  in	
  Philadelphia,	
  New	
  York	
  City	
  and	
  Los	
  Angeles	
  taxis,	
  and	
  are	
  being	
  experimented	
  with	
  on	
  tolled	
  roads.	
  	
  In	
  Hong	
  Kong,	
  transit	
  smart	
  cards	
   are	
   used	
   for	
   a	
  wide	
   variety	
   of	
   applications	
   that	
   transcend	
   transit,	
   including	
  retail	
  and	
  parking.	
  	
  In	
  other	
  countries,	
  such	
  as	
  Taiwan	
  and	
  Malaysia,	
  multi-­‐use	
  cards	
  are	
  used	
  that	
  combine	
  transit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards	
  into	
  one.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  the	
  installation	
  of	
  proximity	
  chips	
  in	
  mobile	
  devices	
  has	
  given	
  mobile	
  phones	
  the	
  ability	
  to	
  conduct	
  proximity	
   transactions	
  at	
   fareboxes.	
   	
   Finally,	
   in	
  Paris,	
   transit	
   cards	
   can	
  be	
  used	
   to	
  pay	
   for	
   and	
   access	
   the	
  Vélib'	
   bikeshare	
   system,	
   and	
   there	
   are	
  plans	
   to	
   extend	
   the	
  card’s	
  use	
  to	
  Autolib',	
  a	
  publicly	
  owned	
  carshare	
  program,	
  when	
  the	
  service	
  is	
  rolled	
  out	
  next	
  year.	
  For	
   consumers,	
   the	
   contactless	
   interface	
   of	
   transit’s	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
  and,	
   by	
   proxy,	
   non-­‐transit	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems,	
   is	
   said	
   to	
   improve	
  convenience,	
  provide	
  an	
  ability	
  to	
  use	
  the	
  same	
  card	
  on	
  multiple	
  operators	
  and	
  have	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   iii	
   features	
   such	
   as	
   registration/balance	
   protection.	
   	
   For	
   agencies,	
   the	
   interface	
  provides	
   the	
   data	
   capacity	
   and	
   security	
   features	
   to	
   support	
   the	
   ability	
   to	
   capture	
  critical	
   operational	
   data,	
   enhance	
   revenue	
   management	
   activities,	
   create	
  partnerships,	
  facilitate	
  innovative	
  fare	
  options,	
  manage	
  loyalty	
  programs	
  and	
  allow	
  faster	
   boarding	
   time.	
   	
   	
   The	
   weaknesses	
   are	
   generally	
   viewed	
   to	
   be	
   the	
   card	
  fee/deposit,	
  which	
  is	
  higher	
  than	
  traditional	
  media	
  (although	
  the	
  card	
  is	
  reusable),	
  that	
   it	
   is	
   not	
   well-­‐suited	
   for	
   one-­‐time	
   users	
   because	
   of	
   the	
   fee/deposit,	
   and	
   the	
  variety	
  of	
  card	
  interfaces	
  make	
  it	
  difficult	
  to	
  integrate	
  with	
  other	
  regions.	
  Traditionally,	
   it	
   is	
   necessary	
   to	
   issue	
   transit	
   cards	
   separately	
   from	
   debit	
   cards	
  because	
  transit	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems	
  need	
  to	
  perform	
  at	
  high	
  speeds	
  or	
  face	
  declining	
   customer	
   service.	
   	
   This	
  means	
   that	
   there	
   has	
   traditionally	
   been	
   a	
   niche	
  market	
   for	
   transit	
   cards.	
   	
   However,	
   this	
   traditional	
   distinction	
   is	
   fading	
   as	
   transit	
  payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems,	
   along	
   with	
   large	
   payment	
   companies	
   such	
   as	
  MasterCard	
   and	
   Visa,	
   increasingly	
   adhere	
   to	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
   14443	
   and	
   EMV	
  international	
   standards	
   for	
   contactless	
   cards.	
   	
  This	
   gives	
  payment	
   companies	
  new	
  business	
   opportunities	
   in	
   the	
   transportation	
   industry,	
   and	
   the	
   transportation	
  industry	
   the	
   ability	
   to	
   directly	
   leverage	
   the	
   infrastructure	
   and	
   services	
   of	
   the	
  financial	
  industry.	
  The	
   main	
   recommendation	
   of	
   this	
   report	
   is	
   that	
   the	
   Vancouver	
   region	
   formally	
  adopt	
   international	
   standards,	
   which	
   are	
   otherwise	
   not	
   compulsory,	
   for	
   payment	
  and	
   access	
   in	
   the	
   region’s	
   transportation	
   industry.	
   	
   This	
   way,	
   Vancouver	
  transportation	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
   will	
   not	
   only	
   allow	
   for	
  interoperability	
   between	
   service	
   providers,	
   but	
   also	
   interoperability	
   with	
   the	
  services	
   of	
   other	
   regions.	
   	
   Achieving	
   this	
   end	
   may	
   involve	
   some	
   clarification	
   of	
  institutional	
   roles,	
   perhaps	
   via	
   provincial	
   legislation,	
   since	
   it	
   is	
   not	
   clear	
  whether	
  Translink	
   has	
   sufficient	
   neutrality	
   in	
   the	
   matter	
   (i.e.	
   Translink	
   is	
   independently	
  rolling	
  out	
  its	
  own	
  system),	
  whether	
  Metro	
  Vancouver	
  has	
  jurisdiction	
  over	
  a	
  matter	
  that	
   clearly	
   intervenes	
   in	
   regional	
   transportation	
  matters,	
   and	
   whether	
   BIAs	
   and	
  other	
  NGOs	
  have	
   the	
  capacity	
  and	
  authority	
   to	
  consult	
  with	
  service	
  providers	
   in	
  a	
  systematic	
   manner.	
   	
   Upon	
   clarifying	
   institutional	
   leadership	
   in	
   facilitation,	
   the	
  Vancouver	
  region	
  can	
  begin	
  to	
  adopt	
  a	
  common	
  standard,	
   ideally	
  the	
  international	
  standard,	
   for	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   in	
   Vancouver	
   regional	
  transportation,	
   and	
   doing	
   so	
   will,	
   over	
   time,	
   lead	
   to	
   a	
   system	
   that	
   is	
   sufficiently	
  integrated	
  so	
  as	
  to	
  allow	
  for	
  interoperability.	
   	
   Table	
  of	
  Contents	
   Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................i	
   Executive	
  Summary .............................................................................................................................. ii	
   Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 2	
   Statement	
  of	
  Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 2	
   Problem	
  Statement .......................................................................................................................... 2	
   Research	
  Design	
  and	
  Report	
  Outline ......................................................................................... 3	
   National	
  and	
  International	
  Practices.............................................................................................. 7	
   The	
  Vancouver	
  Context................................................................................................................... 7	
  Transit:	
  The	
  Translink	
  Smart	
  Card ..........................................................................................................7	
  Parking:	
  The	
  Verrus	
  Pay-­‐By-­‐Phone	
  Service.........................................................................................8	
  Tolling:	
  The	
  Golden	
  Ears	
  Bridge ............................................................................................................ 10	
  Carshare:	
  The	
  Zipcar	
  Access	
  Card......................................................................................................... 10	
  Bikeshare:	
  The	
  BIXI	
  Access	
  Card ........................................................................................................... 11	
   Canadian	
  Practices .........................................................................................................................12	
  Transit	
  Smart	
  Cards .................................................................................................................................... 12	
   American	
  Practices ........................................................................................................................14	
  Transit ............................................................................................................................................................... 14	
  Tolls.................................................................................................................................................................... 17	
   International	
  Practices .................................................................................................................18	
  Hong	
  Kong	
  Octopus	
  System..................................................................................................................... 18	
  Malaysia:	
  Touch	
  ‘n	
  Go................................................................................................................................. 20	
  Taiwan	
  Money	
  Card .................................................................................................................................... 21	
  Paris:	
  Navigo,	
  Vélib'	
  and	
  Autolib' .......................................................................................................... 22	
   Conceptual	
  and	
  General	
  Items ........................................................................................................24	
   Difference	
  Between	
  Transit	
  and	
  Debit	
  Cards........................................................................25	
   Functions	
  and	
  Features	
  of	
  the	
  Contactless	
  Transit	
  Card...................................................25	
  A.	
  Customer	
  Benefits................................................................................................................................... 26	
  B.	
  Agency	
  Benefits........................................................................................................................................ 26	
  C.	
  General	
  Weaknesses .............................................................................................................................. 27	
   Business	
  Issues................................................................................................................................29	
   Card	
  Issuing	
  Versus	
  Card	
  Accepting..........................................................................................31	
   International	
  Standards ...............................................................................................................33	
   Payment	
  Classification	
  and	
  Other	
  Technologies..................................................................34	
  A.	
  Payments	
  Grouped	
  Based	
  On	
  Location.......................................................................................... 35	
  B.	
  Payments	
  Grouped	
  Based	
  On	
  Value................................................................................................ 35	
  C.	
  Payments	
  Grouped	
  Based	
  On	
  Charging	
  Method ........................................................................ 35	
   Analysis:	
  Collaboration	
  Over	
  Standards	
  is	
  Most	
  Practical ....................................................38	
   Recommendations ..............................................................................................................................44	
   Substantive	
  Recommendations .................................................................................................44	
   Institutional	
  Recommendations................................................................................................45	
   Conclusion..............................................................................................................................................49	
   References .............................................................................................................................................50	
   List	
  of	
  Figures...................................................................................................................................50	
   Bibliography.....................................................................................................................................50	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   2	
   Introduction	
   Statement	
  of	
  Purpose	
  The	
   Downtown	
   Vancouver	
   Business	
   Improvement	
   Association	
   is	
   currently	
  interested	
   in	
   acquiring	
   the	
   information	
   necessary	
   to	
   strengthen	
   its	
   position	
   in	
  advocating	
  for	
  a	
  streamlined	
  and	
  integrated	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  for	
   parking	
   and	
   transportation	
   services	
   in	
   the	
   Vancouver	
   region.	
   	
   The	
   research	
  design	
   supports	
   gathering	
   and	
   synthesizing	
   information	
   for	
   analysis	
   in	
   order	
   to	
  deliver	
   a	
   report	
   intended	
   to	
   (1)	
   provide	
   the	
   background	
   necessary	
   to	
   develop	
   an	
  understanding	
  of	
  current	
  worldwide	
  practices	
  in	
  transportation	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
   access,	
   (2)	
   establish	
   key	
   findings	
   to	
   inform	
   the	
   development	
   of	
   a	
   set	
   of	
  recommendations	
  identifying	
  the	
  opportunities	
  available	
  to	
  further	
  advocate	
  for	
  an	
  integrated	
   electronic	
   payment	
   process	
   for	
   parking	
   and	
   transportation	
   in	
   the	
  Vancouver	
   region	
   and	
   (3)	
   clearly	
   identify	
   complexities	
   and	
   challenges	
   related	
   to	
  technological	
  and	
  policy	
  development	
  in	
  this	
  area.	
  	
   Problem	
  Statement	
  Regional	
   governments	
   across	
   North	
   America	
   have	
   established,	
   or	
   have	
   taken	
   the	
  first	
  steps	
  towards	
  establishing	
  what,	
  in	
  this	
  paper,	
  is	
  referred	
  to	
  as	
  transportation	
   and	
   parking	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems:	
   a	
  means	
   by	
  which	
   to	
   conduct	
  payment	
   and	
   grant	
   access	
   to	
   transportation	
   and	
   parking	
   services	
   through	
   the	
  utilization	
   of	
   contactless	
   cards,	
   proximity	
   chips	
   and	
   mobile	
   devices	
   rather	
   than	
  coins,	
   tokens,	
  paper	
   tickets	
  and	
  paper	
  passes.	
   	
  These	
  new	
  media	
   can	
  be	
  used	
  as	
  a	
  means	
  by	
  which	
  to	
  pay	
  for	
  any	
  number	
  of	
  parking,	
   tolling,	
  mass	
  transit,	
  bus,	
   ferry,	
  carshare,	
   bikeshare	
   and	
   taxis	
   services.	
   	
   Standard	
   practice	
   is	
   for	
   transportation	
  service	
  providers	
   to	
   adopt	
   these	
  new	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
   systems	
   independently,	
  without	
  a	
  regional	
  vision	
  towards	
  the	
  integration	
  of	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  procedures	
  (for	
  details,	
  see	
  next	
  ‘National	
  and	
  International	
  Practices’	
  section).	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   3	
   A	
   regional	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   for	
   transportation	
   and	
   parking	
   services	
  would	
   require	
   the	
   collaboration	
   of	
   numerous	
   service	
   providers	
   in	
   the	
   Vancouver	
  region,	
   including	
   the	
   operators	
   of	
   parking	
   garages,	
   on-­‐street	
   parking,	
   carshare	
  programs	
   like	
   Zipcar,	
   taxis,	
   buses,	
   SeaBus,	
   SkyTrain	
   and	
   a	
   future	
   bikeshare	
  programs.	
   	
   Numerous	
   service	
   providers	
   operate	
   under	
   the	
   umbrella	
   of	
   Translink,	
  including	
   buses,	
   SeaBus	
   and	
   SkyTrain.	
   	
   Other	
   service	
   providers	
   are	
   independent,	
  some	
  of	
  which	
  are	
  privately	
  owned	
  (example:	
  some	
  parking	
  garages	
  and	
  carshare)	
  and	
   others	
   of	
   which	
   are	
   owned	
   by	
   the	
   City	
   of	
   Vancouver	
   (example:	
   on-­‐street	
  parking).	
   	
   With	
   respect	
   to	
   future	
   programs,	
   such	
   as	
   a	
   future	
   bikeshare	
   program,	
  discussion	
  continues	
  over	
  who	
  the	
  owners	
  and	
  operators	
  will	
  be.	
  	
  A	
  coordinated	
  approach	
  would	
  address	
  issues	
  of	
  interoperability,	
  global	
  acceptance	
  and	
  ease	
  of	
  use.	
  	
  A	
  number	
  of	
  factors	
  threaten	
  to	
  arrest	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  a	
  more	
  integrated	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system,	
   including	
   the	
   proliferation	
   of	
   competing	
  network	
   standards,	
   incompatible	
   operating	
   systems/devices,	
   a	
   lack	
   of	
   secure	
   and	
  interoperable	
  standards,	
  market	
  uncertainties	
  and	
  a	
  lack	
  of	
  viable	
  business	
  models	
  that	
  address	
  cooperative	
  interests.	
  	
  	
  	
   Research	
  Design	
  and	
  Report	
  Outline	
  This	
   is	
   an	
   exploratory	
   qualitative	
   study	
   on	
   the	
   latest	
   developments	
   of	
   mobile	
  payment	
  and	
  electronic	
  user	
  information	
  systems	
  in	
  the	
  transportation	
  industry	
  and	
  the	
   implications	
   for	
   the	
   Vancouver	
   region.	
   	
   The	
   study	
   employs	
   an	
   inductive	
  approach	
   that	
   does	
   not	
   seek	
   to	
   develop	
   a	
   rigorous	
   framework	
   for	
   experimental	
  control	
   and	
   manipulation	
   of	
   variables.	
   	
   Rather,	
   it	
   seeks	
   to	
   determine	
   what	
   the	
  Vancouver	
   and	
   worldwide	
   practices	
   are	
   and,	
   based	
   on	
   these	
   practices,	
   what	
   the	
  implications	
   are	
   and	
   what	
   recommendations	
   can	
   be	
   made	
   for	
   Downtown	
  Vancouver’s	
   diverse	
   set	
   of	
   stakeholders,	
   especially	
   the	
   Downtown	
   Vancouver	
  Business	
  Improvement	
  Association.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   4	
   The	
  stages	
  of	
  research	
  include	
  (1)	
  essential	
  history	
  and	
  context,	
  (2)	
  case	
  studies,	
  (3)	
  literature	
  review	
  and	
  (4)	
  key	
  informant	
  interviews.	
  	
  These	
  first	
  four	
  stages	
  provide	
  the	
  basis	
  for	
  (5)	
  this	
  final	
  report	
  and	
  analysis.	
   	
   Essential	
   History	
   and	
   Context.	
   	
   This	
   stage	
   involves	
   general	
   web	
   searches	
   for	
   web	
  pages,	
  press	
  releases	
  and	
  newspaper	
  articles	
  that	
  will	
  illuminate	
  the	
  current	
  events	
  in	
   the	
   mobile	
   payment	
   and	
   electronic	
   user	
   information	
   systems	
   in	
   the	
  transportation	
  industry.	
   Case	
  Studies.	
   	
  This	
  stage	
  involved	
  a	
  survey	
  of	
  programs	
  and	
  infrastructure	
  in	
  other	
  cities,	
   the	
  picking	
  of	
  representative	
  cases	
  and	
  a	
  detailed	
   look	
  at	
   the	
  representative	
  cases.	
   	
  This	
  stage	
   involved	
  web	
  searches	
   that	
  yielded	
  news	
  articles,	
  press	
  releases	
  and	
   the	
   informational	
   web	
   pages	
   of	
   the	
   websites	
   of	
   the	
   relevant	
   transportation	
  agencies.	
   	
  As	
  discussed	
   in	
  the	
  next	
  section,	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems	
  are	
   being	
   used	
   to	
   varying	
   extents	
   in	
   all	
   parts	
   of	
   the	
   world,	
   so	
   it	
   can	
   be	
   an	
  overwhelming	
  task	
  to	
  create	
  a	
  complete	
  inventory.	
   	
  The	
  approach	
  to	
  selecting	
  case	
  studies	
   was	
   to	
   focus	
   on	
   the	
   Vancouver,	
   Canadian	
   and	
   American	
   practices,	
   thus	
  highlighting	
   the	
   immediate	
   context	
   within	
   which	
   Vancouver	
   sits,	
   and	
   then	
   to	
  supplement	
  the	
  discussion	
  with	
  unique	
  cases	
  from	
  outside	
  of	
  North	
  America	
  for	
  the	
  purposes	
   of	
   inspiring	
   Vancouver’s	
   approach	
   towards	
   constructing	
   its	
   own	
   unique	
  and	
   integrated	
   transportation	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system.	
   	
   The	
   North	
   American	
  practices	
   are	
   already	
   practiced	
   widely	
   outside	
   of	
   North	
   America.	
   	
   Thus,	
   the	
  international	
   cases	
   presented	
   in	
   the	
   next	
   ‘National	
   and	
   International	
   Practices’	
  section	
  are	
  only	
  those	
  international	
  practices	
  that	
  vary	
  in	
  some	
  way	
  from	
  the	
  base	
  Vancouver	
  and/or	
  North	
  American	
  cases.	
   Essential	
  History	
  and	
  Context	
   Case	
  Studies	
   Literature	
  Review	
   Key	
  Informant	
  Interviews	
   Final	
  Report	
  and	
  Analysis	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   5	
   Literature	
  Review.	
   In	
   this	
   stage,	
   a	
   search	
   for	
   scholarly	
   articles	
   pertinent	
   to	
  mobile	
  payment	
  and	
  user	
   information	
  systems	
   is	
  conducted.	
   	
  Whereas	
   the	
  purpose	
  of	
   the	
  ‘Essential	
   History	
   and	
   Context’	
   section	
   is	
   to	
   determine	
  what	
   the	
   relevant	
   current	
  events	
   are,	
   the	
   purpose	
   of	
   the	
   ‘Literature	
   Review’	
   is	
   to	
   construct	
   an	
   abstracted	
  conceptual	
   understanding	
   of	
   the	
  mobile	
   payment	
   and	
   electronic	
   user	
   information	
  systems	
   in	
   the	
   transportation	
   industry,	
   as	
  well	
   as	
   to	
   provide	
   an	
   account	
   of	
   other	
  similar	
  studies	
  that	
  have	
  been	
  conducted	
  in	
  the	
  past.	
   Key	
   Informant	
   Interviews.	
  Whereas	
   the	
   first	
   two	
   stages	
   involve	
   a	
   survey	
   of	
   public	
  and	
  academic	
  information,	
  this	
  stage	
  involves	
  nuancing	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  institutional	
  context	
  through	
  one-­‐on-­‐one	
  key	
  informant	
  interviews.	
  	
  Participants	
  are	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  Downtown	
  Vancouver	
  Business	
  Improvement	
  Association’s	
  Access	
  and	
  Mobility	
  Committee,	
  on	
  which	
  sit	
  several	
  pertinent	
  representatives	
  of	
  stakeholder	
  groups,	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  independent	
  experts.	
  Interviews	
   are	
   semi-­‐structured,	
   meaning	
   that	
   they	
   are	
   flexible,	
   allowing	
   new	
  questions	
  to	
  be	
  brought	
  up	
  during	
  the	
  interview	
  as	
  a	
  result	
  of	
  what	
  the	
  participant’s	
  particular	
   expertise	
   is,	
   and	
  what	
   he	
   or	
   she	
   says	
   during	
   the	
   interview.	
   	
  While	
   not	
  formalized	
  with	
  a	
  limited	
  set	
  of	
  questions,	
  specific	
  topics	
  have	
  been	
  thought	
  about	
  in	
  advance.	
  	
  In	
  particular,	
  the	
  participants	
  are	
  asked	
  about	
  each	
  of	
  mobile	
  payment	
  and	
  user	
  information	
  technologies	
  -­‐	
  what	
  the	
  advantages	
  and	
  disadvantages	
  are	
  from	
  his	
  or	
   her	
   organization’s	
   point	
   of	
   view,	
   what	
   he	
   or	
   she	
   sees	
   as	
   the	
   barriers	
   to	
   the	
  technologies’	
   proliferation,	
   and	
   what	
   the	
   organization’s	
   prerequisites	
   to	
   the	
  technology’s	
  adoption	
  are.	
  	
  	
   Final	
  Report	
  and	
  Analysis.	
  	
  The	
  final	
  stage	
  involves	
  compiling	
  all	
  of	
  the	
  research	
  in	
  a	
  final	
   report	
   for	
   the	
  Downtown	
  Vancouver	
  Business	
   Improvement	
  Association	
   that	
  comments	
   on	
   the	
   implications	
   for	
   and	
  makes	
   recommendations	
   to	
   the	
   Vancouver	
  region’s	
  various	
  stakeholders.	
   	
  This	
   report	
  draws	
   together	
  best	
  practices,	
   industry	
  trends	
   and	
   the	
   Vancouver	
   context	
   to	
   make	
   recommendations	
   that	
   will	
   not	
   only	
  assist	
   in	
   developing	
   policy	
   around	
   the	
   adoption	
   of	
   mobile	
   payment	
   and	
   user	
  information	
  technologies	
  in	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  transportation	
  industry,	
  but	
  also	
  identify	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   6	
   opportunities	
  for	
  and	
  barriers	
  to	
  institutional	
  cooperation	
  on	
  the	
  matter.	
  	
  The	
  report	
  also	
  identifies	
  areas	
  where	
  further	
  study	
  is	
  required.	
  What	
  follows	
  in	
  the	
  next	
  two	
  sections	
  are	
  the	
  projects	
  findings,	
  organized	
  under	
  the	
  descriptive	
   titles	
   of	
   ‘National	
   and	
   International	
   Practices’	
   and	
   ‘Conceptual	
   and	
  General	
   Items’.	
   	
  Following	
  these	
  two	
  sections	
   is	
  an	
   ‘Analysis’	
  section	
  that	
  has	
  been	
  used	
  to	
  synthesize	
  the	
  findings.	
  	
  Finally,	
  a	
  ‘Recommendations’	
  section	
  is	
  targeted	
  at	
  institutions	
  in	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  region.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   7	
   National	
  and	
  International	
  Practices	
  The	
   purpose	
   of	
   this	
   section	
   is	
   to	
   provide	
   an	
   overview	
   of	
   worldwide	
   practices	
   in	
  transportation	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
   in	
   order	
   to	
   place	
   Vancouver	
   within	
  broader	
  national	
  and	
   international	
   contexts.	
   	
  As	
  discussed	
   in	
   the	
   introduction,	
   the	
  approach	
   to	
   composing	
   this	
   section	
  was	
   to	
   focus	
  on	
   the	
  Vancouver,	
   Canadian	
   and	
  American	
   practices,	
   thus	
   highlighting	
   the	
   immediate	
   context	
   within	
   which	
  Vancouver	
   sits,	
   and	
   then	
   to	
   supplement	
   the	
   discussion	
   with	
   unique	
   cases	
   from	
  outside	
   of	
   North	
   America	
   for	
   the	
   purposes	
   of	
   inspiring	
   Vancouver’s	
   approach	
  towards	
   constructing	
   its	
   own	
   unique	
   and	
   integrated	
   transportation	
   payment	
   and	
  access	
  system.	
  	
   	
   The	
  Vancouver	
  Context	
  Innovations	
   in	
  Vancouver’s	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
   technologies	
  span	
   transit,	
  parking	
  and	
  carshare.	
  	
  I	
  have	
  also	
  included	
  bikeshare,	
  even	
  though	
  it	
  has	
  not	
  been	
  deployed	
  in	
   Vancouver	
   because	
   serious	
   consideration	
   is	
   being	
   given	
   to	
   bring	
   it	
   to	
   the	
  Vancouver	
  region	
  in	
  the	
  future.	
   Transit:	
  The	
  Translink	
  Smart	
  Card	
  Translink	
  is	
  presently	
  committed	
  to	
  implementing	
  a	
  smart	
  card-­‐based	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  for	
  SkyTrain,	
  SeaBus,	
  buses	
  and	
  West	
  Coast	
  Express.	
  	
  Three	
  consortia	
  (Thales/Octopus	
   International	
   Projects,	
   Serco/Parkeon,	
   Cubic/IBM)	
   that	
   supply	
  smart	
  card	
  electronic	
  fare	
  payment	
  systems	
  to	
  other	
  cities	
  have	
  qualified	
  to	
  submit	
  proposals	
  to	
  supply	
  a	
  smart	
  card	
  and	
  faregate	
  system	
  for	
  Translink.	
  	
  A	
  contract,	
  that	
  will	
   include	
   operations	
   and	
   maintenance	
   of	
   the	
   system	
   for	
   10	
   years,	
   could	
   be	
  awarded	
  later	
  this	
  year,	
  with	
  work	
  beginning	
  in	
  2011	
  and	
  operations	
  beginning	
  in	
  2013.	
  	
  	
  Funding	
  for	
  the	
  smart	
  card	
  electronic	
  fare	
  payment	
  system,	
  first	
  announced	
  in	
  April	
  2009,	
  comes	
  from	
  the	
  Government	
  of	
  Canada,	
  British	
  Columbia	
  and	
  Translink.	
  The	
  Province	
  is	
  investing	
  up	
  to	
  $40	
  million	
  and	
  the	
  Government	
  of	
  Canada	
  has	
  agreed	
  in	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   8	
   principal	
  to	
  commit	
  up	
  to	
  $30	
  million	
  to	
  a	
  maximum	
  of	
  one-­‐third	
  of	
  eligible	
  costs	
  in	
  this	
   project.	
   Translink	
   will	
   fund	
   the	
   balance	
   of	
   the	
   project,	
   with	
   the	
   total	
   project	
  budget	
  being	
  $171	
  million.	
  The	
  fare	
  payment	
  system	
  will	
  utilize	
  a	
  card,	
  about	
  the	
  size	
  of	
  a	
  credit	
  card,	
  that	
  will	
  be	
  available	
  at	
  all	
  transit	
  stations	
  and	
  replace	
  current	
  forms	
  of	
  tickets	
  and	
  passes	
  on	
  Translink’s	
   system.	
   	
   	
   Smart	
   card	
   holders	
   will	
   be	
   able	
   to	
   “load”	
   their	
   cards	
   with	
  money	
   in	
   person,	
   via	
   phone	
   or	
   on	
   the	
   Internet,	
   and	
   then	
   use	
   it	
   on	
   all	
   forms	
   of	
  Translink-­‐operated	
   transit	
   in	
   Metro	
   Vancouver	
   by	
   “tagging	
   on	
   /	
   tagging	
   off”	
   at	
  electronic	
  readers	
  as	
  they	
  board	
  and	
  exit	
  transit	
  vehicles.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  Bob	
  Paddon,	
  Vice-­‐President,	
  Corporate	
  &	
  Public	
  Affairs	
  for	
  Translink,	
  pointed	
  out	
  in	
  an	
  interview	
  that	
   the	
  system	
  might	
  eventually	
  allow	
  Visa	
  and	
  MasterCard	
  proximity	
  chips	
  to	
  be	
  scanned	
  at	
  the	
  gate	
  as	
  well.	
  Translink	
  expects	
  it’s	
  electronic	
  fare	
  payment	
  system	
  to	
  have	
  the	
  following	
  benefits:	
   • Provide	
   a	
   more	
   seamless	
   travel	
   experience	
   for	
   passengers	
   accessing	
  Translink’s	
  transit	
  network	
   • Produce	
   data	
   that	
   can	
   provide	
   Translink	
   with	
   greatly	
   more	
   accurate	
   and	
  detailed	
  information	
  about	
  the	
  ridership	
  behavior	
  of	
  transit	
  customers	
  	
  	
   • Allow	
  for	
  new	
  fare	
  options	
  and	
  a	
  greater	
  variety	
  of	
  price	
  incentives	
  to	
  reward	
  customer	
  loyalty	
  and	
  attract	
  new	
  people	
  to	
  transit	
   • Address	
   problems	
   associated	
  with	
   fare	
   evasion	
   and	
  help	
  Translink	
   capture	
  additional	
  revenues	
  that	
  are	
  being	
  lost	
   Parking:	
  The	
  Verrus	
  Pay-­‐By-­‐Phone	
  Service	
  In	
   Vancouver,	
   a	
   pay-­‐by-­‐phone	
   parking	
   service	
   is	
   operated	
   by	
   Verrus	
   Mobile	
  Technologies	
   Inc.	
   	
   As	
   of	
   2007,	
   the	
   service	
   covered	
   500	
   lots	
   and	
   8,300	
   on-­‐street	
  meters	
  in	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  area.	
  	
  According	
  to	
  Verrus,	
  this	
  represents	
  over	
  85%	
  of	
  all	
  meter	
   and	
   surface	
   lot	
   spaces,	
   the	
   largest	
   North	
   American	
   deployment	
   of	
   pay-­‐by-­‐phone	
  parking	
  services.	
  	
  In	
  2001,	
  Imperial	
  Parking	
  was	
  the	
  first	
  parking	
  operator	
  to	
  adopt	
  the	
  Verrus	
  pay	
  by	
  phone	
  parking	
  service,	
  which	
  it	
  operates	
  under	
  its	
  "Impark	
  Wireless”	
   brand.	
   	
   Since	
   then,	
   Advanced	
   Parking,	
  Metro	
   Parking,	
   Diamond	
   Parking	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   9	
   and	
   Easy	
   Park	
   formed	
   partnerships	
   with	
   Verrus.	
   The	
   City	
   of	
   Vancouver	
   and	
   its	
  neighboring	
  cities	
  of	
  White	
  Rock	
  and	
  Richmond	
  have	
  also	
  incorporated	
  the	
  service	
  into	
  their	
  on-­‐street	
  parking	
  spaces.	
  To	
  use	
  the	
  service,	
  motorists	
  call	
  or	
  send	
  a	
  text	
  message	
  to	
  the	
  Verrus	
  system,	
  enter	
  the	
  location	
  number	
  of	
  the	
  meter	
  or	
  parking	
  lot,	
  and	
  then	
  enter	
  the	
  total	
  time	
  they	
  would	
   like	
   to	
   park	
   for.	
   	
   First-­‐time	
   users	
   of	
   the	
   system	
   can	
   create	
   their	
   accounts	
  online	
  using	
  a	
  credit	
  card	
  and	
  license	
  plate.	
  	
  Not	
  only	
  does	
  the	
  service	
  eliminate	
  the	
  need	
   for	
   coins,	
   cash	
   or	
   pay	
   stubs,	
   but	
   the	
   service	
   also	
   provides	
   automatic	
   text	
  reminders	
   and	
   the	
   ability	
   to	
   remotely	
   extend	
   your	
   time	
   from	
   any	
   phone.	
   	
   Mel	
  McKinney,	
   General	
   Manager	
   for	
   Easy	
   Park,	
   says	
   that,	
   at	
   present,	
   pay-­‐by-­‐phone	
  represents	
  a	
  relatively	
  small	
  proportion	
  of	
  the	
  company’s	
  overall	
  revenue	
  at	
  about	
  $410,000	
  of	
  about	
  $28million.	
   	
  Unlike	
  Translink’s	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system,	
   the	
  Verrus	
  system	
  was	
  adopted	
  at	
  no	
  upfront	
  cost	
  to	
  EasyPark.	
  	
  Instead,	
  Verrus	
  extracts	
  a	
  small	
  fee	
  for	
  its	
  services	
  each	
  time	
  it	
  is	
  used	
  by	
  a	
  customer.	
  	
  There	
  have	
  been	
  some	
  issues	
  with	
  the	
  lack	
  of	
  detail	
  on	
  account	
  statements	
  that	
  Easy	
  Park	
  gets	
  from	
  Verrus	
  (i.e.	
   the	
   company	
   operates	
   parking	
   garages	
   at	
   a	
   number	
   of	
   locations	
   and	
   the	
  statements	
   were	
   not	
   location-­‐specific)	
   but	
   the	
   systems	
   is,	
   otherwise,	
   functionally	
  working	
  well.	
   	
   Figure	
  1:	
  A	
  meter	
  in	
  Vancouver	
  that	
  enables	
  pay-­by-­phone	
   	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   10	
   Tolling:	
  The	
  Golden	
  Ears	
  Bridge	
  The	
   new	
   Golden	
   Ears	
   Bridge,	
   which	
   opened	
   in	
   2009,	
   uses	
   an	
   electronic	
   tolling	
  system	
   to	
   recover	
   construction	
   costs,	
   the	
   first	
   time	
   tolls	
   have	
   been	
   used	
   in	
   the	
  Lower	
   Mainland	
   since	
   the	
   1960s.	
   	
   Drivers	
   have	
   the	
   option	
   of	
   opening	
   a	
   tolling	
  account	
  that	
  includes	
  a	
  transponder	
  that	
  is	
  mounted	
  on	
  the	
  vehicle's	
  windshield.	
  It	
  will	
  detect	
  usage	
  of	
  the	
  bridge,	
  allowing	
  toll	
  charges	
  to	
  be	
  automatically	
  billed	
  to	
  the	
  driver's	
  account.	
  	
  Vehicles	
  without	
  an	
  electronic	
  tolling	
  device	
  will	
  have	
  their	
  license	
  plates	
  identified	
  through	
  an	
  automated	
  video	
  recognition	
  system,	
  and	
  will	
  be	
  billed	
  accordingly.	
   Drivers	
   will	
   also	
   have	
   the	
   option	
   to	
   pay	
   for	
   their	
   trip	
   in	
   advance	
   by	
  establishing	
  a	
  temporary	
  account	
  with	
  a	
  credit	
  card.	
   Carshare:	
  The	
  Zipcar	
  Access	
  Card	
  U.S.-­‐based	
  Zipcar	
  initially	
  invested	
  about	
  $2	
  million	
  to	
  launch	
  the	
  car-­‐share	
  service	
  in	
   Vancouver	
   with	
   a	
   fleet	
   of	
   100	
   new	
   vehicles	
   spread	
   throughout	
   the	
   city.	
   	
   The	
  commercial	
   venture	
   competes	
   with	
   the	
   non-­‐profit	
   Co-­‐operative	
   Auto	
   Network,	
  which	
  has	
  operated	
  in	
  Vancouver	
  since	
  its	
  creation	
  in	
  1997.	
  	
  The	
  Co-­‐operative	
  Auto	
  Network	
  has	
  more	
   than	
  3,000	
  members	
  who	
   can	
   choose	
   from	
  about	
  160	
  vehicles	
  throughout	
   the	
  Lower	
  Mainland.	
   	
  Car	
  sharing	
  allows	
  members	
   to	
  reserve	
  a	
  car	
   for	
  personal	
  use	
  and	
  to	
  pay	
  by	
  the	
  hour.	
  	
  Zipcar	
  members	
  pay	
  a	
  one-­‐time	
  application	
  fee	
  ($25)	
  and	
  an	
  annual	
  membership	
  fee	
  ($55)	
  to	
  join.	
  It	
  costs	
  from	
  $8.30	
  to	
  $14.75	
  an	
  hour	
   to	
   use	
   a	
   vehicle,	
   which	
   includes	
   insurance,	
   gas,	
   designated	
   parking,	
  maintenance,	
   and	
   up	
   to	
   150	
   km	
   of	
   driving	
   in	
   a	
   24-­‐hour	
   period.	
   	
   The	
   Cooperative	
  Auto	
   Network	
   uses	
   a	
   different	
   rate	
   structure	
   than	
   Zipcar,	
   charging	
   a	
   $500	
  membership	
   fee,	
  which	
   is	
   refundable,	
   and	
  a	
  $2-­‐an-­‐hour	
  vehicle	
  usage	
  charge,	
  plus	
  driving	
   charges	
   of	
   18	
   cents	
   to	
   38	
   cents	
   per	
   kilometer.	
   	
   These	
   services	
   differ	
   from	
  traditional	
   car	
   rental	
   services	
   in	
   fee	
   structure,	
   as	
   they	
   are	
   meant	
   to	
   provide	
  incentives	
  for	
  short-­‐term	
  use	
  within	
  a	
  city,	
  and	
  features	
  cars	
  placed	
  at	
  convenient	
  on	
  and	
  off-­‐street	
  locations.	
  Upon	
  completing	
  an	
  online	
  application,	
   customers	
  of	
  ZipCar	
  are	
  sent	
  a	
  contactless	
  smart	
   card	
   by	
   mail.	
   	
   Upon	
   receiving	
   the	
   card,	
   users	
   can	
   reserve	
   cars	
   online	
   by	
  location,	
  type	
  of	
  car	
  and	
  time	
  slot.	
  	
  	
  A	
  car	
  that	
  has	
  been	
  booked	
  by	
  a	
  customer	
  can	
  be	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   11	
   unlocked	
  by	
  tapping	
  the	
  contactless	
  smart	
  card	
  to	
  the	
  car’s	
  windshield.	
  	
  Alternately,	
  a	
  new	
  iPhone	
  application	
  allows	
  ZipCar	
  members	
  to	
  find,	
  book	
  and	
  unlock	
  the	
  doors	
  to	
  vehicles.	
  	
  The	
  application	
  acts	
  as	
  a	
  virtual	
  key	
  fob	
  that	
  sends	
  a	
  signal	
  to	
  the	
  ZipCar	
  system,	
  then	
  to	
  the	
  car	
  for	
  unlocking.	
  	
  In	
  both	
  cases,	
  payment	
  is	
  made	
  using	
  a	
  credit	
  card,	
  so	
  the	
  contactless	
  smart	
  card	
  and	
  iPhone	
  application	
  are	
  solely	
  used	
  for	
  access	
  purposes.	
   	
   Figure	
  2:	
  (left)	
  smart	
  card	
  swiped	
  at	
  windshield	
  to	
  gain	
  access	
  to	
  reserved	
  car	
  and	
  (right)	
  mobile	
   application	
  allows	
  user	
  to	
  reserve	
  car	
  online	
  and	
  unlock	
  reserved	
  car	
   	
   Bikeshare:	
  The	
  BIXI	
  Access	
  Card	
  While	
  not	
  yet	
  built,	
  public	
  bike	
  sharing	
  has	
  been	
  identified	
  by	
  the	
  City	
  of	
  Vancouver	
  as	
  a	
  ‘high	
  priority’	
  project	
  for	
  the	
  near	
  future,	
  with	
  the	
  most	
  feasible	
  platform	
  being	
  the	
  BIXI	
  system	
  used	
  in	
  Montreal	
  (City	
  of	
  Vancouver,	
  2009).	
  	
  For	
  users	
  subscribed	
  to	
  a	
  yearly	
  or	
  monthly	
  BIXI	
  service	
  plan	
  in	
  Montreal,	
  a	
  small	
  card	
  is	
  sent	
  by	
  mail	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  used	
  to	
  unlock	
  a	
  bike.	
  	
  When	
  finished,	
  the	
  bicycle	
  is	
  returned	
  to	
  any	
  BIXI	
  bike	
  station	
  in	
  the	
  city.	
  	
  One-­‐time	
  users	
  can	
  pay	
  with	
  a	
  credit	
  card	
  at	
  the	
  automated	
  pay	
  station	
   that	
  will	
   then	
  print	
  an	
  access	
  number	
   for	
  24-­‐hour	
  day	
  pass	
  users.	
   	
  Paddon	
  suggested	
   that	
   Translink	
   is	
   the	
   likely	
   operator	
   of	
   future	
   Vancouver	
   bikeshare	
  because	
  municipalities	
  want	
  it	
  to	
  be	
  a	
  regional	
  program.	
  	
  He	
  agrees	
  that	
  it	
  ought	
  to	
  share	
   an	
   electronic	
   purse	
  with	
   the	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   being	
   planned	
   for	
  other	
  Translink	
  services.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   12	
   	
   Figure	
  3:	
  BIXI	
  keycard	
  allows	
  rider	
  to	
  access	
  a	
  bike	
  	
   Canadian	
  Practices	
   Transit	
  Smart	
  Cards	
  Several	
   transit	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
   are	
   in	
   development	
   in	
   Canada.	
   	
   The	
  cities	
   listed	
   below	
   have	
   already	
   rolled-­‐out	
   or	
   are	
   planning	
   to	
   rollout	
   transit	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems.	
  	
  	
  Regional	
  Programs	
   	
   • Ontario	
  PRESTO	
  	
   • Quebec	
  OPUS	
  	
  Municipal	
  Programs	
   	
   • Calgary	
  (in	
  development)	
   • Edmonton	
  ETS	
  BLUE	
  (piloting)	
   • Kingston	
  MY	
  CARD	
   • Regina	
  (in	
  development)	
   • Saskatoon	
  GO-­‐PASS	
   • St.	
  John’s	
  M-­‐CARD	
  	
  Typically,	
  coins	
  continue	
  to	
  be	
  accepted	
  at	
   fare	
  boxes,	
  but	
   the	
  use	
  of	
  paper	
  money	
  and	
  paper	
  tickets	
  are	
  discontinued.	
  	
  Instead,	
  tickets	
  and	
  monthly	
  passes	
  are	
  loaded	
  onto	
  a	
  reusable	
  smart	
  card	
  at	
  the	
  time	
  of	
  purchase.	
  	
  As	
  will	
  be	
  the	
  case	
  in	
  Vancouver,	
  holders	
  will	
  generally	
  be	
  able	
  to	
  put	
  money	
  on	
  their	
  cards	
  in	
  person,	
  via	
  phone	
  or	
  on	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   13	
   the	
   Internet,	
   and	
   then	
   use	
   it	
   on	
   all	
   forms	
   of	
   transit	
   by	
   scanning	
   their	
   card	
   at	
  electronic	
  readers	
  as	
  they	
  board	
  and	
  exit	
  transit	
  vehicles.	
  Canada’s	
   two	
   largest	
   systems	
   are	
   worth	
   special	
   mention	
   as	
   they	
   bring	
   together	
  multiple	
  transit	
  authorities.	
   	
  The	
  Quebec	
  OPUS	
  system	
  was	
  the	
  first	
   in	
  Canada	
  and	
  covers	
  the	
  Montréal	
  and	
  Québec	
  City	
  region,	
   including	
  Longueuil	
  and	
  Laval	
  (this	
   is	
  most	
  of	
  the	
  public	
  transit	
  systems	
  in	
  Quebec).	
  	
  The	
  Ontario	
  PRESTO	
  system	
  began	
  its	
  rollout	
   almost	
   two	
   years	
   after	
   the	
   OPUS	
   system,	
   and	
   is	
   still	
   in	
   the	
   rollout	
   phase.	
  	
  Plans	
   call	
   for	
  PRESTO	
   to	
   finish	
  being	
   rolled	
  out	
   across	
   the	
  Toronto,	
  Hamilton	
  and	
  Ottawa	
  region	
  by	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  2011.	
  	
  The	
  OPUS	
  system	
  brings	
  together	
  sixteen	
  transit	
  authorities	
  and	
  PRESTO	
  brings	
  together	
  eleven.	
  	
  OPUS	
   PRESTO	
   Agence	
  métropolitaine	
  de	
  transport	
   Ontario	
  Ministry	
  of	
  Transportation	
   Société	
  de	
  transport	
  de	
  Montréal	
   GO	
  Transit	
   Société	
  de	
  transport	
  de	
  Laval	
   Oakville	
  Transit	
   Réseau	
  de	
  transport	
  de	
  Longueuil	
  	
   Burlington	
  Transit	
   Réseau	
  de	
  transport	
  de	
  la	
  Capitale	
   	
   Brampton	
  Transit	
   CIT	
  Sorel-­Varennes	
   	
   Mississauga	
  Transit	
   CIT	
  Laurentides	
   Hamilton	
  Street	
  Railway	
   CIT	
  Chambly-­Richelieu-­Carignan	
   York	
  Region	
  Transit	
   CIT	
  Le	
  Richelain	
   Durham	
  Region	
  Transit	
   CIT	
  Roussillon	
   OC	
  Transport	
   Ville	
  de	
  Sainte-­Julie	
   	
   Toronto	
  Transit	
  Commission	
  	
   CIT	
  La	
  Presqu'Île	
   	
   CIT	
  Vallée-­Richelieu	
   	
   	
   CRT	
  Lanaudière	
   	
   CIT	
  Sud	
  Ouest	
  	
   	
   CIT	
  Haut-­Saint-­Laurent	
   	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   14	
   It	
  is	
  standard	
  practice	
  in	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems	
  that	
   the	
   transportation	
   industry	
   engage	
   in	
   a	
   collaborative	
   process	
   involving	
   a	
  multitude	
  of	
  stakeholders,	
  often	
  across	
  multiple	
   jurisdictions	
  that	
  have	
  historically	
  utilized	
   separate	
   ticketing	
   systems,	
   payment	
   procedures	
   and	
   passes.	
   	
   The	
   first	
  widely	
   used	
   electronic	
   payment	
   system	
  was	
   developed	
   in	
   Hong	
   Kong	
   (discussion	
  forthcoming)	
   and	
   required	
   the	
   coming-­‐together	
   of	
   five	
   major	
   transportation	
  operators.	
   	
   Similarly,	
   Toronto’s	
   regional	
   electronic	
   payment	
   system	
   required	
  coordination	
   amongst	
   ten	
   agencies,	
   including	
   involvement	
   from	
   the	
   provincial	
  Ministry	
   of	
   Transportation.	
   	
   Other	
   regions	
   in	
   Quebec,	
   Washington	
   state	
   and	
  elsewhere	
  in	
  North	
  America	
  and	
  worldwide	
  have	
  engaged	
  in	
  a	
  similar	
  collaborative	
  processes	
  in	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  their	
  transit	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system.	
   	
   Figure	
  4:	
  (left)	
  Quebec	
  Opus	
  card	
  and	
  reader,	
  (right)	
  Ontario	
  Presto	
  card	
  and	
  reader	
   	
   	
   American	
  Practices	
   Transit	
  Transit	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
   in	
   the	
   United	
   States	
   are	
   largely	
   similar	
   in	
  nature	
   to	
   those	
   in	
   Canada,	
   with	
   a	
   few	
   differences	
   and	
   innovative	
   exceptions.	
  Examples	
  of	
  American	
  transit	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems:	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   15	
   State-­‐Wide	
   	
   • Maryland	
  CHARM	
  CARD	
   • Utah	
  (open	
  payment	
  system)	
  	
  Municipal/Regional	
   	
   • Atlanta	
  BREEZE	
   • Boston	
  CHARLIE	
  CARD	
   • Chicago	
  CARD	
   • Houston	
  Q	
  CARD	
   • Los	
  Angeles	
  TAP	
   • Miami	
  EASY	
  CARD	
   • Minneapolis	
  –	
  Saint	
  Paul	
  GO-­‐TO	
   • New	
  York/New	
  Jersey	
  SMART	
  LINK	
  and	
  open	
  payment	
  pilot	
   • Philadelphia/New	
  Jersey	
  FREEDOM	
   • San	
  Francisco	
  Bay	
  Area	
  CLIPPER	
   • San	
  Diego	
  COMPASS	
   • Seattle	
  ORCA	
   • Spokane	
  GO	
   • Ventura	
  GO	
  VENTURA	
   • Washington	
  D.C.	
  SMAR-­‐TRIP	
   	
  	
  As	
   is	
   the	
   case	
   with	
   Canadian	
   systems,	
   most	
   American	
   systems	
  will	
   eventually	
   be	
  discontinuing	
  paper	
  tickets	
  and	
  passes	
  by	
  loading	
  them	
  onto	
  a	
  reusable	
  smart	
  card	
  that	
   can	
   be	
   reloaded	
   in	
   person	
   at	
   stations,	
   via	
   phone	
   and	
   Internet.	
   	
   In	
   one	
   case,	
  Washington	
  D.C.,	
  the	
  SMAR-­‐TRIP	
  card	
  was	
  made	
  the	
  exclusive	
  form	
  of	
  payment	
  for	
  all	
  park	
  ‘n	
  ride	
  lots	
  owned	
  by	
  the	
  transit	
  agency,	
  although	
  complaints	
  eventually	
  led	
  to	
   the	
   acceptance	
   of	
   credit	
   cards	
   too.	
   	
   Besides	
   park	
   ‘n	
   rides	
   in	
   Washington	
   D.C.,	
  however,	
   there	
   has	
   been	
   little	
   experimentation	
   with	
   how	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
  systems	
  can	
  be	
  extended	
  beyond	
  transit.	
  However,	
   innovative	
   approaches	
   to	
   access	
   and	
   payment	
   systems	
   that	
   differ	
   from	
  those	
  in	
  Canada	
  and	
  most	
  other	
  regions	
  of	
  the	
  United	
  States	
  are	
  being	
  experimented	
  with	
   in	
   Utah	
   State	
   and	
   New	
   York	
   City.	
   	
   Transit	
   agencies	
   there	
   accept	
   contactless	
  prepaid,	
   debit	
   and	
   credit	
   cards	
   issued	
   by	
   financial	
   institutions	
   at	
   the	
   farebox,	
  meaning	
   that	
   these	
   third-­‐party	
   cards	
   are	
   functionally	
   both	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
  passes.	
  	
  In	
  addition	
  to	
  accepting	
  the	
  cards	
  of	
  financial	
  institutions,	
  other	
  cards	
  such	
  as	
   company	
   and	
   school-­‐sponsored	
   annual	
   passes	
   can	
   be	
   used	
   in	
  Utah.	
   	
   It	
   is	
   these	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   16	
   third-­‐party	
   cards,	
   rather	
   than	
   agency-­‐issued	
   transit	
   cards,	
   that	
   are	
   tapped	
   to	
   gain	
  access	
   to	
   a	
   bus	
   or	
   transit	
   fare-­‐zone.	
   	
   In	
   addition,	
   Visa	
   recently	
   released	
   an	
  application	
   for	
   the	
   iPhone	
  that	
  allows	
  transit	
  riders	
   in	
  New	
  York	
  to	
   tap	
  their	
  NFC-­‐enabled1	
  phone,	
  rather	
  than	
  their	
  Visa	
  card,	
  at	
   the	
   farebox.	
   	
   It	
   is	
  expected	
  that	
   the	
  new	
  approach	
  will	
  save	
  transit	
  agencies	
  money	
  that	
  is	
  now	
  used	
  to	
  issue	
  fare	
  media	
  (i.e.	
   the	
   contactless	
   smart	
   cards)	
   and	
   manage	
   the	
   fare	
   payment	
   and	
   collection	
  system.	
  Experimenting	
  in	
  these	
  regions	
  comes	
  following	
  the	
  release	
  of	
  MasterCard	
  PayPass	
  and	
   Visa	
   PayWave,	
   contactless	
   payment	
   platforms	
   that	
   allow	
   customers	
   tap	
   their	
  card,	
   phone,	
   FOB	
   or	
   other	
   payment	
   device	
   on	
   a	
   contactless-­‐enabled	
   terminal	
   or	
  reader	
  at	
  checkout.	
  Customers	
  do	
  not	
  have	
  to	
  swipe	
  or	
  hand	
  their	
  card	
  to	
  a	
  cashier,	
  and	
   there's	
  no	
   signature	
   required	
   for	
  purchases	
  under	
  $50.	
   	
  These	
   companies	
  are	
  experimenting	
   with	
   other	
   transportation	
   payment	
   solutions	
   in	
   the	
   United	
   States.	
  	
  For	
  example,	
  MasterCard	
  is	
  working	
  to	
  bring	
  PayPass	
  terminals	
  into	
  New	
  York	
  City	
  taxis,	
   as	
  well	
   as	
   taxis	
   in	
   Philadelphia	
   and	
   Las	
   Vegas.	
   	
   Taxis	
   in	
   Philadelphia	
   began	
  accepting	
   contactless	
   prepaid,	
   debit	
   and	
   credit	
   cards	
   in	
  November	
   2006	
   and	
  New	
  York	
  City	
  taxis	
  began	
  accepting	
  them	
  in	
  2007.	
  	
  In	
  2006,	
  MasterCard	
  worked	
  with	
  the	
  Ohio	
   Turnpike	
   Commission	
   to	
   bring	
   a	
   consumer	
   trial	
   of	
   PayPass	
   payments	
   in	
  selected	
  exit	
   lanes	
  and	
  service	
  plazas	
  on	
   the	
  Ohio	
  Turnpike.	
  The	
  Ohio	
  Turnpike	
   is	
  the	
  first	
  toll	
  road	
  in	
  the	
  U.S.	
  to	
  accept	
  payment	
  cards	
  for	
  self-­‐service	
  toll	
  transactions	
  and	
   the	
   first	
   to	
   test	
   general-­‐purpose	
   contactless	
   payment	
   cards	
   in	
   a	
   highway	
  environment.	
   	
   Finally,	
   Affiliated	
   Computer	
   Services	
   has	
   been	
   working	
   with	
  MasterCard	
   to	
   bring	
   PayPass	
   to	
   its	
   parking	
   applications	
   at	
   major	
   airports	
  throughout	
  North	
  America.	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  1	
  NFC	
  refers	
  to	
  ‘near	
  field	
  communication’,	
  typically	
  enabled	
  using	
  a	
  computer	
  chip	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  read	
  when	
  it	
  is	
  held	
  near	
  (usually	
  within	
  10	
  cm)	
  of	
  a	
  reader	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   17	
   	
   Figure	
  5:	
  (left	
  and	
  middle)	
  MasterCard	
  PayPass	
  tapped	
  near	
  contactless	
  reader	
  directly	
  at	
  transit	
   farebox	
  in	
  New	
  York	
  City	
  and	
  (right)	
  card	
  is	
  tapped	
  near	
  contactless	
  reader	
  at	
  farebox	
  on	
  a	
  public	
   bus	
  in	
  Utah	
  	
   Tolls	
  During	
   the	
  1990s,	
   a	
   variety	
  of	
   electronic	
  payment	
  methods	
  were	
   tested,	
   including	
  laser	
   bar-­‐code	
   scanners	
   and	
   long-­‐range	
   RFID	
   transponders	
   that	
   enabled	
  unattended,	
   nonstop	
   cashless	
   payment.	
   	
   The	
   first	
   large-­‐scale	
   system	
   using	
   what	
  today	
   is	
   widely	
   recognized	
   as	
   electronic	
   toll	
   collection	
   (ETC)	
   technology	
   was	
   the	
  North	
  Texas	
  Tollway.	
   	
  Since	
  its	
  commissioning,	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  toll	
  facilities	
  across	
  the	
  United	
   States	
  have	
   implemented	
   such	
   systems.	
   	
   The	
   Inter-­‐Agency	
  Group	
   (IAG)2	
   of	
  New	
   York/New	
   Jersey	
   worked	
   for	
   4	
   years	
   to	
   test	
   and	
   finally	
   adopt	
   a	
   common	
  transponder	
  system	
  for	
  all	
  its	
  members	
  (Smart	
  Card	
  Alliance,	
  2006).	
  	
  	
  Today,	
  millions	
  of	
  vehicles	
  carry	
  E-­‐Z	
  Pass	
  transponders	
  and	
  maintain	
  accounts	
  with	
  the	
   IAG	
   clearinghouse.	
   	
   The	
   use	
   of	
   common	
   technology	
   and	
  messaging	
   standards	
  allow	
   the	
   disparate	
   agencies	
   to	
   honor	
   common	
   transponders	
   and	
   reconcile	
  accounts.	
   	
   Automated	
   systems	
   classify	
   vehicles,	
   calculate	
   fees,	
   identify	
   valid	
  transponders,	
   and	
   debit	
   the	
   centralized	
   accounts	
   for	
   E-­‐Z	
   Pass	
   users.	
   RFID-­‐based	
  transponder	
   technology	
   is	
   also	
   used	
   in	
   Florida,	
   Illinois,	
   California,	
   Oklahoma	
   and	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  2	
  IAG	
  includes	
  agencies	
  that	
  extend	
  across	
  several	
  northeastern	
  states	
  and	
  represent	
  the	
  majority	
  of	
  tolls	
  paid	
  in	
  the	
  United	
  States	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   18	
   Texas.	
  Toll	
   agencies	
  have	
   embraced	
  operating	
  practices	
   that	
   encourage	
   the	
  use	
  of	
  transponder-­‐based	
  technologies	
   through	
  pricing	
   incentives.	
   In	
  some	
  areas,	
   the	
  use	
  of	
   these	
   transponders	
   has	
   been	
   extended	
   to	
   parking	
   facilities	
   such	
   as	
   airports	
  (Smart	
  Card	
  Alliance,	
  2006).	
   	
   Figure	
  6:	
  E-­Z	
  Pass	
  transponder	
  installed	
  near	
  the	
  rearview	
  mirror	
   	
   International	
  Practices	
   Hong	
  Kong	
  Octopus	
  System	
  The	
  Octopus	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  was	
  originally	
  introduced	
  for	
  fare	
  payment	
  on	
   the	
  MTR,	
   the	
  rapid	
   transit	
   railway,	
  but,	
   in	
  1994,	
  Hong	
  Kong's	
   five	
  major	
  public	
  transport	
   operators	
   –	
   the	
   MTR,	
   KCRC,	
   KMB,	
   Citybus	
   and	
   the	
   Hong	
   Kong	
   and	
  Yaumatei	
   Ferry	
   –	
   established	
   a	
   joint	
   venture	
   known	
   as	
   Creative	
   Star	
   Limited	
  (renamed	
   Octopus	
   Cards	
   Limited	
   in	
   2002)	
   to	
   oversee	
   the	
   development	
   and	
  implementation	
   of	
   contactless	
   smart	
   card	
   technology.	
   	
   As	
   with	
   Canadian	
   and	
  American	
   systems,	
   the	
   Octopus	
   utilizes	
   a	
   rechargeable	
   contactless	
   stored	
   value	
  smart	
   card	
   to	
   transfer	
   electronic	
   payments.	
   	
   Customers	
   “load”	
   money	
   onto	
   their	
  cards	
  and	
  then	
  “tag	
  on	
  /	
  tag	
  off”	
  at	
  electronic	
  readers.	
  	
  According	
  to	
  Octopus	
  Cards	
  Limited,	
   95%	
   of	
   people	
   in	
   Hong	
   Kong	
   aged	
   16	
   to	
   65	
   use	
   Octopus	
   (Octopus,	
  "Corporate	
  Profile:	
  Services	
  in	
  Hong	
  Kong").	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   19	
   In	
   2000,	
   Octopus	
   obtained	
   deposit-­‐taking	
   company	
   authorization	
   from	
   the	
   Hong	
  Kong	
   Monetary	
   Authority,	
   which	
   allowed	
   the	
   company’s	
   expansion	
   into	
   a	
   wider	
  range	
   of	
   different	
   applications,	
   especially	
   in	
   the	
   retail	
   sector.	
   	
   Over	
   3,000	
   service	
  providers	
   throughout	
   the	
   territory	
   now	
   support	
   the	
   card	
   (Octopus,	
   "Corporate	
  Profile:	
   Services	
   in	
  Hong	
  Kong").	
   	
  The	
  card	
  can	
  also	
  be	
  used	
   in	
   soft	
  drink	
  vending	
  machines,	
  pay	
  phones	
  and	
  photo	
  booths.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  the	
  card	
  doubles	
  as	
  an	
  access	
  control	
   card	
   for	
   numerous	
   buildings	
   and	
   for	
   school	
   administrative	
   functions.	
   	
   At	
  certain	
  office	
  buildings,	
  residential	
  buildings,	
  and	
  schools,	
  usage	
  of	
  an	
  Octopus	
  card	
  is	
   required	
   for	
   entry.	
   	
   In	
   2006,	
   the	
   first	
   trial	
   of	
   taxis	
   equipped	
  with	
  Octopus	
   card	
  readers	
  was	
   launched	
  but	
  many	
  drivers	
  dropped	
  out	
  of	
   the	
  program	
  because	
   they	
  had	
  to	
  return	
  to	
  the	
  office	
  every	
  day	
  for	
  accounting.	
  Therefore,	
  Octopus	
  is	
  working	
  on	
   upgrading	
   the	
   system	
   to	
   allow	
   automatic	
   account	
   updating	
   from	
   taxis	
   in	
   the	
  future.	
  	
  	
  Today,	
   the	
   card	
   is	
   not	
   only	
   used	
   for	
   purchasing	
   consumer	
   products	
   and	
   the	
   vast	
  majority	
  of	
  public	
   transit	
  but	
  also	
   for	
  most	
  on	
  and	
  off-­‐street	
  parking.	
   	
  As	
  of	
  2006,	
  close	
   to	
  200	
  parking	
  garages	
  accepted	
  Octopus	
  cards	
   for	
  payment	
  of	
  parking	
   fees.	
  	
  The	
  parking	
  garage	
  system	
  works	
  as	
  follows:	
  on	
  entry,	
  the	
  customer	
  obtains	
  a	
  ticket	
  and	
   a	
   barrier	
   rises	
   automatically.	
   The	
   ticket	
   is	
   a	
   magnetic	
   ticket	
   retained	
   by	
   the	
  customer.	
  	
  On	
  exit,	
  the	
  customer	
  drives	
  to	
  the	
  exit	
  gate,	
  inserts	
  the	
  magnetic	
  ticket	
  in	
  the	
  gate,	
  and	
  pays	
  by	
  presenting	
  the	
  Octopus	
  card.	
  	
  To	
  obtain	
  a	
  receipt,	
  the	
  customer	
  presses	
   a	
   button	
   at	
   the	
   exit	
   gate.	
   	
   The	
   Octopus	
   back-­‐end	
   system	
   processes	
   the	
  transactions,	
  generates	
  reports,	
  and	
  sends	
  out	
  the	
  reports	
  the	
  next	
  day.	
  The	
  car	
  park	
  operators	
   reconcile	
   these	
   reports	
   with	
   their	
   own	
   records	
   and	
   can	
   request	
   an	
  investigation	
  if	
  there	
  are	
  discrepancies.	
  The	
  car	
  park	
  operators	
  receive	
  their	
  parking	
  revenue	
  before	
  4	
  PM	
  the	
  same	
  day.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  all	
  on-­‐street	
  metered	
  parking	
  spaces	
  in	
   Hong	
   Kong	
   (over	
   17,700	
   in	
   18	
   districts)	
   are	
   equipped	
   with	
   Octopus	
   parking	
  meters	
   as	
   of	
   November	
   21,	
   2004.	
   	
   Octopus	
   parking	
   meters	
   use	
   touch-­‐screen	
  technology	
   to	
   permit	
   customers	
   to	
   select	
   a	
   parking	
   space	
   and	
   an	
   amount	
   of	
   time.	
  The	
  customer	
  then	
  presents	
  the	
  Octopus	
  card	
  to	
  the	
  card	
  reader	
  to	
  pay	
  for	
  parking	
  (Smart	
  Card	
  Alliance,	
  2006).	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   20	
   Since	
  its	
   inception,	
  the	
  technology	
  has	
  since	
  been	
  exported	
  to	
  the	
  Netherlands	
  and	
  Dubai.	
   	
   Octopus	
   Cards	
   Limited	
   is	
   also	
   one	
   of	
   ten	
   companies	
   that	
   responded	
   to	
  Translink’s	
   ‘Request	
   for	
   Qualifications’	
   last	
   year	
   to	
   supply	
   and	
   operate	
   a	
   transit	
  payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   for	
   the	
   Lower	
   Mainland,	
   and	
   is	
   now	
   one	
   of	
   three	
  companies	
  selected	
  by	
  Translink	
  to	
  submit	
  formal	
  proposals.	
   	
   Figure	
  7:	
  Parking	
  meter	
  in	
  Hong	
  Kong	
  accepts	
  Octopus	
  	
   Malaysia:	
  Touch	
  ‘n	
  Go	
  In	
   Malaysia,	
   a	
   smart-­‐card	
   based	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   called	
   Touch	
   'n	
   Go	
  provides	
   the	
  basis	
   for	
   a	
   national	
   electronic	
   toll	
   collection	
   system	
   implemented	
  on	
  many	
   highways	
   and	
   bridges	
   since	
   1997,	
   but	
   is	
   also	
   used	
   at	
   many	
   locations	
  throughout	
  the	
  country	
  for	
  transit,	
  parking	
  and	
  theme	
  park	
  charges.	
  	
  As	
  with	
  other	
  smart	
  cards,	
  the	
  user	
  simply	
  touches	
  a	
  Touch	
  and	
  Go	
  card	
  at	
  designated	
  readers	
  and	
  the	
  toll	
  or	
  fare	
  is	
  deducted	
  electronically	
  from	
  the	
  card.	
  In	
   addition,	
   a	
   NFC-­‐enabled	
   phone	
   is	
   being	
   piloted	
   on	
   the	
   network	
   that	
   lets	
  customers	
  use	
  a	
  Nokia	
  NFC-­‐enabled	
  phone	
  to	
  not	
  only	
  make	
  Touch	
  ‘n	
  Go	
  contactless	
  transactions,	
  but	
  also	
  Visa	
  PayWave	
  transactions.	
  	
  In	
  this	
  case,	
  the	
  cell	
  phone	
  has	
  an	
  embedded	
  RFID	
   chip	
   that	
   allows	
   the	
   proximity	
   transaction	
   to	
   take	
   place.	
   	
   Several	
  stakeholders	
  teamed	
  up	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  launch	
  this	
  product,	
  including	
  Maxis,	
  the	
  largest	
  wireless	
   carrier	
   in	
   Malaysia,	
   Nokia,	
   Maybank,	
   a	
   leading	
   Malaysian	
   financial	
  institution,	
   transport	
   payment	
   card	
   issuer	
   Touch	
   'n	
   Go	
   and	
  Visa.	
   	
   Customers	
  who	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   21	
   sign	
  up	
  for	
  the	
  new	
  Maxis	
  FastTap	
  service	
  are	
  able	
  to	
  use	
  their	
  Nokia	
  6212	
  Classic	
  phones	
  to	
  purchase	
  goods	
  and	
  services	
  at	
  more	
  than	
  1,800	
  Visa	
  PayWave	
  merchant	
  locations	
   as	
   well	
   as	
   pay	
   for	
   toll,	
   transit,	
   parking	
   and	
   theme	
   park	
   charges	
   at	
   over	
  3,000	
  Touch	
   'n	
   Go	
   points	
   nationwide.	
   	
   Customers	
   simply	
  wave	
   their	
  NFC-­‐enabled	
  Nokia	
   6212	
   Classic	
   handset	
   in	
   front	
   of	
   a	
   contactless	
   reader	
   to	
   complete	
   their	
  transactions	
   (Clark,	
   2009).	
   	
   Similar	
   NFC	
   mobile	
   payment	
   technology	
   is	
   in	
   use	
   in	
  Japan.	
   	
   Figure	
  8:	
  Maxis	
  FastTap	
  enabled	
  Nokia	
  mobile	
  phone	
  and	
  reader	
  	
   Taiwan	
  Money	
  Card	
  The	
  TaiwanMoney	
  Card,	
  used	
  for	
  payment	
  in	
  the	
  city	
  of	
  Kaohsiung	
  and	
  its	
  vicinity,	
  is	
  an	
   all-­‐in-­‐one	
   payment	
   card	
   that	
   combines	
   credit,	
   debit,	
   stored	
   value	
   features	
   and	
  provides	
  access	
  to	
  ATMs.	
  	
  Although	
  the	
  card	
  utilizes	
  MasterCard	
  PayPass	
  contactless	
  technology,	
  this	
  card	
  differs	
  from	
  program	
  in	
  New	
  York	
  and	
  Utah	
  in	
  the	
  credit	
  and	
  debit	
  functions	
  of	
  the	
  card	
  are	
  not	
  used	
  to	
  payment	
  at	
  the	
  farebox	
  to	
  gain	
  access	
  to	
  transit.	
  	
  Rather,	
  the	
  Taiwan	
  money	
  card	
  is	
  three	
  cards	
  combined	
  into	
  one,	
  including	
  a	
  transit	
  card	
  that	
  still	
  must	
  be	
   loaded.	
   	
   It	
   is	
  similar,	
   in	
  concept,	
   to	
  the	
  Nokia	
  NFC-­‐enabled	
   phone	
   in	
   Malaysia	
   as	
   it	
   too	
   combines	
   credit	
   and	
   transport-­‐payment	
  services,	
  but	
  does	
  not	
  allow	
  VISA	
  PayWave	
   itself	
   to	
  be	
  used	
  directly	
  at	
   the	
   reader	
  (MULTOS,	
  2006).	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   22	
   	
   Figure	
  9:	
  TaiwanMoney	
  Card	
  is	
  both	
  a	
  transit	
  card	
  and	
  a	
  credit	
  card	
  	
   Paris:	
  Navigo,	
  Vélib'	
  and	
  Autolib'	
  A	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   similar	
   to	
   elsewhere	
   is	
   used	
   in	
   Paris,	
   but	
   is	
   worth	
  special	
   mention	
   here	
   because	
   the	
   system	
   includes	
   the	
   Vélib'	
   bikeshare	
   program.	
  	
  Use	
  of	
  the	
  transit	
  card	
  with	
  bikeshare	
  differs	
  from	
  other	
  cities	
  such	
  as	
  Montreal	
  and	
  London	
  where	
  it	
  is	
  necessary	
  to	
  obtain	
  a	
  separate	
  access	
  key.	
  	
  Similar	
  in	
  concept	
  to	
  Vélib',	
  a	
  program	
  called	
  Autolib'	
  is	
  under	
  development	
  with	
  deployment	
  expected	
  in	
  2011.	
   	
   Autolib'	
   is	
   a	
   program	
  which	
   allows	
   casual	
   car	
   users	
   to	
   pick	
   up	
   a	
   publicly	
  owned	
  battery-­‐powered	
  car	
  in	
  one	
  part	
  of	
  the	
  city	
  and	
  drop	
  it	
  off	
  in	
  another.	
  	
  Users	
  will	
  either	
  pay	
  an	
  annual	
  subscription,	
  or	
  pay	
  at	
  pick-­‐up	
  points	
  on	
   the	
  spur	
  of	
   the	
  moment	
  by	
  using	
  their	
  public	
  transport	
  pass.	
  	
  An	
  increasing	
  number	
  of	
  neighboring	
  cities	
  have	
  also	
  joined	
  in	
  developing	
  and	
  funding	
  the	
  Autolib'	
  program.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   23	
   	
   Figure	
  10:	
  (left)	
  bikeshare	
  in	
  Paris	
  is	
  payable	
  using	
  Navigo	
  transit	
  card	
  and	
  (right)	
  an	
  artistic	
  rendering	
   of	
  a	
  future	
  carshare	
  program	
  that	
  would	
  accept	
  Navigo	
  transit	
  card	
  	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   24	
   Conceptual	
  and	
  General	
  Items	
  The	
  purpose	
  of	
  this	
  section	
  is	
  to	
  convey	
  findings	
  that	
  are	
  broader	
  than	
  those	
  of	
  the	
  previous	
  section.	
   	
  This	
  section	
  includes	
  generalized	
  findings	
  that	
  not	
  only	
  arise	
  out	
  of	
  the	
  literature,	
  but	
  also	
  general	
  web	
  searches	
  for	
  relevant	
  news	
  articles	
  and	
  other	
  websites	
  such	
  as	
  those	
  of	
  transit	
  agencies.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  the	
  nine	
  interviews	
  that	
  were	
  conducted	
  are	
  discussed	
  in	
  this	
  section,	
  usually	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  each	
  subsection.	
  	
  Thus,	
  a	
  secondary	
  purpose	
  of	
  this	
  section	
  is	
  to	
  show	
  how	
  the	
  general	
  findings	
  apply	
  to	
  the	
  particular	
  context	
  of	
  Vancouver.	
  	
  A	
  synthesis	
  of	
  these	
  findings	
  is	
  not	
  provided	
  here,	
  but	
  rather	
  in	
  the	
  next	
  section,	
  ‘Analysis’.	
  The	
   section	
   begins	
  with	
   a	
   discussion	
   specific	
   to	
   contactless	
   smart	
   cards	
   in	
   transit	
  because	
   they	
   are	
   the	
   best	
   documented	
   electronic	
   payment	
   systems	
   in	
   the	
  transportation	
  industry,	
  and	
  because,	
  as	
  further	
  discussed	
  in	
  the	
   ‘Analysis’	
  section,	
  the	
   discussion	
   is	
   largely	
   generalizable	
   to	
   other	
   forms	
   of	
   electronic	
   payment.	
   	
   The	
  second	
   part	
   of	
   this	
   section	
   discusses	
   mobile	
   payments	
   in	
   transportation	
   more	
  generally,	
  including	
  a	
  classification	
  of	
  mobile	
  payments	
  according	
  to	
  attribute.	
  	
  The	
  general	
   discussion	
   of	
   mobile	
   payments	
   is	
   included	
   for	
   the	
   purposes	
   of	
   framing	
  mobile	
  payment	
   in	
   transportation	
  within	
   the	
  broader	
  mobile	
  payments	
  discussion	
  (for	
  example,	
  retail	
  payments	
  made	
  by	
  mobile	
  devices).	
  The	
  topics	
  in	
  this	
  section	
  include:	
   • Differences	
  Between	
  Transit	
  and	
  Debit	
  Cards	
   • Functions	
  and	
  Features	
  of	
  the	
  Contactless	
  Transit	
  Card	
   • Business	
  Issues	
   • Card	
  Issuing	
  Versus	
  Card	
  Accepting	
   • International	
  Standards	
   • Payment	
  Classification	
  and	
  Other	
  Technologies	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   25	
   Difference	
  Between	
  Transit	
  and	
  Debit	
  Cards	
  Transit	
  agencies	
  typically	
  invest	
  in	
  their	
  own	
  smart	
  card	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  and	
   issue	
   cards	
   that	
   must	
   be	
   “loaded”	
   with	
   passes	
   and/or	
   credit.	
   	
   In	
   contrast,	
  ordinary	
   retail	
   outlets	
   seldom	
   issue	
   their	
  own	
  cards.	
   	
  Rather,	
   they	
   typically	
  accept	
  third-­‐party	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
   cards.	
   	
  Transit	
  agencies	
  often	
  accept	
   third-­‐party	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards	
  as	
  well,	
  but	
  these	
  cards	
  are	
  usually	
  only	
  used	
  to	
  load	
  credit	
  onto	
  a	
  transit	
  card,	
  meaning	
  that	
  the	
  customer	
  is	
  always	
  carrying	
  at	
  least	
  two	
  cards.	
  There	
   is	
   good	
   reason	
   debit	
   and	
   credit	
   cards	
   have	
   not	
   traditionally	
   doubled	
   as	
   a	
  transit	
  access	
  card	
  at	
  the	
  farebox.	
   	
  Specifically,	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards	
  are	
  generally	
  too	
  slow	
  for	
  farebox	
  payment.	
   	
  Transit	
  operators	
  need	
  to	
  assure	
  that	
  any	
  payment	
  device	
   performs	
   at	
   speeds	
   ranging	
   from	
   70	
   to	
   300	
   milliseconds	
   for	
   the	
   entire	
  customer	
  interface	
  (i.e.,	
  using	
  the	
  fare	
  medium	
  at	
  a	
  gate,	
  performing	
  the	
  transaction,	
  and	
   opening	
   the	
   gate)	
   because	
   transaction	
   speeds	
   have	
   a	
   significant	
   impact	
   on	
  transit	
  customer	
  service	
  (i.e.	
  reducing	
  the	
  length	
  of	
  queues	
  and	
  speeding	
  passengers	
  through	
   the	
  system)	
   (Smart	
  Card	
  Alliance,	
  2003).	
  This	
   speed	
   is	
   significantly	
   faster	
  than	
  a	
  typical	
  debit/credit	
  transaction	
  at	
  the	
  point-­‐of-­‐sale	
  in	
  a	
  retail	
  setting.	
   	
  Other	
  differences/limitations	
  exist,	
  and	
  are	
  explored	
  under	
  the	
  next	
  subheading.	
  	
   Functions	
  and	
  Features	
  of	
  the	
  Contactless	
  Transit	
  Card	
  Listed	
   here	
   are	
   the	
   espoused	
   functions,	
   benefits	
   and	
   weaknesses	
   of	
   transit	
  contactless	
   smart	
   card	
   systems.	
   	
   I	
   say	
   ‘espoused’	
   because	
   at	
   least	
   some	
   of	
   the	
  benefits/weaknesses	
   are	
   potential	
   benefits	
   since	
   there	
   have	
   not	
   yet	
   been	
   any	
  objective	
   studies	
   to	
   confirm	
   them.	
   	
   The	
   functions,	
   benefits	
   and	
   weaknesses	
  discussed	
  here	
  are	
  a	
  summary	
  of	
  what	
  the	
  literature	
  and	
  transit	
  agencies	
  conceive	
  of	
  as	
  the	
  benefits	
  and	
  weaknesses.	
  To	
  begin,	
  transit	
  smart	
  cards	
  have	
  at	
  least	
  two	
  basic	
  functions:	
   • Payment	
   • Access	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   26	
   In	
  many	
  cases	
  terminals	
  read	
  the	
  amount	
  of	
  money	
  on	
  a	
  card	
  and	
  then	
  deduct	
  the	
  transit	
  fare	
  (this	
  is	
  the	
  payment	
  function).	
  	
  Following	
  payment,	
  the	
  user	
  is	
  permitted	
   access.	
   	
   In	
   other	
   cases,	
   a	
  weekly	
   or	
  monthly	
   pass	
  may	
   have	
   been	
   loaded	
   onto	
   the	
  smart	
  card.	
   	
   In	
  the	
  case	
  of	
  passes,	
  payment	
  is	
  not	
  made	
  at	
  the	
  farebox.	
   	
  Rather	
  the	
  pass,	
  which	
  has	
  been	
  loaded	
  onto	
  the	
  card,	
  is	
  merely	
  confirmed	
  by	
  the	
  reader,	
  and	
  the	
   user	
   is	
   granted	
   access.	
   	
   Debit/credit	
   cards	
   are	
   not	
   typically	
   viewed	
   as	
   access	
  cards,	
   although	
   I	
  will	
   discuss	
   in	
   the	
  Analysis	
   section	
  how	
   this	
   is	
   not	
   necessarily	
   a	
  limitation	
  on	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  debit/credit	
  cards	
  in	
  transit	
  payment.	
  Differing	
  perspectives	
  mean	
   that	
   the	
   card	
  may	
  perform	
  additional	
  basic	
   functions.	
  	
  For	
   example,	
   transit	
   agencies	
   frequently	
   cite	
   the	
   card’s	
   ability	
   to	
   capture	
   critical	
  operational	
   data	
   to	
   improve	
   service	
   planning	
   as	
   a	
   rationale	
   for	
   spending	
   large	
  amounts	
   of	
   public	
   funds	
   the	
   cards	
   and	
   their	
   infrastructure.	
   	
   Below	
   is	
   a	
   list	
   of	
  frequently	
   espoused	
   benefits	
   and	
   weaknesses.	
   	
   Data	
   collection	
   and	
   discount	
  programs	
  are	
  elaborated	
  on	
  following	
  this	
  list.	
   A.	
  Customer	
  Benefits	
  •	
  Improved	
  convenience	
  of	
  the	
  contactless	
  interface	
  (i.e.	
  the	
  card	
  does	
  not	
  have	
  to	
  be	
  removed	
  from	
  a	
  wallet	
  or	
  purse	
  to	
  scan)	
  •	
   Ability	
   to	
   use	
   the	
   same	
   card	
   on	
  multiple	
   operators	
   and	
   for	
   nontransit	
   purposes	
  (e.g.,	
   parking	
   or	
   retail	
   payments,	
   university	
   or	
   employer	
   ID/access,	
   and	
   other	
  functions)	
  	
  •	
  Features	
  such	
  as	
  registration/balance	
  protection,	
  employer	
  autoload,	
  and	
  negative	
  balance	
   B.	
  Agency	
  Benefits	
  •	
  Data	
  capacity	
  and	
  security	
  features	
  needed	
  to	
  support	
  partnerships	
  that	
  can	
  help	
  spread	
  system	
  costs	
  	
  •	
   Faster	
   boarding	
   or	
   throughput	
   than	
   other	
   fare	
  media	
   could	
   ultimately	
   translate	
  into	
  service	
  reliability	
  improvements	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   27	
   •	
  Higher	
  data	
  capacity	
  and	
  processing	
  capabilities	
  facilitate	
  innovative	
  fare	
  options,	
  and	
  the	
  management	
  of	
  loyalty	
  and	
  other	
  discount	
  programs	
  •	
  Ability	
  to	
  capture	
  critical	
  operational	
  data	
  to	
  improve	
  service	
  planning	
  •	
   Nontransit	
   applications	
   (e.g.	
   retail	
   payments,	
   university	
   or	
   employer	
   ID/access,	
  and	
  other	
  functions)	
  •	
   More	
   efficient	
   revenue	
   management	
   activities.	
   Depending	
   on	
   how	
   the	
   transit	
  operator	
  processes	
  currency,	
  reconciling	
  reports	
  from	
  electronic	
  transactions	
  can	
  be	
   more	
   efficient	
   (thus	
   reducing	
   operation	
   costs),	
   reduce	
   inaccuracies	
   and	
  provide	
  an	
  audit	
  trail,	
  which	
  can	
  lead	
  to	
  a	
  strengthening	
  of	
  internal	
  controls.	
   C.	
  General	
  Weaknesses	
  •	
  A	
  card	
   fee/deposit	
  may	
  be	
  needed	
  which	
  has	
  raised	
  equity	
  objections	
   from	
   low-­‐	
  income	
  riders	
  •	
  Not	
  well-­‐	
  suited	
  for	
  one-­‐time	
  users	
  (e.g.,	
  visitors)	
  because	
  of	
  card	
  fee/deposit	
  •	
  Variety	
  of	
   card	
   interfaces	
   in	
  market	
  place	
   complicate	
  potential	
   to	
   integrate	
  with	
  other	
  regions	
  or	
  other	
  applications	
  Here,	
   I	
  will	
  make	
  special	
  mention	
  of	
   two	
  features	
  raised	
  by	
   interviewees:	
  discount	
  programs	
   and	
  data	
   collection.	
   	
   Finally,	
   I	
   end	
   this	
   section	
  with	
   a	
   discussion	
   on	
   the	
  criticisms	
  made	
  by	
  interviewees.	
  Both	
   McKinney	
   and	
   Paddon	
   raised	
   the	
   topic	
   of	
   managing	
   discount	
   and	
   loyalty	
  programs.	
  	
  McKinney	
  suggests	
  that,	
  for	
  parking,	
  an	
  electronic	
  payment	
  system	
  could	
  help	
  to	
  manage	
  sustainability	
  programs	
  such	
  as	
  discounted	
  parking	
  rates	
  for	
  those	
  who	
  carpool.	
  	
  Similarly,	
  Paddon	
  points	
  out	
  that	
  an	
  integrated	
  payment	
  system	
  could	
  help	
  identify	
  commuters	
  who	
  use	
  transit	
  avidly	
  during	
  the	
  week	
  so	
  that	
  they	
  can	
  be	
  given	
  a	
  discount	
  on	
  parking	
  on	
  the	
  weekend	
  (see	
  ‘Analysis’	
  section	
  for	
  more	
  on	
  this).	
  	
  Others	
   made	
   such	
   comments	
   as	
   well.	
   	
   Although	
   I	
   did	
   not	
   identify	
   an	
   existing	
  program	
  of	
  this	
  nature,	
  I	
  did	
  find	
  that	
  loyalty	
  programs	
  are	
  an	
  important	
  feature	
  of	
  transit	
  smart	
  cards	
  where	
  they	
  are	
  used	
  in	
  retail.	
  	
  In	
  Hong	
  Kong,	
  for	
  example,	
  loyalty	
  programs	
  are	
  one	
  of	
  three	
  ‘business	
  applications’	
  of	
  the	
  Octopus	
  card,	
  the	
  other	
  two	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   28	
   functions	
   being	
   ‘payment’	
   and	
   ‘access’.	
   	
   In	
   the	
  Hong	
  Kong	
   case,	
   a	
   user	
   earns	
   cash	
  value	
  every	
  time	
  a	
  purchase	
   is	
  made	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  used	
  at	
  numerous	
  partners,	
  a	
   list	
  which	
  includes	
  international	
  companies	
  such	
  as	
  McDonald’s.	
  Also	
  worth	
  rising,	
  Paddon	
  points	
  out	
  that	
  electronic	
  payment	
  systems	
  play	
  the	
  dual	
  function	
   of	
   collecting	
   data	
   about	
   their	
   users.	
   	
   Users	
   ‘tap-­‐in’	
  when	
   they	
   get	
   on	
   the	
  train	
   and	
   ‘tap-­‐out’	
  when	
   they	
   get	
   off	
   the	
   train.	
   	
   Translink	
   can	
   analyze	
   such	
   travel	
  data	
  for	
  the	
  purposes	
  of	
  improving	
  service	
  along	
  crowded	
  corridors.	
  	
  Collecting	
  the	
  data	
  from	
  electronic	
  readers	
  would	
  be	
  a	
  significant	
  improvement	
  over	
  current	
  data	
  collection	
  techniques.	
  	
  With	
  such	
  a	
  system,	
  data	
  from	
  the	
  readers	
  can	
  potentially	
  be	
  viewed	
  according	
  to	
  smaller	
  temporal	
  units	
  such	
  as	
  a	
  particular	
  time	
  of	
  a	
  particular	
  day.	
  	
  Finally,	
   although	
   the	
   use	
   of	
   smart	
   cards	
   in	
   transportation	
  were	
  widely	
   viewed	
   by	
  interviewees	
   as	
   both	
   enhancing	
   customer	
   convenience	
   and	
   bringing	
   benefits	
   to	
  agencies	
   that	
   use	
   them,	
   Richard	
   Drdul,	
   community	
   transportation	
   planner,	
  suggested	
   that	
   the	
   customer	
   and	
   business	
   benefits	
   are	
   not	
   clear.	
   	
   He	
   makes	
   the	
  point,	
   which	
   has	
   been	
   confirmed	
   through	
   this	
   report’s	
   research,	
   that	
   objective	
  studies	
   testing	
   these	
   benefits	
   have	
   not	
   been	
   conducted.	
   	
  While	
  many	
   suggest,	
   for	
  example,	
   that	
   the	
   increased	
  convenience	
  will	
   lead	
   to	
  an	
   increase	
   in	
   the	
  number	
  of	
  customers,	
  in	
  turn	
  increasing	
  revenue,	
  there	
  is	
  no	
  objective	
  evidence	
  to	
  suggest	
  this	
  is	
   the	
  case.	
   	
  Others,	
  such	
  as	
  Dave	
  Lewin	
  agree,	
  predicting	
  that	
  an	
  adoption	
  of	
  such	
  technology	
  will	
  not	
  increase	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  customers.	
  	
  One	
  study	
  out	
  of	
  the	
  United	
  States	
  has	
  examined	
  how	
  transportation	
  agencies	
  evaluate	
  smart	
  card	
  systems	
  and	
  found	
   that	
   analyses	
   across	
   agencies	
   are	
   neither	
   consistent	
   with	
   one	
   another	
   nor	
  definitive	
   to	
  provide	
  any	
  systematic	
  evaluation	
  of	
  costs	
  and	
  benefits	
  of	
  smart	
  card	
  deployment.	
   These	
   shortcomings	
   are	
   mainly	
   due	
   to:	
   (1)	
   difficulty	
   of	
   estimating	
  many	
   of	
   the	
   qualitative	
   benefits,	
   such	
   as	
   convenience	
   for	
   transfers	
   and	
  comprehensive	
   regional	
   travel	
  data,	
   (2)	
   a	
   significant	
   variation	
   in	
  quantitative	
   cost	
  estimates	
  among	
  the	
  analyses	
  for	
  unclear	
  reasons,	
  and	
  (3)	
  difficulty	
  in	
  generalizing	
  costs	
   and	
   benefits	
   among	
   cases	
   with	
   the	
   unique	
   organizational	
   structures	
   and	
  particular	
  political	
  issues	
  in	
  different	
  regions	
  (Iseki,	
  2008).	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   29	
   While	
   it	
   is	
   true	
   that	
   adequate	
   evaluation	
   are	
   not	
   generally	
   conducted,	
   customer	
  satisfaction	
   studies	
   have	
   been	
   conducted.	
   	
   Users	
   of	
   smart	
   cards	
   have	
   expressed	
  generally	
   high	
   levels	
   of	
   satisfaction	
  with	
   the	
   cards	
   and	
  programs.	
   For	
   instance,	
   in	
  Chicago,	
  93%	
  of	
  survey	
  respondents	
  were	
  satisfied	
  or	
  very	
  satisfied	
  with	
  the	
  cards,	
  and	
  86%	
  expressed	
  willingness	
   to	
   continue	
  using	
   the	
   card	
   after	
   the	
   conclusion	
  of	
  the	
  pilot	
  period	
  and	
  to	
  recommend	
  the	
  card	
  to	
  others.	
  In	
  the	
  San	
  Francisco	
  program,	
  both	
   survey	
   respondents	
   and	
   focus	
   group	
   participants	
   expressed	
   a	
   high	
   level	
   of	
  satisfaction	
   with	
   the	
   program.	
   Moreover,	
   two-­‐thirds	
   of	
   non-­‐	
   card	
   users	
   surveyed	
  said	
  that	
  they	
  are	
  “very	
  likely”	
  to	
  try	
  the	
  card.	
  	
  Finally,	
  sales	
  of	
  the	
  SmarTrip	
  card	
  in	
  Washington	
  have	
  grown	
  steadily	
  since	
  its	
  introduction,	
  despite	
  the	
  fact	
  that	
  WMATA	
  has	
  done	
  very	
  little	
  marketing	
  of	
  the	
  program	
  (Coverage,	
  2009).	
   	
   Business	
  Issues	
  In	
  the	
  case	
  where	
  regional	
  transit	
  authorities	
  and	
  service	
  providers	
  issue	
  their	
  own	
  card,	
  issues	
  such	
  as	
  fraud	
  exposure	
  and	
  liability	
  need	
  to	
  be	
  considered.	
  	
  When	
  a	
  card	
  is	
  accepted	
  outside	
  a	
  particular	
  transportation	
  network,	
  say	
  public	
  transit,	
  the	
  card	
  issuer	
  is	
  exposed	
  to	
  additional	
  losses	
  associated	
  with	
  fraud.	
  	
  These	
  are	
  expenses	
  to	
  the	
   card	
   operator.	
   	
   Partners	
   in	
   a	
   payment	
   scheme	
   must	
   consider	
   and	
   define	
   the	
  liability	
  for	
  payment	
  fraud.	
   	
  This	
  is	
  in	
  addition	
  to	
  how	
  funds	
  are	
  moved,	
  customers	
  are	
  served	
  and	
  how	
  information	
  is	
  shared	
  (or	
  not	
  shared).	
  	
  Numerous	
  articles	
  have	
  been	
  written	
  that	
  address	
  the	
  business	
  case	
  and	
  issues	
  in	
  collaborative	
  governance	
  of	
  regional	
  automated	
  payment	
  systems.	
  	
  A	
  good	
  example	
  of	
  a	
  ‘how-­‐to’	
  establish	
  and	
  operate	
  a	
  regional	
  transportation	
  payment	
  system	
  and	
  clearinghouse	
  can	
  be	
  found	
  at:	
  	
   http://www.aptastandards.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=V1JSPsB9CPI%3d&tabid=168&mid=703&language=en-­‐US.	
   	
   This	
  document	
   covers	
   key	
   terms,	
   functions	
   of	
   a	
   regional	
   payment	
   system,	
   funding	
   and	
  governance	
  structure.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   30	
   A	
  	
  critique	
  of	
  the	
  business	
  case	
  for	
  regional	
  payment	
  systems	
  will	
  be	
  covered	
  in	
  the	
  ‘Analysis’	
  section	
   in	
  more	
  detail.	
   	
  A	
  discussion	
  of	
   the	
  Vancouver	
   interviews	
  will	
  be	
  covered	
  	
  in	
  the	
  remainder	
  of	
  this	
  section.	
  Paddon	
  and	
  others	
  from	
  Translink	
  say	
  that	
  adding	
  applications	
  to	
  their	
  smart	
  card	
  will	
  be	
  simple,	
  thus	
  making	
  it	
  possible	
  for	
  parking	
  operators	
  and	
  other	
  businesses	
  to	
  utilize	
   the	
  card.	
   	
  However,	
  allowing	
   independent	
  service	
  providers	
   to	
  use	
   the	
  card	
  would	
  have	
  to	
  make	
  business	
  sense.	
   	
   In	
  other	
  words,	
  allowing	
  others	
  to	
  utilize	
  the	
  card	
  would	
  have	
  to	
  add	
  value	
  to	
  the	
  card.	
  	
  At	
  present,	
  Translink	
  is	
  focused	
  on	
  getting	
  the	
  card	
  established.	
  	
  Initially,	
  the	
  card	
  will	
  not	
  share	
  an	
  electronic	
  purse	
  like	
  Hong	
  Kong’s	
   Octopus	
   card	
   because	
   Translink	
   will	
   not	
   be	
   operating	
   a	
   central	
  clearinghouse.	
   	
   In	
   addition,	
   there	
   are	
   no	
   current	
   plans	
   to	
   extend	
   the	
   usage	
   of	
   the	
  card.	
   	
   Having	
   said	
   this,	
   Paddon	
   did	
   say	
   that	
   extending	
   the	
   card’s	
   usage	
   could	
  potentially	
   create	
   revenue	
   opportunities	
   for	
   Translink	
   as	
   well	
   as	
   enhance	
  Translink’s	
  business	
  image.	
  Others	
   commented	
  on	
   the	
  business	
   logic	
  of	
   collaborating	
   to	
   release	
  a	
   joint	
  mobile	
  payment	
   system.	
   	
   The	
   joint	
   payment	
   system	
   discussed	
   in	
   the	
   interviews	
   did	
   not	
  necessarily	
   take	
   the	
   form	
   of	
   a	
   smart	
   card.	
   	
   McKinney	
   suggested	
   that	
   the	
   selling	
  points	
  to	
  Easy	
  Park	
  are	
  more	
  efficient	
  accounting,	
  more	
  convenience	
  for	
  customers,	
  enhanced	
  brand	
  and	
  the	
  possibility	
  of	
  generating	
  new	
  business.	
  	
  As	
  with	
  Translink,	
  brand	
  recognition	
  was	
  stressed.	
  	
  McKinney	
  points	
  out	
  that	
  25%	
  of	
  people	
  recognize	
  the	
   EasyPark	
   brand	
  while	
   90%	
   recognize	
   the	
   Impark	
   brand.	
   	
  However,	
  McKinney	
  suggests	
   all	
   these	
   benefits	
   are	
   limited	
   because,	
   in	
   parking,	
   customers	
   ultimately	
  choose	
  parking	
  based	
  on	
  proximity	
  to	
  their	
  final	
  destination.	
  	
  Finally,	
  McKinney	
  also	
  suggests	
   that	
   a	
   pre-­‐requisite	
   to	
   adopting	
   an	
   electronic	
   payment	
   system	
   is	
   that	
   it	
  must	
   communicate	
  with	
   enforcement.	
   	
   In	
   other	
  words,	
   enforcement	
   officers	
  must	
  know	
  who	
  has	
  paid	
  for	
  parking	
  and	
  who	
  has	
  not,	
  which	
  would	
  require	
  a	
  means	
  by	
  which	
   to	
   download	
   information	
   electronically	
   to	
   a	
   portable	
   device.	
   	
   Another	
   pre-­‐requisite	
   is	
   that	
   the	
   system	
   be	
   provided	
   at	
   little	
   or	
   no	
   upfront	
   cost.	
   	
   Unlike	
  Translink’s	
   future	
   smart	
   card	
   and	
   faregate	
   system,	
   EasyPark’s	
   current	
   mobile	
  payment	
  scheme,	
  operated	
  through	
  Verrus,	
  did	
  not	
  cost	
  anything	
  to	
  establish.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   31	
   Dave	
   Harkness,	
   Director,	
   Parking	
   &	
   Ground	
   Transportation	
   for	
   the	
   Vancouver	
  Airport	
  Authority,	
  points	
  out	
  that	
  there	
  is	
  a	
  different	
  culture	
  at	
  EasyPark	
  because	
  of	
  the	
   company’s	
   relationship	
   with	
   the	
   city.	
   	
   Dave	
   Harkness’	
   opinion	
   is	
   that	
   any	
  integrated	
   system	
   that	
   involves	
  parking	
  would	
  be	
  best	
   started	
  with	
  EasyPark	
   in	
   a	
  manner	
  that	
  leaves	
  it	
  open	
  to	
  others	
  joining	
  later.	
  	
  Harkness	
  also	
  echoes	
  McKinney’s	
  (and	
  others)	
  sentiments	
  that	
  brand	
  is	
  of	
  central	
  importance,	
  even	
  though	
  parking	
  is	
  ultimately	
  driven	
  by	
  location.	
  	
  An	
  example	
  of	
  this	
  is	
  how	
  the	
  Verrus	
  system	
  had	
  to	
  be	
  rebranded	
   Impark	
   Wireless	
   when	
   it	
   provides	
   services	
   to	
   Impark	
   customers.	
  	
  Harkness	
  suggests	
  that	
  the	
  Verrus/Impark	
  system	
  functionally	
  works	
  great,	
  but	
  that	
  the	
  public	
  needs	
  to	
  be	
  educated	
  so	
  that	
  they	
  think	
  it	
  is	
  convenient	
  too.	
  Dave	
   Lewin	
   of	
   ZipCar	
   points	
   out	
   that	
   their	
   electronic	
   access	
   system	
   is	
   operated	
  through	
   Boston,	
   so	
   changes	
   made	
   in	
   Vancouver	
   have	
   to	
   be	
   made	
   elsewhere,	
  although	
   this	
   would	
   not	
   be	
   the	
   case	
   with	
   the	
   Car	
   Co-­‐op.	
   	
   Levin’s	
   pre-­‐requisite	
   is	
  transparency	
   and	
   accountability.	
   	
   A	
   drawback	
   that	
   Lewin	
   sees	
   for	
   an	
   integrated	
  system	
   is	
   that	
   competitors	
   would	
   be	
   put	
   on	
   a	
   list	
   alongside	
   ZipCar,	
   showing	
  customers	
   that	
   they	
   have	
   another	
   option	
   that	
   they	
   didn’t	
   know	
   they	
   had	
   before.	
  	
  Lewin	
  also	
  points	
  out	
   that	
  he	
  has	
  been	
  approached	
  before	
   for	
  an	
   intertwined	
  card	
  and	
  discusses	
  how	
  it	
  would	
  have	
  hurt	
  Zipcar’s	
  brand.	
  	
  With	
  respect	
  to	
  Brand,	
  Lewin	
  also	
  points	
  out	
   the	
   importance	
  of	
  having	
  an	
   independent	
  card	
  with	
   the	
  company’s	
  logo.	
  	
  Every	
  time	
  a	
  customer	
  takes	
  out	
  the	
  card,	
  he	
  or	
  she	
  sees	
  the	
  company’s	
  logo.	
  	
  An	
  integrated	
  card	
  would	
  not	
  leave	
  the	
  same	
  brand	
  impression	
  on	
  the	
  customer.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
   the	
   card	
   has	
   other	
   functions	
   including	
   contact	
   numbers	
   for	
   ZipCar,	
   the	
  customers	
  ID	
  number	
  and	
  instructions	
  for	
  accessing	
  the	
  company’s	
  cars.	
   	
   Card	
  Issuing	
  Versus	
  Card	
  Accepting	
  As	
  mentioned	
  in	
  the	
  previous	
  ‘National	
  and	
  International	
  Practices’	
  section,	
  several	
  agencies	
   are	
   transitioning	
   to	
   an	
   ‘open	
   source’	
   payment	
   system,	
   meaning	
   that	
  agencies’	
  payment	
  systems	
  are	
  built	
  to	
  accept	
  cards	
  from	
  third	
  parties.	
  	
  Third-­‐party	
  cards	
   can	
   be	
   accepted	
   both	
   in	
   place	
   of	
   and	
   in	
   conjunction	
   with	
   an	
   agency’s	
   self-­‐ Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   32	
   issued	
  cards.	
   	
  Two	
  North	
  American	
  examples	
  stand	
  out.	
   	
  As	
  discussed	
  earlier,	
  New	
  York	
  City’s	
   three	
  transit	
  agencies	
  are	
  together	
  piloting	
  readers	
  at	
   the	
   faregate	
  that	
  allow	
  customers	
  to	
  use	
  third-­‐party	
  contactless	
  prepaid,	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards,	
  along	
  with	
   other	
   devices	
   such	
   as	
   NFC-­‐enabled	
   cell	
   phones	
   and	
   key	
   chains,	
   issued	
   by	
  financial	
   institutions	
   to	
   be	
   scanned	
   directly	
   at	
   the	
   faregate	
   for	
   both	
   payment	
   and	
  access	
  to	
  transit.	
  	
  Utah	
  is	
  already	
  using	
  a	
  similar	
  system	
  that	
  not	
  only	
  accepts	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards,	
  but	
  other	
  cards	
  such	
  as	
  ski	
  passes	
  that	
  have	
  been	
  built	
  to	
  conform	
  to	
  the	
  system’s	
  standards.	
  	
  Paddon	
  points	
  out	
  that	
  Translink’s	
  system	
  may	
  also	
  allow	
  Visa	
   and	
   MasterCard’s	
   proximity	
   chips	
   to	
   be	
   scanned	
   directly	
   at	
   the	
   gate,	
   giving	
  customers	
   payment	
   options	
   that	
   go	
   beyond	
   the	
   Translink	
   smart	
   card.	
   	
   Paddon	
  points	
   out	
   that	
   third	
   parties	
   such	
   as	
   Visa	
   and	
  MasterCard	
   are	
   not	
   quite	
   ready	
   to	
  deploy	
  their	
  cards	
  to	
   the	
  mass	
  transit	
  market	
  (but	
  does	
  expect	
   they	
  will	
  step	
   in	
  at	
  some	
  point)	
  so	
  transit	
  agencies	
  are	
  stepping	
  in	
  with	
  their	
  own	
  card	
  in	
  the	
  meantime.	
  It	
  is	
  apparent	
  from	
  their	
  websites	
  that	
  such	
  as	
  Visa	
  and	
  MasterCard	
  no	
  longer	
  wish	
  to	
  be	
  viewed	
  solely	
  as	
  credit	
  card	
  companies.	
   	
  While	
  it	
  is	
  true	
  that	
  such	
  companies	
  began	
  as	
  credit	
  card	
  companies,	
  they	
  have	
  grown	
  into	
  much	
  more	
  generic	
  “payment	
  product	
   and	
   solution	
   companies”.	
   	
  MasterCard	
  maintains	
   a	
  webpage	
   summarizing	
  the	
   company’s	
   milestones	
   in	
   introducing	
   cashless	
   payments	
   into	
   the	
   transit	
  environment:	
   http://www.mastercard.com/us/company/en/whatwedo/paypass_in_action.html.	
  	
  The	
   products	
   they	
   offer	
   go	
   beyond	
   credit	
   cards	
   to	
   include	
   debit,	
   prepaid,	
  commercial,	
   chip	
  and	
   contactless	
   cards.	
   	
   In	
   addition,	
   they	
  offer	
  payment	
  mediums	
  besides	
  cards.	
   	
  For	
  example,	
   in	
  May	
  2007,	
  MasterCard	
   launched	
  a	
  watch	
  equipped	
  with	
   PayPass	
   technology.	
   	
   Another	
   example	
   is	
   the	
   previously	
   mentioned	
   Nokia	
  phone	
  equipped	
  with	
  Visa	
  PayWave	
  technology	
  in	
  Malaysia,	
  which	
  cannot	
  be	
  used	
  at	
  the	
   transit	
   farebox,	
  and	
   the	
  application	
   that	
  allows	
   the	
   iPhone	
   to	
  be	
  waved	
  at	
  any	
  contactless	
   reader,	
   including	
   fareboxes	
   in	
   New	
   York	
   City.	
   	
   Traditional	
   credit	
   card	
  companies,	
  now	
  more	
  generic	
  “payment	
  product	
  and	
  solution”	
  companies	
  are	
  well	
  positioned	
   in	
   terms	
   of	
   technology	
   and	
   customer	
   account	
   management	
   to	
   offer	
  products	
   and	
   solutions	
   that	
   address	
   the	
   distinct	
   needs	
   of	
   the	
   transportation	
  industry.	
   	
   Transit	
   agencies	
   in	
   other	
   places,	
   such	
   as	
   Chicago	
   and	
   Vancouver,	
   are	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   33	
   building	
  new	
  systems	
  with	
  the	
  expectation	
  that,	
  one	
  day,	
  they	
  will	
  not	
  have	
  to	
  issue	
  their	
  own	
  cards	
  because	
  third-­‐parties	
  will	
  not	
  only	
  step	
  in	
  with	
  their	
  own	
  cards,	
  but	
  with	
  other	
  NFC-­‐enabled	
  devices.	
   	
   International	
  Standards	
  An	
   important	
   standard	
   to	
   pay	
   attention	
   to	
   when	
   planning	
   for	
   a	
   new	
   electronic	
  payment	
   system	
   is	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
   14443	
   standard	
   for	
   contactless	
   integrated	
   circuit	
  cards.	
  	
  It	
  is	
  a	
  non-­‐binding	
  standard	
  that	
  comes	
  out	
  of	
  a	
  joint	
  technical	
  committee	
  of	
  the	
   International	
   Organization	
   for	
   Standardization	
   (ISO)	
   and	
   the	
   International	
  Electrotechnical	
   Commission	
   (IEC),	
   both	
   of	
   which	
   are	
   made	
   up	
   of	
   national	
  committees	
   that	
   include	
   governmental	
   agencies,	
   professional	
   societies,	
   trade	
  associations	
  and	
  standards	
  developers	
   from	
  national	
  standards	
  bodies.	
   	
  Cards	
  that	
  meet	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
   14443	
   standard	
   are	
   of	
   two	
   types:	
   Type	
   A	
   and	
   Type	
   B,	
   each	
   of	
  which	
  has	
  particular	
  specifications	
  for	
  physical	
  characteristics,	
  power	
  and	
  interface,	
  initialization	
  and	
  anti-­‐collision	
  and	
  transmission	
  protocols.	
  	
  The	
  standard	
  is	
  not	
  only	
  relevant	
  to	
  transit	
  smart	
  cards,	
  but	
  also	
  to	
  contactless	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards.	
  	
  For	
   example,	
   Cubic,	
   a	
   company	
   leading	
   in	
   automated	
   fare	
   collection	
   systems	
   for	
  public	
   transport	
   in	
  North	
  America,	
  developed	
  a	
  contactless	
  card	
  prior	
   to	
   the	
  2001	
  ratification	
  of	
   the	
  ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  standard.	
   	
  This	
  technology	
  was	
  used	
  as	
  the	
  basis	
  for	
   the	
   initial	
   transit	
   smart	
   card	
   deployments	
   in	
  Washington	
  D.C.	
   (SmarTrip)	
   and	
  Chicago	
   (ChicagoCard).	
   Upon	
   ratification	
   of	
   ISO/IEC	
   14443,	
   Cubic	
   developed	
   a	
  contactless	
  card	
  processor	
  (the	
  Tri-­‐Reader)	
   that	
  supports	
  both	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  protocols	
   (Type	
   A	
   and	
   Type	
   B)	
   and	
   which	
   has	
   been	
   the	
   basis	
   for	
   all	
   subsequent	
  Cubic	
  transit	
  cards,	
  including	
  London's	
  Oyster	
  Card.	
  	
  As	
  of	
  2004,	
  the	
  ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  standard	
   for	
   contactless	
   cards	
   is	
   the	
   standard	
   that	
  most,	
   although	
   not	
   all,	
   transit	
  agencies	
  include	
  in	
  their	
  fare	
  collection	
  system	
  designs	
  (APTA,	
  2004).	
  Given	
   the	
   potential	
   overlapping	
   configurations	
   of	
   transit	
   cards	
   and	
   the	
   prepaid,	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards	
  of	
  financial	
  institutions,	
  it	
  is	
  also	
  worth	
  mentioning	
  the	
  EMV	
  standard	
  for	
  interoperability.	
  	
  The	
  EMV	
  acronym	
  comes	
  from	
  the	
  initial	
  letters	
  of	
  the	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   34	
   three	
   companies	
   that	
   created	
   it:	
   Europay,	
   MasterCard	
   and	
   Visa,	
   although	
   the	
  company’s	
  four	
  current	
  members,	
  each	
  with	
  an	
  equal	
  ¼	
  of	
  the	
  voting	
  share,	
  are	
  JCB	
  International,	
   American	
   Express,	
   MasterCard	
   and	
   Visa.	
   	
   Together,	
   they	
   define	
   the	
  interaction	
  at	
  the	
  physical,	
  electrical,	
  data	
  and	
  application	
  levels	
  between	
  integrated	
  circuit	
   cards	
   and	
   the	
   card	
   processing	
   devices	
   for	
   financial	
   transactions.	
   	
   As	
   is	
  increasingly	
  the	
  case	
  with	
  transit	
  cards,	
  the	
  EMV	
  standard	
  is	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  standard	
  for	
  contactless	
  cards	
  (and	
  the	
  ISO/IEC	
  7816	
  for	
  contact	
  cards).	
  	
  	
  An	
   organization	
   to	
   pay	
   attention	
   to	
   regarding	
   standards	
   for	
   transit	
   cards	
   is	
   the	
  American	
   Public	
   Transportation	
   Association	
   (APTA)	
   Standards	
   Development	
  Program,	
   a	
   non-­‐profit	
   international	
   association	
   of	
   more	
   than	
   1,500	
   public	
   and	
  private	
   member	
   organizations	
   that	
   claims	
   to	
   represent	
   over	
   ninety	
   percent	
   of	
  persons	
   using	
   public	
   transportation	
   in	
   the	
   United	
   States	
   and	
   Canada.	
   	
   Under	
   the	
  auspices	
   of	
   the	
   APTA,	
   the	
   Universal	
   Transit	
   Fare	
   System	
   (UTFS)	
   Task	
   Force	
   was	
  established	
  with	
  the	
  mission	
  of	
  creating	
  an	
  open	
  architecture	
  payment	
  environment	
  and	
   to	
   integrate	
   independent	
   payment	
   systems.	
   	
   A	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  standard,	
  the	
  EMV	
  standard,	
  with	
  consideration	
  of	
  the	
  APTA	
   Standards	
   Development	
   Program	
   would	
   ensure	
   the	
   widest	
   possible	
   card	
  interoperability	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  the	
  potential	
  to	
   leverage	
  the	
  infrastructure	
  and	
  services	
  already	
  established	
  by	
  the	
  financial	
  industry.	
   	
   Payment	
  Classification	
  and	
  Other	
  Technologies	
  Mobile	
   payment	
   systems	
   and	
   approaches	
   are	
   driven	
   by	
   a	
   variety	
   of	
   concepts	
   and	
  technologies.	
   	
   In	
   this	
  section	
   I	
  speak	
  more	
  broadly	
  about	
  mobile	
  payment	
  systems	
  (i.e.	
  the	
  discussion	
  covers	
  retail	
  payment	
  as	
  well)	
  but	
  follow	
  it	
  with	
  a	
  discussion	
  of	
  transportation	
   payment	
   technologies	
   in	
   transit,	
   parking,	
   tolls,	
   carshare	
   and	
  bikeshare.	
   	
   This	
   section	
   draws	
   on	
   Stamatis	
   Karnouskos	
   and	
   Fraunhofer	
   Fokus’	
   Mobile	
   Payment:	
   a	
   Journey	
   Through	
   Existing	
   Procedures	
   and	
   Standardization	
   Initiatives	
   to	
  summarize	
  some	
  of	
  the	
  essential	
  concepts	
  and	
  technologies	
  in	
  mobile	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   35	
   payment.	
   	
  Grouping	
   the	
   technologies	
  according	
   to	
  attribute	
  does	
   this.	
   	
  Specifically,	
  the	
  technologies	
  are	
  grouped	
  according	
  to	
  location,	
  value	
  and	
  charging	
  method.	
   A.	
  Payments	
  Grouped	
  Based	
  On	
  Location	
  •	
   Remote	
   Transactions:	
   Transactions	
   are	
   conducted	
   independent	
   of	
   the	
   user’s	
  location.	
   Examples	
   include	
   prepaid	
   top-­‐up	
   services,	
   delivery	
   of	
   digital	
   services,	
  m-­‐tickets,	
  digital	
  cash,	
  peer-­‐to-­‐peer	
  payments,	
  etc.	
  	
  	
  •	
  Proximity/Local	
  Transactions:	
  Transactions	
  occur	
  where	
  the	
  mobile	
  device	
  locally	
  communicates	
  (e.g.,	
  via	
  Bluetooth,	
  IrDA,	
  RFID,	
  Near	
  Field	
  Communication)	
  with	
  a	
  POS/ATM,	
   e.g.	
   payments	
   at	
   unattended	
   machines,	
   mParking,	
   payments	
   at	
  traditional	
  POS,	
  or	
  money	
  withdrawals	
  from	
  a	
  bank’s	
  ATM.	
   B.	
  Payments	
  Grouped	
  Based	
  On	
  Value	
  •	
  Micro-­Payments:	
  These	
  are	
  the	
  lowest	
  values,	
  typically	
  under	
  $2.	
  Micro-­‐payments	
  are	
   expected	
   to	
  boost	
  mobile	
   commerce	
  as	
  well	
   as	
  pay-­‐per-­‐view/click	
   charging	
  schemas.	
  •	
  Mini-­Payments:	
   These	
   are	
   payments	
   between	
   $2	
   and	
   $20,	
   targeting	
   commonly	
  purchased	
  small	
  items.	
  •	
  Macro-­Payments:	
  These	
  payments	
  are	
  typically	
  more	
  than	
  $20.	
   C.	
  Payments	
  Grouped	
  Based	
  On	
  Charging	
  Method	
  •	
  Pay-­now:	
  In	
  this	
  method	
  the	
  user	
  pays	
  in	
  real-­‐time	
  or	
  close	
  to	
  real-­‐time	
  (based	
  on	
  technical	
  limits),	
  with	
  the	
  funds	
  immediately	
  available	
  to	
  the	
  merchant	
  (same	
  as	
  cash).	
  •	
  Post-­paid:	
  This	
  is	
  the	
  most	
  common	
  method	
  used	
  in	
  electronic/mobile	
  commerce	
  transactions	
  today.	
  Mobile	
  network	
  operators	
  use	
  the	
  phone-­‐bill	
  based	
  charging	
  method	
  and	
  the	
  account-­‐based	
  method	
  is	
  by	
  banks	
  and	
  credit	
  card	
  companies.	
  •	
  Pre-­‐paid:	
  This	
  is	
  a	
  common	
  charging	
  method	
  for	
  mobile	
  network	
  operators	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  third-­‐party	
  service	
  providers	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  be	
  able	
  to	
  evaluate	
  only	
  that	
  the	
  user	
  is	
   capable	
   of	
   paying.	
   	
   A	
   transit	
   card	
   onto	
   which	
   money	
   must	
   be	
   loaded	
   is	
   an	
  example.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   36	
   •	
   Near	
   “real-­‐time”:	
   This	
   method	
   includes	
   solutions	
   that	
   charge	
   the	
   user	
   of	
   the	
  service	
  in	
  a	
  reasonable	
  amount	
  of	
  time.	
  A	
  typical	
  example	
  of	
  this	
  category	
  is	
  the	
  debit	
  card,	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  systems	
  that	
  do	
  real-­‐time	
  fund	
  reservation,	
  but	
  the	
  clearing	
  and	
  fund	
  transfer	
  happens	
  later	
  and	
  typically	
  at	
  the	
  end	
  of	
  the	
  day.	
  The	
  timeframe	
  between	
  the	
  reservation	
  and	
  the	
  clearing	
  can	
  be	
  handled	
  by	
  the	
  bank	
  according	
  to	
  its	
  risk	
  management	
  policy.	
  Canada	
   is	
   ahead	
   of	
   other	
   countries	
   like	
   the	
   United	
   States	
   in	
   introducing	
   general	
  forms	
  of	
  mobile	
  payment	
  technologies.	
  	
  Canada’s	
  three	
  largest	
  wireless	
  carriers,	
  Bell	
  Canada,	
   Rogers	
   Communications	
   Inc.,	
   and	
   TELUS	
   Corporation	
   formed	
   a	
   joint	
  venture	
   in	
   2005	
   called	
   EnStream	
   which,	
   as	
   stated	
   on	
   its	
   website,	
   is	
   “working	
   to	
  become	
   a	
   driving	
   force	
   at	
   the	
   heart	
   of	
   mobile	
   commerce”.	
   	
   In	
   2009,	
   EnStream	
  launched	
  a	
  mobile	
  payment	
  service	
  that	
  allows	
  mobile	
  phone	
  users	
  with	
  a	
  plan	
  with	
  Bell,	
  Solo,	
  PC	
  Mobile,	
  Rogers,	
  Fido	
  or	
  Telus	
  to	
  send,	
  request	
  and	
  receive	
  money	
  via	
  their	
  mobile	
  phones	
  using	
  an	
  account	
  the	
  user	
  sets	
  up	
  or	
  from	
  their	
  credit	
  card.	
  	
  	
  The	
  company	
  has	
  also	
  announced	
  that	
  it	
   is	
  testing	
  a	
  tag	
  that,	
  when	
  attached	
  to	
  the	
  back	
  of	
  your	
  phone,	
  can	
  allow	
  you	
  to	
  pay	
  for	
  goods	
  with	
  a	
  quick	
  tap	
  at	
  locations	
  with	
  PayPass	
  sensors.	
   	
  The	
  technology	
  does	
  not	
  hinge	
  on	
  handset	
  manufacturer	
  making	
  elaborate	
   upgrades,	
   or	
   vendors	
   to	
   adopt	
   niche	
   hardware,	
   since	
   PayPass	
   terminals	
  are	
  already	
  being	
  adopted	
  by	
  merchants	
  who	
  take	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards.	
   	
  There	
  is	
  no	
   indication	
   that	
   EnStream	
   itself	
   is	
   piloting	
   transportation-­‐specific	
   applications,	
  but	
   with	
   its	
   links	
   to	
   MasterCard’s	
   PayPass	
   platform,	
   it	
   is	
   a	
   mobile	
   payments	
  company	
  worth	
  paying	
  attention	
  to,	
  or	
  even	
  partnering	
  with.	
  Mobile	
  devices	
  are	
  increasingly	
  able	
  to	
  process	
  both	
  proximity/local	
  transactions	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  its	
  remote	
  transactions,	
  meaning	
  that,	
  in	
  the	
  future,	
  users	
  may	
  use	
  a	
  phone	
  where	
   once	
   a	
   separate	
   card	
   was	
   required.	
   	
   It	
   is	
   also	
   increasingly	
   the	
   case	
   that	
  traditional	
  debit	
  and	
  credit	
  cards	
  are	
  able	
  to	
  process	
  the	
  micro	
  and	
  mini	
  payments	
  as	
   conveniently	
   as	
   transit	
   cards	
   have	
   been	
   able	
   to.	
   	
   For	
   example,	
   Hong	
   Kong’s	
  Octopus	
   card	
   is	
   not	
   only	
   used	
   for	
   transit’s	
  micro	
   and	
  mini	
   payments,	
   but	
   also	
   for	
  micro	
   and	
  mini	
   payments	
   at	
   convenience	
   stores,	
   snack	
   shops	
   and	
   other	
   retailers.	
  	
  Debit	
   and	
   credit	
   cards	
   have	
   traditionally	
   been	
   cumbersome	
   for	
   such	
   small	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   37	
   purchases.	
   	
  However,	
   it	
   is	
   increasingly	
   the	
   case	
   that	
  debit	
   and	
  credit	
   cards	
  do	
  not	
  require	
   signatures	
   or	
   pin	
   codes	
   for	
   smaller	
   purchases,	
  meaning	
   that	
   the	
   payment	
  procedures	
   of	
   contactless	
   prepaid,	
   debit	
   and	
   credit	
   cards	
   are	
   increasingly	
  functionally	
  equivalent	
  to	
  transit	
  cards	
  such	
  as	
  the	
  Octopus.	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   38	
   Analysis:	
  Collaboration	
  Over	
  Standards	
  is	
  Most	
  Practical	
  Vancouver	
   is	
   a	
   unique	
   case	
   because;	
   as	
   is	
   only	
   the	
   case	
   in	
   select	
   other	
   cities	
   like	
  Chicago,	
   most	
   regional	
   transportation	
   projects	
   are	
  managed	
   by	
   a	
   single	
   agency	
   –	
  Translink.	
   	
   In	
   Vancouver,	
   an	
   automated	
   fare	
   collection	
   system	
   is	
   being	
   developed	
  that	
   will	
   be	
   owned	
   by	
   Translink	
   to	
   serve	
   users	
   of	
   Translink	
   services	
   exclusively.	
  	
  Although	
  Translink	
  has	
  said	
  it	
  is	
  open	
  to	
  allowing	
  other	
  entities	
  to	
  join	
  the	
  payment	
  network	
   they	
  are	
   creating,	
  no	
  official	
   initiating	
   steps	
  have	
  been	
   taken,	
  making	
   the	
  Vancouver	
   region	
   an	
   exception	
   when	
   it	
   comes	
   to	
   what	
   is	
   generally	
   a	
   multi-­‐stakeholder	
   approach	
   to	
   a	
   unified	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system.	
   	
   In	
   many	
   ways,	
  however,	
  such	
  steps	
  are	
  unnecessary	
  because	
  Translink	
  already	
  brings	
  together	
  the	
  region’s	
  major	
  transportation	
  operators.	
  	
  Once	
  fully	
  rolled-­‐out,	
  the	
  Translink	
  smart	
  card	
  will	
  be	
  usable	
   for	
  payment	
  with	
  SkyTrain,	
  SeaBus,	
  buses	
  and	
  other	
  operators	
  that	
   fall	
   under	
   the	
   Translink	
   umbrella.	
   	
   The	
   extent	
   of	
   this	
   payment	
   system’s	
  coverage	
  will	
  be	
  equivalent	
  to	
  other	
  similar	
  regional	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems	
  in	
  North	
  America.	
  The	
   Vancouver	
   region	
   should	
   strive	
   to	
   achieve	
   interoperability	
   beyond	
   the	
  Translink	
  system	
  for	
  several	
  reasons.	
  1. Carrying	
  numerous	
  payment	
  cards,	
  pay	
  stubs	
  and	
  tickets	
  is	
  cumbersome	
  and	
  the	
  technology	
  exists	
  to	
  improve	
  upon	
  the	
  current	
  system.	
  	
  From	
  a	
  customer-­‐centric	
   point	
   of	
   view,	
   an	
   integrated	
   payment	
   system	
   for	
   transportation	
  makes	
  sense	
  because	
  it	
  is	
  only	
  necessary	
  to	
  obtain	
  a	
  single	
  card,	
  thus	
  making	
  traveling	
  more	
  convenient	
  for	
  both	
  residents	
  and	
  visitors	
  to	
  the	
  city.	
  2. Electronic	
  payment	
   systems	
   in	
  other	
   cities,	
   especially	
  Asia	
   and	
  Europe,	
   but	
  also	
   in	
   North	
   America,	
   are	
   more	
   competitive	
   because	
   they	
   span	
   a	
   greater	
  array	
   of	
   services,	
   making	
   access	
   and	
   mobility	
   convenient	
   relative	
   to	
  Vancouver.	
  3. Vancouver’s	
  population	
  is	
  technically	
  sophisticated,	
  with	
  a	
  high	
  usage	
  rate	
  of	
  debit	
  cards,	
  credit	
  cards	
  and	
  mobile	
  phones.	
   	
  Therefore,	
  we	
  can	
  expect	
   that	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   39	
   new	
  technologies,	
  where	
  they	
  increase	
  convenience,	
  would	
  likely	
  be	
  utilized	
  in	
  this	
  region.	
  4. New	
   modes	
   of	
   transportation	
   such	
   as	
   bike	
   share	
   and	
   car	
   share	
   are	
  challenging	
  the	
  traditional	
  dichotomy	
  of	
  transit	
  users	
  versus	
  drivers,	
  thus	
  we	
  can	
   expect	
   Vancouverites	
   to	
   increasingly	
   envision	
   themselves	
   utilizing	
  multiple	
  modes	
  of	
   transportation,	
   rather	
   than	
  being	
   exclusively	
   a	
   driver	
   or	
  transit	
  rider.	
  	
  5. Many	
   of	
   Vancouver’s	
   operators	
   are	
   already	
   moving	
   to	
   electronic	
   payment	
  systems	
   anyway,	
   but	
   lack	
   coordination,	
   meaning	
   that	
   there	
   could	
   be	
  challenges	
   for	
   future	
   interoperability	
   and	
   global	
   acceptance	
   in	
   Vancouver.	
  	
  Coordinating	
   the	
   purchases	
   of	
   expensive	
   infrastructure	
   would	
   not	
   only	
  increase	
   convenience	
   and	
   regional	
   competitiveness,	
   but,	
   potentially,	
   would	
  be	
   in	
   the	
   interests	
   of	
   the	
   businesses	
   who	
   are	
   already	
   purchasing	
   these	
  technologies	
  anyway.	
  The	
  lack	
  of	
  consistent	
  and	
  systematic	
  evaluation	
  of	
  costs	
  and	
  benefits	
  of	
  integrated	
  electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems,	
   however,	
   suggests	
   that	
   decisions	
   over	
  whether	
  or	
  not	
  to	
  adopt	
  a	
  regional	
  electronic	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  should	
  be	
  left	
   to	
   individual	
   service	
   providers.	
   	
   As	
   discussed,	
   there	
   exists	
   difficulty	
   in	
  generalizing	
   the	
   costs	
   and	
   benefits	
   among	
   cases	
   with	
   unique	
   organizational	
  structures	
  and	
  issues.	
  	
  This	
  makes	
  coordination	
  among	
  service	
  providers	
  in	
  a	
  large	
  region	
  such	
  as	
  Vancouver	
  complicated,	
  even	
  unlikely.	
   	
  The	
  second	
  reason	
   is	
   that	
  a	
  high	
   degree	
   of	
   coordination	
  would	
   be	
   necessary	
   and	
   expensive	
   new	
   bureaucratic	
  structures	
   would	
   have	
   to	
   be	
   constructed.	
   	
   For	
   example,	
   service	
   providers	
   would	
  need	
   to	
   collaborate	
   on	
   funding,	
   timelines	
   and	
   the	
   creation	
   of	
   a	
   clearinghouse.	
  	
  Provisions	
  would	
  need	
  to	
  be	
  made	
  for	
  how	
  funds	
  are	
  moved,	
  customers	
  are	
  served	
  and	
   information	
   is	
   shared	
   (or	
   not	
   shared)	
   in	
   addition	
   to	
   how	
   individual	
   service	
  provider	
  that	
  request	
  systematic	
  changes	
  or	
  to	
  opt	
  out	
  of	
  the	
  system	
  are	
  dealt	
  with.	
  In	
   addition	
   to	
   these	
   complicated	
   logistical	
   issues,	
   Paddon,	
   McKinney,	
   Lewin	
   and	
  Harkness	
   all	
   caution	
   that	
   the	
   success	
  of	
   an	
   integrated	
   regional	
  payment	
   system	
   is	
  dependent	
   on	
   complimentary	
   business	
   interests.	
   	
   In	
   particular,	
   their	
   respective	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   40	
   businesses	
  are	
  only	
  interested	
  in	
  adopting	
  a	
  common	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  if	
  it	
   is	
   expected	
   to	
   lead	
   to	
   an	
   increase	
   in	
   revenue,	
   enhancement	
   of	
   brand	
   or	
   a	
   cost	
  savings.	
   	
  As	
  already	
  pointed	
  out,	
   the	
  benefits	
  of	
  an	
   integrated	
  payment	
  system	
  are	
  not	
  proven,	
  meaning	
  that	
  there	
  will	
  be	
  a	
   large	
  degree	
  of	
  uncertainty	
  for	
   individual	
  service	
  providers	
  that	
  are	
  asked	
  to	
  join.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  partners	
  in	
  a	
  payment	
  scheme	
  must	
   consider	
   and	
  define	
   the	
   liability	
   for	
   payment	
   fraud	
   and	
   other	
   contingencies.	
  	
  Therefore,	
  even	
  if	
  business	
  issues	
  align	
  at	
  present,	
  they	
  will	
  be	
  subject	
  to	
  change	
  and	
  the	
  opting-­‐out	
  of	
  individual	
  service	
  providers,	
  thus	
  rendering	
  a	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  unstable	
  and	
  creating	
  uncertainty	
  for	
  the	
  consumer.	
  Having	
   said	
   this,	
   an	
   integrated	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   can	
   be	
  achieved	
   without	
   collaboration	
   over	
   funding,	
   timelines,	
   clearinghouse,	
   provisions	
  for	
  funds	
  movement	
  and	
  the	
  sharing	
  of	
  information.	
  	
  Rather,	
  stakeholders	
  can	
  come	
  together	
  and	
  collaborate	
  over	
  a	
  broad	
  set	
  of	
   standards	
   that	
  define	
   the	
  parameters	
  that	
   must	
   be	
   operated	
   within	
   to	
   ensure	
   interoperability.	
   	
   In	
   this	
   case,	
   other	
  considerations	
  are	
  left	
  to	
  individual	
  service	
  providers.	
  	
  Collaboration	
  over	
  standards	
  is	
  not	
  only	
  a	
  much	
  simpler	
  process,	
  but	
  small	
  and	
  large	
  service	
  providers	
  alike	
  retain	
  the	
   freedom	
  to	
  purchase	
   the	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  that	
  works	
  best	
   for	
   their	
  respective	
   priorities,	
   while	
   sub-­‐groups	
   of	
   service	
   providers	
   are	
   also	
   still	
   free	
   to	
  collaborate	
   should	
   their	
   interests	
   happen	
   to	
   align	
   and/or	
   if	
   they	
   can	
   benefit	
   by	
  economies	
  of	
  scale.	
  The	
   trend	
   is	
   to	
   move	
   away	
   from	
   closed	
   systems	
   to	
   those	
   that	
   accept	
   third-­‐party	
  cards,	
   especially	
   those	
   issued	
   by	
   financial	
   institutions.	
   	
   Robust	
   international	
  standards	
  based	
  on	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
  14443	
   and	
  EMV	
   standard	
   simplify	
   the	
  process	
   of	
  selecting	
   a	
   regional	
   standard	
   on	
  which	
   to	
   base	
   an	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
  system.	
   	
   Individual	
   institutions,	
   such	
   as	
   Translink,	
   are	
   more	
   likely	
   in	
   the	
   past	
   to	
  select	
  a	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  system	
  that	
  conforms	
  to	
  these	
  standards,	
  but	
  this	
  is	
  not	
  guaranteed	
  since	
  international	
  standards	
  are	
  not	
  compulsory	
  and	
  not	
  all	
  technology	
  is	
  built	
  to	
  this	
  standard.	
  	
  In	
  addition,	
  while	
  evidence	
  to	
  suggest	
  that	
  transit	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems	
  are	
  more	
  likely	
  than	
  in	
  the	
  past	
  to	
  adopt	
  the	
  standard,	
  there	
  is	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   41	
   no	
  evidence	
   to	
  suggest	
   that	
  parking,	
   carshare,	
  bikeshare	
  and	
   tolling	
  schemes	
  have	
  progressed	
  in	
  the	
  same	
  manner	
  as	
  transit	
  schemes.	
  Any	
  industry	
  that	
  adopts	
  the	
  ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  standard,	
  whether	
  it	
   is	
  transportation	
  or	
   otherwise,	
   creates	
   an	
   opportunity	
   to	
   leverage	
   the	
   existing	
   infrastructure	
   and	
  services	
   of	
   the	
   financial	
   industry.	
   	
   Contactless	
   prepaid,	
   debit	
   and	
   credit	
   cards	
   are	
  increasingly	
   adapted	
   to	
   serve	
   as	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   cards	
   for	
   the	
   transportation	
  industry.	
   	
   As	
   previously	
   discussed,	
   there	
   has	
   traditionally	
   been	
   a	
   need	
   for	
   the	
  transportation	
  industry	
  to	
  manufacture	
  and	
  deploy	
  its	
  own	
  card	
  system	
  because,	
  for	
  example,	
  response	
  time	
  for	
  a	
  magnetic-­‐strip	
  contact	
  debit	
  or	
  credit	
  card	
  swiped	
  at	
  a	
  reader	
  is	
  traditionally	
  too	
  slow.	
  	
  Contactless	
  cards	
  are	
  much	
  faster	
  and	
  investment	
  is	
  being	
  made	
  by	
   innovative	
   transit	
   agencies	
   and	
  major	
  payment	
   companies	
   such	
  as	
  MasterCard	
   and	
  Visa	
   to	
   further	
   adapt	
   these	
   cards	
   and	
   readers	
   to	
   better	
   serve	
   the	
  transportation	
  industry.	
  	
  Examples	
  include	
  trials	
  on	
  New	
  York	
  and	
  Utah	
  transit;	
  New	
  York,	
   Philadelphia	
   and	
   Los	
   Angeles	
   taxis;	
   the	
   combined	
   PayPass/Transit	
  TaiwanMoney	
  Card;	
   and	
  Malaysia’s	
   combined	
  PayWave/Touch	
   ‘n	
  Go	
  NFC-­‐enabled	
  phone.	
  	
  Experimentation	
  with	
  these	
  kinds	
  of	
  products	
  continues.	
  Other	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  media	
  exist	
  as	
  well.	
  	
  For	
  example,	
  the	
  transponder,	
  used	
  for	
  paying	
  tolls.	
  	
  While	
  there	
  is	
  precedent	
  for	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  smart	
  cards	
  to	
  pay	
  for	
  tolls	
  (ex:	
   Malaysia),	
   transponders	
   are	
   more	
   commonly	
   used	
   in	
   North	
   America.	
  	
  Transponders	
   utilize	
   NFC	
   technology,	
   just	
   as	
   smart	
   cards,	
   but	
   at	
   a	
   much	
   wider	
  proximity.	
  	
  It	
  is	
  not	
  practical	
  to	
  request	
  that	
  other	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  technologies,	
  such	
  as	
   transponders,	
  be	
   replaced	
  with	
  a	
   smart	
   card	
   for	
   the	
   sake	
  of	
   an	
   integrated	
  system	
   because	
   transponders	
   have	
   certain	
   advantages	
   over	
   smart	
   cards.	
   	
   For	
  example,	
  the	
  transponder	
  is	
  mounted	
  onto	
  the	
  vehicle,	
  meaning	
  that	
  drivers	
  do	
  not	
  have	
   to	
   slow	
   down	
   to	
   tap	
   a	
   card	
   to	
   a	
   reader.	
   	
   The	
   issue	
   of	
   integration	
   for	
  transponders	
   is	
   not	
   so	
   much	
   a	
   hardware	
   issue,	
   as	
   the	
   transponder	
   has	
   certain	
  advantages	
   over	
   a	
   smart	
   card,	
   but	
   rather	
   an	
   issue	
   of	
   how	
   multiple	
   accounts	
   are	
  managed.	
   	
   One	
   could	
   speculate	
   that,	
   one	
   day,	
   payment	
   companies	
   such	
   as	
  MasterCard	
   and	
   Visa	
   will	
   expand	
   their	
   business	
   into	
   transponders	
   as	
   they	
   are	
  attempting	
  to	
  do	
  with	
  the	
  transit	
  cards.	
  	
  As	
  it	
  stands,	
  however,	
  certain	
  hardware,	
  for	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   42	
   practical	
   reasons,	
   should	
   not	
   be	
   forced	
   to	
   physically	
   integrate	
   with	
   a	
   regional	
  payment	
   and	
   access	
   system	
   (although,	
   they	
   can	
   still	
   be	
   coordinated	
   virtually	
  through	
  linking	
  accounts).	
  Another	
  example	
  is	
  pay-­‐by-­‐phone.	
  	
  Pay-­‐by-­‐phone	
  is	
  distinct	
  from	
  both	
  transponders	
  and	
  smart	
  cards	
  because	
   it	
   is	
  a	
  remote	
  rather	
   than	
  proximity/local	
   transaction.	
   	
   It	
  too	
  offers	
  advantages	
  over	
  the	
  smart	
  card,	
  including	
  warnings	
  via	
  text	
  message	
  that	
  the	
  meter	
  is	
  expiring.	
  	
  It	
  also	
  offers	
  the	
  advantage	
  of	
  extending	
  time	
  over	
  the	
  phone	
  or	
  via	
  text	
  message.	
   	
  As	
  is	
  the	
  case	
  with	
  a	
  transponder,	
  there	
  may	
  be	
  no	
  argument	
  for	
  integrating	
  hardware	
  by	
  adopting	
  the	
  smart	
  card	
  platform	
  instead.	
  	
  However,	
  as	
  with	
  the	
  transponder,	
  it	
  would	
  be	
  made	
  more	
  user-­‐friendly	
  if	
  accounts	
  were	
  linked	
  virtually.	
  	
  It	
  may	
  not	
  be	
  as	
  far-­‐fetched	
  as	
  the	
  case	
  of	
  transponders	
  to	
  speculate	
  that	
  MasterCard	
  or	
  Visa	
  might,	
  one	
  day,	
  step	
  in	
  to	
  offer	
  their	
  own	
  pay-­‐by-­‐phone	
  solution	
  because,	
  as	
  previously	
  discussed,	
  the	
  mobile	
  devices	
  are	
  increasingly	
  functioning	
  in	
  both	
   the	
   remote	
  and	
  proximity	
   transaction	
  environments	
  with	
   the	
  advent	
  of	
  NFC-­‐enabled	
   phones.	
   	
   Software	
   applications	
   could	
   conceivably	
   link	
   the	
   remote	
   and	
  proximity	
   transaction	
   functions,	
   and	
   they	
   could	
   conceivably	
   be	
   developed	
   by	
   any	
  third-­‐party	
  card	
   issuer,	
   thus	
  enabling	
  one	
   to	
  access	
  parking	
  directly	
  via	
  a	
  prepaid,	
  debit	
  or	
  credit	
  card	
  account.	
  	
  	
  Finally,	
   should	
   the	
   transportation	
   industry	
   choose	
   to	
   pursue	
   a	
   standard	
   that	
   is	
   in	
  common	
   with	
   the	
   international	
   contactless	
   standards	
   and	
   leverage	
   the	
  infrastructure	
  and	
  services	
  used	
  by	
   financial	
   institutions,	
   the	
   industry	
  will	
  need	
  to	
  place	
  itself	
  within	
  a	
  much	
  broader	
  mobile	
  payment	
  context.	
  	
  As	
  pointed	
  out,	
  mobile	
  payment	
   systems	
   and	
   approaches	
   are	
   driven	
   by	
   a	
   variety	
   of	
   concepts	
   and	
  technologies.	
   	
   International	
   standards	
   focus	
   on	
   the	
   interface	
   between	
   proximity	
  cards	
  and	
  reader	
  and,	
  by	
  proxy,	
  other	
  proximity	
  hardware	
  such	
  as	
  proximity	
  chips	
  in	
   mobile	
   phones.	
   	
   Formalizing	
   pertinent	
   international	
   standards	
   in	
   Vancouver	
  would	
  not	
  only	
  ensure	
   interoperability	
  among	
   third-­‐party	
   cards	
  and	
  card	
   readers,	
  but	
  a	
  large	
  degree	
  of	
  interoperability	
  between	
  readers	
  other	
  proximity-­‐chip	
  enabled	
  devices	
  such	
  as	
  mobile	
  phones.	
  	
  Where	
  international	
  standards	
  are	
  less	
  clear	
  about	
  what	
   the	
   parameters	
   are	
   for	
   particular	
   types	
   of	
   hardware,	
   experimentation	
   and	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   43	
   collaboration	
  should	
  be	
  allowed	
   to	
  continue.	
   	
  The	
  Vancouver	
   region	
  could	
  benefit,	
  however,	
  by	
  ensuring	
  it	
  adheres	
  to	
  the	
  most	
  up-­‐to-­‐date	
  standards.	
   	
  At	
  present,	
  this	
  means	
  understanding	
  how	
  the	
  ISO/IEC	
  14443	
  and	
  EMV	
  standard	
  can	
  be	
  applied	
  to	
  transportation	
  services	
  in	
  Vancouver.	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   44	
   Recommendations	
  This	
   section	
  begins	
  with	
   substantive	
   recommendations,	
  based	
  on	
   the	
   findings	
  and	
  analysis	
  of	
  this	
  paper,	
  for	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  region.	
  	
  Afterwards,	
  recommendations	
  are	
  given	
  on	
  how	
  to	
  proceed	
  given	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  institutional	
  context.	
   Substantive	
  Recommendations	
  The	
  general	
  recommendations	
  are	
  as	
  follows:	
  1. Formally	
   adopt	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
   14443	
   and	
   the	
   EMV	
   contactless	
   standards	
   as	
  minimum	
   standards	
   for	
   all	
   transportation	
   and	
   parking	
   electronic	
   payment	
  and	
  access	
   systems	
   in	
   the	
  Vancouver	
   region.	
   	
  This	
   could	
   take	
   the	
   form	
  of	
  a	
  new	
  bylaw	
  or,	
  alternatively,	
   the	
  writing	
  and	
  signing	
  of	
  a	
  binding	
  agreement	
  amongst	
   service	
   providers.	
   	
   	
   Doing	
   so	
   will	
   ensure	
   a	
   seamless	
   transition	
  between	
   various	
   modes	
   of	
   transportation,	
   over	
   time	
   as	
   new	
   payment	
   and	
  access	
   systems	
   are	
   rolled-­‐out.	
   	
   It	
  will	
   also	
   ensure	
   interoperability	
   between	
  Vancouver	
  and	
  other	
  regions	
  built	
  on	
  the	
  standard.	
  2. Ensure	
   changes	
   to	
   international	
   standards	
   are	
   tracked	
   over	
   time,	
   and	
  incorporated	
   into	
   the	
   relevant	
   bylaws	
   and/or	
   agreements.	
   	
   Changes	
   to	
   the	
  ISO/IEC	
   14443	
   and	
   EMV	
   standard	
   are	
   likely	
   only	
   to	
   be	
   periodic	
   since	
   the	
  former	
   requires	
   collaboration	
   amongst	
   hundreds	
   of	
   stakeholders	
   –	
  governmental	
  agencies,	
  national	
  standards	
  bodies,	
  professional	
  societies	
  and	
  trade	
   associations	
   under	
   the	
   auspices	
   of	
   international	
   organizations	
   –	
   and	
  the	
   latter	
   requires	
   collaboration	
   amongst	
   four	
   competing	
   payment	
  companies	
  that	
  have	
  made	
  significant	
  investments	
  in	
  technologies	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  meet	
  the	
  standard,	
  and	
  led	
  the	
  majority	
  of	
  other	
  financial	
  institutions	
  around	
  the	
  world	
  to	
  do	
  so	
  as	
  well.	
   	
  Even	
  so,	
  the	
  possibility	
  remains	
  that	
  norms	
  and	
  conventions	
  will	
  change	
  over	
  time.	
  3. Compose	
   a	
   minimum	
   set	
   of	
   third	
   party	
   payment	
   media	
   that	
   all	
   service	
  providers	
   must	
   accept.	
   	
   Ensuring	
   a	
   common	
   standard	
   merely	
   ensures	
   the	
   possibility	
   that	
   interoperability	
  will	
   exist.	
   	
   Individual	
   service	
  providers	
  may	
  still	
   choose	
   to	
   issue	
   their	
   own	
   media	
   to	
   the	
   exclusion	
   of	
   others,	
   so	
   it	
   is	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   45	
   necessary	
   to	
   ensure	
   a	
   minimum	
   set	
   of	
   cards	
   so	
   that	
   the	
   possibility	
   of	
  interoperability	
  is	
  made	
  reality.	
  4. 	
  Commit	
   to	
   a	
   review	
   of	
   how	
   the	
   transportation	
   industry	
   can	
   leverage	
   the	
  infrastructure	
   and	
   services	
   of	
   the	
   financial	
   industry	
   to	
   reduce	
   operational	
  costs.	
   	
   There	
   is	
   opportunity	
   to	
   save	
   on	
   operational	
   costs	
   not	
   only	
   through	
  using	
   media	
   issued	
   by	
   financial	
   institutions,	
   but	
   also	
   through	
   utilizing	
  potential	
   financial	
   reports	
   and	
   auditing	
   trails.	
   	
   Information	
   sessions	
   can	
  be	
  provided	
  to	
  service	
  providers	
  who	
  wish	
  to	
  increase	
  operation	
  efficiency.	
  5. Develop	
   partnerships	
   with	
   innovative	
   payment	
   companies	
   in	
   the	
   financial	
  industry.	
   	
   The	
   transportation	
   industry	
   presents	
   a	
   large	
   opportunity	
   for	
  payment	
  companies	
  such	
  as	
  MasterCard	
  and	
  Visa	
  to	
  expand	
  their	
  businesses.	
  	
  A	
   coordinated	
   regional	
   approach	
   to	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
   in	
   the	
  Vancouver	
  region	
  could	
  yield	
  problems	
  to	
  which	
  payment	
  companies	
  will	
  be	
  eager	
  to	
  pilot	
  solutions.	
   	
  Pilot	
  projects	
  could	
  be	
  mutually	
  beneficial	
  for	
  both	
  payment	
  companies	
  and	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  region.	
   Institutional	
  Recommendations	
  The	
   recommendations,	
   should	
   they	
   be	
   accepted	
   as	
   objectives,	
   will	
   require	
   an	
  effective	
  planning	
  process	
  if	
  they	
  are	
  to	
  be	
  achieved.	
  	
  The	
  purpose	
  of	
  this	
  section	
  is	
  to	
   assess	
   the	
   institutional	
   context	
   and	
   provide	
   recommendations	
   for	
   how	
   to	
  proceed.	
  The	
  stakeholder	
  groups	
  include:	
   • Service	
  Providers	
  (not	
  including	
  Translink)	
   • Translink	
   • Regional	
  Business	
  Improvement	
  Associations	
  (BIAs)	
   • Other	
  Nongovernmental	
  Organizations	
  (NGOs)	
   • Municipal	
  Governments	
  in	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  Region	
   • Greater	
  Vancouver	
  Regional	
  District	
  (Metro	
  Vancouver)	
   • British	
  Columbia	
  Provincial	
  Government	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   46	
   Service	
  Providers:	
  It	
  is	
  possible	
  for	
  service	
  providers	
  to	
  self-­‐organize	
  and	
  engage	
  in	
  a	
   planning	
   process	
   that	
   results	
   in	
   a	
   common	
   standard	
   that	
   can	
   be	
   proposed	
   as	
   a	
  bylaw	
  or	
  adopted	
  as	
  a	
  binding	
  memorandum	
  of	
  understanding.	
  	
  However,	
  the	
  social	
  and	
  other	
  regional	
  benefits	
  of	
  an	
   integrated	
  system	
  may	
  be	
   largely	
  external	
   to	
   the	
  businesses	
  of	
  individual	
  service	
  providers.	
  	
  For	
  this	
  reason,	
  it	
  would	
  not	
  be	
  prudent	
  to	
  expect	
  service	
  providers	
  to	
  self-­‐organize.	
  Translink:	
   Is	
   not	
   unlike	
   other	
   service	
  providers	
   in	
   that	
   it	
   has	
   a	
   limited	
   interest	
   in	
  providing	
  regional	
  social	
  benefits	
  that	
   largely	
  external	
  to	
  its	
  business.	
   	
   	
  Translink’s	
  core	
   business	
   is	
   to	
   plan,	
   finance	
   and	
  manage	
   regional	
   transit,	
   roads,	
   bridges	
   and	
  cycling	
  specifically.	
  	
  It	
  is	
  not	
  clear	
  if	
  or	
  to	
  what	
  extent	
  Translink	
  would	
  be	
  interested	
  in	
   spearheading	
   an	
   effort	
   that	
   goes	
   beyond	
   its	
   own	
   internal	
   system.	
   	
   However,	
   a	
  point	
  could	
  also	
  be	
  made	
  that	
  Translink	
  differs	
  from	
  other	
  service	
  providers	
  in	
  that	
  it	
  also	
  has	
  a	
  public	
  mandate.	
  	
  Even	
  so,	
  if	
  Translink	
  were	
  to	
  lead	
  service	
  providers	
  in	
  a	
  planning	
  process,	
  it	
  would	
  have	
  to	
  think	
  outside	
  of	
  its	
  own	
  business	
  interests.	
  	
  BIAs	
   and	
  Other	
  NGOs:	
   Can	
   self-­‐organize,	
   raise	
   awareness	
   and	
   facilitate	
   discussion	
  among	
  service	
  providers.	
   	
  However,	
  BIAs	
  and	
  NGOs	
  often	
  have	
  particular	
  interests	
  in	
  contained	
  geographical	
  areas.	
  	
  A	
  convening	
  of	
  service	
  providers	
  on	
  the	
  magnitude	
  of	
  the	
  whole	
  region,	
   in	
  addition	
  to	
  facilitating	
  the	
  negotiation	
  of	
  a	
  binding	
  contract	
  or	
   bylaw	
   among	
   as	
  many	
   service	
   providers,	
  may	
   be	
   beyond	
   the	
   capacity	
   of	
   these	
  institutions.	
  Municipal	
  Governments:	
  Have	
  a	
  public	
  mandate,	
  but	
  interests	
  are	
  local	
  rather	
  than	
  regional.	
   	
  It	
  is	
  unlikely	
  that	
  a	
  particular	
  municipal	
  government	
  would	
  take	
  the	
  lead	
  in	
  organizing	
  transportation	
  service	
  providers	
  operating	
  beyond	
  their	
  jurisdictional	
  boundaries.	
   	
   In	
   addition,	
   municipal	
   governments	
   have	
   a	
   stake	
   in	
   parking,	
  particularly	
   on-­‐street	
   parking,	
   so	
   are	
   themselves	
   partially	
   service	
   providers.	
  	
  Municipal	
  governments	
  would	
  have	
  to	
  partner	
  with	
  other	
  municipal	
  governments	
  in	
  the	
   region.	
   	
   It	
   would	
   not	
   be	
   prudent	
   to	
   expect	
   municipal	
   governments	
   to	
   self-­‐organize,	
  especially	
  since	
  a	
  regional	
   institution,	
  Metro	
  Vancouver,	
  already	
  exists	
  to	
  address	
  regional	
  needs.	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   47	
   Metro	
  Vancouver:	
  Is	
  responsible	
  for	
  regional	
  policies	
  including	
  regional	
  growth	
  and	
  “acts	
   as	
   a	
   facilitator,	
   convener,	
   partner	
   and	
   advocate	
   and	
   significant	
   conduit	
   for	
  information	
  and	
  education	
  in	
  the	
  community”.	
  	
  Metro	
  Vancouver	
  could	
  conceivably	
  raise	
   awareness	
   and	
   would	
   be	
   a	
   more	
   neutral	
   facilitator	
   than	
   Translink	
   (since	
  Translink	
   is	
   in	
   the	
   midst	
   of	
   planning	
   its	
   own	
   system).	
   	
   However,	
   it	
   is	
   not	
   clear	
  whether	
   Metro	
   Vancouver	
   has	
   the	
   mandate	
   necessary	
   to	
   address	
   this	
   issue,	
  especially	
  given	
  that	
  a	
  regional	
  transportation	
  authority,	
  Translink,	
  exists.	
  Provincial	
   Government:	
   Because	
   ambiguity	
   exists	
   in	
   who	
   is	
   responsible	
   for	
  addressing	
   such	
   matters,	
   it	
   may	
   be	
   necessary	
   for	
   the	
   provincial	
   government	
   to	
  clarify	
  institutional	
  responsibilities	
  through	
  legislation.	
  	
  The	
  provincial	
  government	
  would	
  ideally	
  give	
  Metro	
  Vancouver	
  authority	
  to	
  create	
  bylaws	
  regarding	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems	
  that	
  apply	
  to	
  Translink	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  other	
  service	
  providers.	
  	
  	
  NGOs	
   and	
   BIAs	
   can	
   play	
   a	
   role	
   in	
   raising	
   awareness	
   and	
   facilitating	
   discussion	
  among	
   service	
   providers,	
   but	
   it	
   is	
   ultimately	
   the	
   regional	
   government,	
   Metro	
  Vancouver,	
   that	
   has	
   the	
   necessary	
   institutional	
   capacity,	
   neutrality	
   and	
  representativeness	
   to	
   serve	
   as	
   a	
   legitimate	
   authority	
   and	
   facilitator.	
   	
   Because	
  ambiguity	
  may	
  exist	
  in	
  how	
  powers	
  are	
  delegated	
  with	
  respect	
  to	
  regional	
  standards	
  regarding	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems,	
   it	
   may	
   be	
   necessary	
   for	
   the	
   provincial	
  government	
  to	
  clarify	
  roles	
  with	
  new	
  legislation.	
  	
  Thus,	
  my	
  recommendation	
  would	
  be	
   to	
   check	
   with	
   Metro	
   Vancouver	
   to	
   see	
   if	
   they	
   have	
   the	
   interest/capacity	
   to	
  facilitate	
   a	
   process	
   that	
   would	
   end	
   with	
   a	
   binding	
   agreement	
   among	
   service	
  providers.	
   	
   Translink	
  would	
   have	
   to	
   agree	
   to	
   relegate	
   its	
   role	
   to	
   that	
   of	
   a	
   service	
  provider	
   (although	
   it	
   could	
   still	
   maintain	
   a	
   leadership	
   role	
   among	
   service	
  providers).	
   	
   If	
   the	
   process	
   does	
   not	
   obtain	
   sufficient	
   participation	
   or	
   requires	
  stronger	
   legal	
   enforcement,	
   BIAs	
   and	
   other	
   NGOs	
   should	
   lobby	
   the	
   provincial	
  government	
   to	
   clarify	
   roles	
   through	
   legislation,	
   particularly	
   with	
   respect	
   to	
   the	
  authority	
   to	
   create	
  bylaws	
  on	
   the	
  matter.	
   	
  Once	
   an	
   adequate	
   authority	
   is	
   found,	
   a	
  strategic	
   planning	
   process	
   should	
   be	
   undertaken	
   that	
   involves	
   consultation	
   with	
  various	
   service	
   providers.	
   	
   Adherence	
   to	
   the	
   standard	
   should	
   be	
   binding,	
   with	
   a	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   48	
   mechanism	
   to	
   allow	
   for	
   an	
   evolution	
   (or	
   dissolution)	
   in	
   the	
   standards,	
   but	
   in	
  consultation	
  with	
   a	
   third-­‐party	
   that	
   represents	
   the	
   interests	
   of	
   the	
   residents	
   and	
  businesses	
  that	
  are	
  ultimately	
  affected	
  by	
  the	
  adopted	
  standards.	
  	
  	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   49	
   Conclusion	
  Vancouver’s	
   practices	
   are	
   not	
   dissimilar	
   to	
   other	
   regions	
   of	
   the	
   world.	
   	
   Service	
  providers	
  are	
  independently	
  establishing	
  payment	
  and	
  access	
  systems,	
  with	
  the	
  risk	
  that	
  operating	
  systems/devices	
  will	
  not	
  be	
  interoperable	
  between	
  service	
  providers.	
  	
  Incompatible	
   operating	
   systems/devices	
   in	
   parking	
   and	
   transportation	
   can	
   be	
  avoided	
  through	
  the	
  regional	
  adoption	
  of	
  standards.	
  	
  The	
  Vancouver	
  region	
  can	
  gain	
  substantially	
   from	
   the	
  adoption	
  of	
   the	
   ISO/IEC	
  14443	
   international	
   standard.	
   	
   For	
  example,	
   transportation	
   service	
   providers	
   would	
   gain	
   the	
   ability	
   to	
   leverage	
   the	
  infrastructure	
   and	
   services	
   of	
   the	
   financial	
   industry.	
   	
   In	
   Vancouver,	
   this	
   means	
  clarifying	
  institutional	
  roles	
  and	
  engaging	
  in	
  a	
  strategic	
  planning	
  process	
  that	
  brings	
  the	
  region’s	
  service	
  providers	
  together	
  to	
  agree	
  on	
  a	
  binding	
  standard.	
  	
  Doing	
  so	
  will	
  not	
  only	
  ensure	
  convenience	
  through	
  interoperability,	
  but	
  also	
  form	
  a	
  institutional	
  framework	
   that	
   will	
   establish	
   Vancouver	
   as	
   an	
   international	
   leader	
   in	
   the	
  governance	
   of	
   regional	
   electronic	
   payment	
   and	
   access	
   systems	
   for	
   parking	
   and	
  transportation.	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   50	
   References	
   List	
  of	
  Figures	
  Figure	
  1:	
  http://www.mobilemuse.ca/tags/vancouver	
  Figure	
  2:	
  http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/zipcar-­‐free-­‐iphone-­‐app-­‐car-­‐sharing-­‐ipod-­‐touch.php	
  and	
  http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/2009/06/02/zipcar-­‐promises-­‐save-­‐money-­‐provide-­‐convenient-­‐transportation/	
  	
  Figure	
  3:	
  http://montreal.bixi.com/rolling-­‐with-­‐bixi/explore-­‐a-­‐station	
  Figure	
  4:	
  http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/840466	
  and	
  http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii68/Habfanman/Metro/IMG_6948Metromix.jpg	
  Figure	
  5:	
  http://www.govtech.com/transportation/Utah-­‐Transit-­‐Riders-­‐Use-­‐Smart-­‐Cards.html	
  and	
  http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/news/single-­‐view/view/contactless-­‐payment-­‐trial-­‐in-­‐new-­‐york.html	
  and	
  http://gothamist.com/2010/06/14/did_you_tap_that_mastercard_paypass.php	
  	
  	
  Figure	
  6:	
  http://www.mdta.maryland.gov/ICC/E-­‐ZPass.html	
  Figure	
  7:	
  http://www.flickr.com/photos/49503124323@N01/7488281/	
  Figure	
  8:	
  http://gadgets.emedia.com.my/img/MaxisFastTap.jpg	
  Figure	
  9:	
  http://www.multos.com/downloads/marketing/CaseStudy_Taiwan_Money.pdf	
  Figure	
  10:	
  http://saratorrao.wordpress.com/category/transports-­‐ecolo/	
  and	
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bornettes_Velib%27.JPG	
  	
   Bibliography	
  APTA	
  Fare	
  Media	
  Research	
  Working	
  Group	
  of	
  the	
  Universal	
  Transit	
  Fare	
  System	
  (UTFS)	
  Task	
  Force.	
  "Trends	
  in	
  Electronic	
  Fare	
  Media	
  Technology:	
  APTA	
  Technical	
  Report	
  TR-­‐UTFS-­‐FMWG-­‐001-­‐04."	
  February	
  14	
  (2004)	
  Beiske,	
  B.,	
  et	
  al.	
  EOctopus	
  in	
  Hong	
  Kong–A	
  Feasibility	
  Study.	
  GRIN	
  Verlag,	
  2007.	
  Berlin,	
  L.	
  "Cellphones	
  as	
  Credit	
  Cards?	
  Americans	
  must	
  Wait."	
  New	
  York	
  Times.	
  January	
  24	
  (2009)	
  Bourreau,	
  M.,	
  M.	
  Verdier,	
  and	
  T.	
  ParisTech.	
  "Cooperation	
  for	
  Innovation	
  in	
  Payment	
   Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   51	
   Systems:	
  The	
  Case	
  of	
  Mobile	
  Payments."	
  February	
  (2010)	
  Chau,	
  P.	
  Y.	
  K.,	
  and	
  S.	
  Poon.	
  "Octopus:	
  An	
  e-­‐Cash	
  Payment	
  System	
  Success	
  Story."	
   Communications	
  of	
  the	
  ACM	
  46.9	
  (2003):	
  133.	
  City	
  of	
  Vancouver.	
  "Public	
  Bike	
  Share	
  System."	
  October	
  8	
  2009.	
  <http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/cycling/plans/publicbikeshare.htm>.	
  Clark,	
  Sarah.	
  "First	
  Commercial	
  NFC	
  Service	
  Launched	
  in	
  Malaysia."	
  (April	
  27	
  2009)	
   Near	
  Field	
  Communications	
  World.	
  <http://www.nearfieldcommunicationsworld.com/2009/04/27/3993/first-­‐commercial-­‐nfc-­‐service-­‐launched-­‐in-­‐malaysia/>	
  Coverage,	
  T.,	
  and	
  T.	
  Serials.	
  "Fare	
  Policies,	
  Structures	
  and	
  Technologies:	
  Update."	
   Transportation	
  Research	
  12	
  (2009):	
  11AM.	
  Dahlberg,	
  T.,	
  et	
  al.	
  "Past,	
  Present	
  and	
  Future	
  of	
  Mobile	
  Payments	
  Research:	
  A	
  Literature	
  Review."	
  Electronic	
  Commerce	
  Research	
  and	
  Applications	
  7.2	
  (2008):	
  165-­‐81.	
  Hui-­‐ling,	
  Z.,	
  et	
  al.	
  "The	
  Research	
  of	
  Parking	
  Guidance	
  and	
  Information	
  System	
  Based	
  on	
  Dedicated	
  Short	
  Range	
  Communication."	
  2003	
  IEEE	
  Intelligent	
   Transportation	
  Systems,	
  2003.Proceedings	
  2	
  (2003)	
  Iseki,	
  H.,	
  et	
  al.	
  "Evaluating	
  the	
  Costs	
  and	
  Benefits	
  of	
  Transit	
  Smart	
  Cards."	
  (2008)	
  Jensen,	
  M.,	
  and	
  A.	
  Terve.	
  "Mobile	
  Payments	
  through	
  Near	
  Field	
  Communication."	
  (2009)	
  	
  Karnouskos,	
  S.,	
  and	
  F.	
  Fokus.	
  "Mobile	
  Payment:	
  A	
  Journey	
  through	
  Existing	
  Procedures	
  and	
  Standardization	
  Initiatives."	
  IEEE	
  Communications	
  Surveys	
  and	
   Tutorials	
  6.4	
  (2004):	
  44-­‐66.	
  Little,	
  Arthur	
  D.	
  "Global	
  M-­‐Payment	
  Report	
  Update	
  -­‐	
  2009."	
  Liu,	
  Q.,	
  et	
  al.	
  "Design	
  and	
  Development	
  of	
  Parking	
  Guidance	
  Information	
  System	
  Based	
  on	
  Web	
  and	
  Gis	
  Technology".	
  ITS	
  Telecommunications	
  Proceedings,	
  2006	
   6th	
  International	
  Conference	
  on.	
  2006.	
  1263-­‐1266.	
  Ma,	
  L.	
  C.	
  K.,	
  et	
  al.	
  "Diffusion	
  of	
  the	
  ‘Octopus’	
  Smart	
  Card	
  E-­‐Payment	
  System."	
   International	
  Journal	
  of	
  Business	
  and	
  Information	
  3.1	
  (2008)	
  MULTOS.	
  "Case	
  Study:	
  The	
  ‘TaiwanMoney	
  Card’	
  -­‐	
  the	
  World’s	
  First	
  Payment	
  Smart	
  Card	
  to	
  Combine	
  both	
  Transportation	
  and	
  Shopping."	
  (2006)	
  Octopus.	
  "Corporate	
  Profile:	
  Services	
  in	
  Hong	
  Kong."	
  <http://www.octopus.com.hk/about-­‐us/corporate-­‐profile/services-­‐in-­‐hong-­‐ Gallop,	
  Christopher	
  2010	
   52	
   kong/en/index.html>	
  Ondrus,	
  J.,	
  K.	
  Lyytinen,	
  and	
  Y.	
  Pigneur.	
  "Why	
  Mobile	
  Payments	
  Fail?	
  Towards	
  a	
  Dynamic	
  and	
  Multi-­‐Perspective	
  Explanation."	
  hicss,	
  pp.1-­‐10,	
  42nd	
  Hawaii	
  International	
  Conference	
  on	
  System	
  Sciences	
  (2009)	
  Ondrus,	
  J.,	
  and	
  Y.	
  Pigneur.	
  "Towards	
  a	
  Holistic	
  Analysis	
  of	
  Mobile	
  Payments:	
  A	
  Multiple	
  Perspectives	
  Approach."	
  Electronic	
  Commerce	
  Research	
  and	
   Applications	
  5.3	
  (2006):	
  246-­‐57.	
  Poon,	
  S.,	
  and	
  P.	
  Y.	
  K.	
  Chau.	
  "Octopus:	
  The	
  Growing	
  e-­‐Payment	
  System	
  in	
  Hong	
  Kong."	
   Electronic	
  markets	
  11.2	
  (2001):	
  97-­‐106.	
  Ramezani,	
  E.	
  "Mobile	
  Payment."	
  (2008)	
  	
  <http://webuser.hs-­‐furtwangen.de/~heindl/ebte-­‐08-­‐ss-­‐mobile-­‐payment-­‐Ramezani.pdf>	
  Shaheen,	
  S.	
  A.,	
  C.	
  J.	
  Rodier,	
  and	
  A.	
  M.	
  Eaken.	
  "Smart	
  Parking	
  Management	
  Field	
  Test:	
  A	
  Bay	
  Area	
  Rapid	
  Transit	
  (BART)	
  District	
  Parking	
  Demonstration."	
  Institute	
  of	
   Transportation	
  Studies,	
  University	
  of	
  California,	
  Davis,	
  Research	
  Report	
  UCD-­ ITS-­RR-­05-­02	
  (2005)	
  Smart	
  Card	
  Alliance.	
  "Smart	
  Cards	
  and	
  Parking."	
  SC	
  Alliance.	
  Princeton	
  Junction,	
  New	
  Jersey	
  (2006)	
  -­‐-­‐-­‐.	
  "Transit	
  and	
  Retail	
  Payment:	
  Opportunities	
  for	
  Collaboration	
  and	
  Convergence."	
   SC	
  Alliance.	
  Princeton	
  Junction,	
  New	
  Jersey	
  (2003)	
  Van	
  der	
  Heijden,	
  H.	
  "Factors	
  Affecting	
  the	
  Successful	
  Introduction	
  of	
  Mobile	
  Payment	
  Systems".	
  15th	
  Bled	
  Electronic	
  Commerce	
  Conference	
  eReality:	
   Constructing	
  the	
  eEconomy,	
  Bled,	
  Slovenia,	
  June.	
  Citeseer	
  ,	
  2002.	
  17-­‐19.	
  Varshney,	
  U.	
  "Mobile	
  Payments."	
  IEEE	
  Computer	
  35.12	
  (2002):	
  120-­‐1.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
Canada 31 3
United States 14 0
Australia 4 0
Bolivia 2 0
United Kingdom 2 0
Russia 1 0
Chile 1 0
Germany 1 12
New Caledonia 1 0
Zimbabwe 1 1
China 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 13 15
Montreal 10 0
Vancouver 10 0
Ashburn 8 0
Brisbane 2 0
Beenleigh 2 0
La Paz 2 0
Newtownabbey 2 0
Boardman 1 0
Santiago 1 0
Thornhill 1 1
Brooklyn 1 0
Sunnyvale 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.310.1-0102525/manifest

Comment

Related Items

Admin Tools

To re-ingest this item use button below, on average re-ingesting will take 5 minutes per item.

Reingest

To clear this item from the cache, please use the button below;

Clear Item cache