In recent years, there has been an upsurge in intelligent mobility solutions that provide door-to-door services. Although these services offer convenience to certain individuals, it is frequently overlooked that they can lead to welfare losses when accounting for the reduced health benefits that result from reduced physical activity. In this paper, we derive a welfare function of introducing first- and last-mile public transport services. By comparing possible health gains from walking with corresponding accessibility losses, we identify the distance boundaries under which the service fails to be socially beneficial. The results are based on a simulation study and draw on further insights from a recent agent-based model from Copenhagen focusing on first- and last-mile public transport. Although the model is intentionally stylized and may not apply universally to all scenarios featuring diverse population densities, demographic profiles, or transport network layouts, the fundamental conclusion presented in the paper is that first-mile services have minimal welfare impact for average trip distances below 1 km, appears robust even under conservative assumptions. In this case, the probability of failure is almost 100% for any realistic parametrization. This finding implies that planners and researchers should focus on the design of main transit networks and the access and egress of active modes to and from the stations. In particular, door-to-door services covering shorter distances should not be the priority of public funding unless in particular situations or contexts.

近年来，提供​​上门服务的智能出行解决方案兴起。尽管这些服务为某些个人提供了便利，但人们常常忽视，在考虑到体力活动减少导致的健康益处减少时，它们可能会导致福利损失。在本文中，我们推导了引入第一英里和最后一英里公共交通服务的福利函数。通过比较步行可能带来的健康收益与相应的可达性损失，我们确定了该服务无法对社会有益的距离界限。结果基于模拟研究，并借鉴了哥本哈根最近基于代理的模型的进一步见解，该模型专注于第一英里和最后一英里的公共交通。尽管该模型是有意程式化的，并且可能无法普遍适用于具有不同人口密度、人口概况或交通网络布局的所有场景，但本文提出的基本结论是，第一英里服务对于低于 1 的平均出行距离的福利影响最小。 km，即使在保守的假设下也显得稳健。在这种情况下，任何实际参数化失败的概率几乎都是 100%。这一发现意味着规划者和研究人员应重点关注主要交通网络的设计以及进出车站的主动模式的进出。特别是，除非在特定情况或背景下，否则覆盖较短距离的上门服务不应成为公共资金的优先事项。