IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jotrge/v89y2020ics0966692320309510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride

Author

Listed:
  • Laa, Barbara
  • Leth, Ulrich

Abstract

In many cities around the world, electric (e-)scooters have emerged as a new means of transportation. They are often advertised as supporting modal shift towards more sustainable transportation and as a tool for enabling more equity in mobility. However, the environmental impact depends on how they are used and what kinds of trips they replace. Integration of e-scooters into urban transport systems also implicates discussions on fair road space allocation. In our study, we assess the socio-economic profiles and usage patterns of e-scooter users in Vienna, Austria. We differentiate between two basic groups of e-scooter users (renters and owners) and apply two different methods. Firstly, based on an online survey, we examine the age, gender and education of e-scooter users and we look into which kinds of trips (commuting, shopping or leisure) and which other means of transportation are replaced by e-scooter trips. Secondly, we analyse data from field observations at cycle paths in Vienna in order to determine the share of e-scooter riders and their gender distribution. We find that e-scooter users are more likely to be young, male, highly educated and residents of Vienna. According to the survey, there are considerable differences in usage between owners of private scooters and users of sharing schemes. Whereas in both groups, e-scooter trips mostly replace walking and public transport as a mode, e-scooter owners also show a considerable mode-shift from private car trips. These results implicate that e-scooter riders are additional users of cycling infrastructure. This puts further pressure on the current allocation of road space, which provides little space for active modes of transport. We conclude that city policies should address this competitive relationship adequately by allocating more space to safe and convenient cycling infrastructure and traffic-calmed zones. This could not only help ease the current challenges due to e-scooters but also provide better conditions for walking and cycling and thereby at the same time contribute to a more sustainable and equitable urban transport system.

Suggested Citation

  • Laa, Barbara & Leth, Ulrich, 2020. "Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:89:y:2020:i:c:s0966692320309510
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692320309510
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102874?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rachel Aldred & Bridget Elliott & James Woodcock & Anna Goodman, 2017. "Cycling provision separated from motor traffic: a systematic review exploring whether stated preferences vary by gender and age," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 29-55, January.
    2. Simma, A. & Axhausen, K. W., 2001. "Structures of commitment in mode use: a comparison of Switzerland, Germany and Great Britain," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 279-288, October.
    3. Jurgis Zagorskas & Marija Burinskienė, 2019. "Challenges Caused by Increased Use of E-Powered Personal Mobility Vehicles in European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam, 2019. "Shared Micromoblity Policy Toolkit: Docked and Dockless Bike and Scooter Sharing," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt00k897b5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    5. Docherty, Iain & Marsden, Greg & Anable, Jillian, 2018. "The governance of smart mobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 114-125.
    6. Owain James & J I Swiderski & John Hicks & Denis Teoman & Ralph Buehler, 2019. "Pedestrians and E-Scooters: An Initial Look at E-Scooter Parking and Perceptions by Riders and Non-Riders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-13, October.
    7. Geoffrey Rose, 2012. "E-bikes and urban transportation: emerging issues and unresolved questions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 81-96, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mehzabin Tuli, Farzana & Mitra, Suman & Crews, Mariah B., 2021. "Factors influencing the usage of shared E-scooters in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 164-185.
    2. Ouassim Manout & Azise Oumar Diallo & Thibault Gloriot, 2023. "Implications of pricing and fleet size strategies on shared bikes and e-scooters: a case study from Lyon, France," Working Papers hal-04017908, HAL.
    3. Mohammed Hamad Almannaa & Faisal Adnan Alsahhaf & Huthaifa I. Ashqar & Mohammed Elhenawy & Mahmoud Masoud & Andry Rakotonirainy, 2021. "Perception Analysis of E-Scooter Riders and Non-Riders in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Survey Outputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Nikiforiadis, Andreas & Paschalidis, Evangelos & Stamatiadis, Nikiforos & Paloka, Ntonata & Tsekoura, Eleni & Basbas, Socrates, 2023. "E-scooters and other mode trip chaining: Preferences and attitudes of university students," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    5. Fei-Hui Huang, 2021. "User Behavioral Intentions toward a Scooter-Sharing Service: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    6. Alberica Domitilla Bozzi & Anne Aguilera, 2021. "Shared E-Scooters: A Review of Uses, Health and Environmental Impacts, and Policy Implications of a New Micro-Mobility Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Cubells, Jerònia & Miralles-Guasch, Carme & Marquet, Oriol, 2023. "Gendered travel behaviour in micromobility? Travel speed and route choice through the lens of intersecting identities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Yang, Hongtai & Huo, Jinghai & Bao, Yongxing & Li, Xuan & Yang, Linchuan & Cherry, Christopher R., 2021. "Impact of e-scooter sharing on bike sharing in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 23-36.
    9. Draženko Glavić & Ana Trpković & Marina Milenković & Sreten Jevremović, 2021. "The E-Scooter Potential to Change Urban Mobility—Belgrade Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-29, May.
    10. Maximilian Heumann & Tobias Kraschewski & Tim Brauner & Lukas Tilch & Michael H. Breitner, 2021. "A Spatiotemporal Study and Location-Specific Trip Pattern Categorization of Shared E-Scooter Usage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Johannes Gessner & Wolfgang Habla & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2023. "Can Social Comparisons and Moral Appeals Induce a Modal Shift Towards Low-Emission Transport Modes?," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_451, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    12. Tiziana Campisi & Anastasios Skoufas & Alexandros Kaltsidis & Socrates Basbas, 2021. "Gender Equality and E-Scooters: Mind the Gap! A Statistical Analysis of the Sicily Region, Italy," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, October.
    13. Monika Hamerska & Monika Ziółko & Patryk Stawiarski, 2022. "A Sustainable Transport System—The MMQUAL Model of Shared Micromobility Service Quality Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, March.
    14. Yang, Hongtai & Zheng, Rong & Li, Xuan & Huo, Jinghai & Yang, Linchuan & Zhu, Tong, 2022. "Nonlinear and threshold effects of the built environment on e-scooter sharing ridership," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    15. Samira Dibaj & Aryan Hosseinzadeh & Miloš N. Mladenović & Robert Kluger, 2021. "Where Have Shared E-Scooters Taken Us So Far? A Review of Mobility Patterns, Usage Frequency, and Personas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-27, October.
    16. Marco Diana & Andrea Chicco, 2023. "The effect of COVID restriction levels on shared micromobility travel patterns: A comparison between dockless bike sharing and e-scooter services," Papers 2309.16440, arXiv.org.
    17. Johannes Gessner & Wolfgang Habla & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2023. "Can Social Comparisons and Moral Appeals Induce a Modal Shift Towards Low-Emission Transport Modes?," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_451v2, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    18. Huo, Jinghai & Yang, Hongtai & Li, Chaojing & Zheng, Rong & Yang, Linchuan & Wen, Yi, 2021. "Influence of the built environment on E-scooter sharing ridership: A tale of five cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Samadzad, Mahdi & Nosratzadeh, Hossein & Karami, Hossein & Karami, Ali, 2023. "What are the factors affecting the adoption and use of electric scooter sharing systems from the end user's perspective?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 70-82.
    2. Jurgis Zagorskas & Marija Burinskienė, 2019. "Challenges Caused by Increased Use of E-Powered Personal Mobility Vehicles in European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Gabriel Dias & Elisabete Arsenio & Paulo Ribeiro, 2021. "The Role of Shared E-Scooter Systems in Urban Sustainability and Resilience during the Covid-19 Mobility Restrictions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, June.
    4. Fei-Hui Huang, 2021. "User Behavioral Intentions toward a Scooter-Sharing Service: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    5. Alberica Domitilla Bozzi & Anne Aguilera, 2021. "Shared E-Scooters: A Review of Uses, Health and Environmental Impacts, and Policy Implications of a New Micro-Mobility Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Maximilian Heumann & Tobias Kraschewski & Tim Brauner & Lukas Tilch & Michael H. Breitner, 2021. "A Spatiotemporal Study and Location-Specific Trip Pattern Categorization of Shared E-Scooter Usage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-24, November.
    7. Ziwen Ling & Christopher R. Cherry & John H. MacArthur & Jonathan X. Weinert, 2017. "Differences of Cycling Experiences and Perceptions between E-Bike and Bicycle Users in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, September.
    8. Ruhrort, Lisa, 2020. "Reassessing the Role of Shared Mobility Services in a Transport Transition: Can They Contribute the Rise of an Alternative Socio-Technical Regime of Mobility?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(19), pages 1-1.
    9. Synek, Stefan & Koenigstorfer, Joerg, 2018. "Exploring adoption determinants of tax-subsidized company-leasing bicycles from the perspective of German employers and employees," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 238-260.
    10. Cao, Zhejing & Zhang, Xiaohu & Chua, Kelman & Yu, Honghai & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "E-scooter sharing to serve short-distance transit trips: A Singapore case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 177-196.
    11. Scheiner, Joachim & Holz-Rau, Christian, 2013. "A comprehensive study of life course, cohort, and period effects on changes in travel mode use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 167-181.
    12. Benjamin Maas, 2022. "Literature Review of Mobility as a Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-28, July.
    13. Tuğba Yeğin & Muhammad Ikram, 2022. "Analysis of Consumers’ Electric Vehicle Purchase Intentions: An Expansion of the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    14. Sebastian Kussl & Andreas Wald, 2022. "Smart Mobility and its Implications for Road Infrastructure Provision: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Pangbourne, Kate & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Stead, Dominic & Milakis, Dimitris, 2020. "Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 35-49.
    16. Devon McAslan & Farah Najar Arevalo & David A. King & Thaddeus R. Miller, 2021. "Pilot project purgatory? Assessing automated vehicle pilot projects in U.S. cities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Thomas, Alainna, 2016. "A More Sustainable Minivan? An Exploratory Study of Electric Bicycle Use by San Francisco Bay Area Families," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6g79m3xx, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    18. Alexandra König & Laura Gebhardt & Kerstin Stark & Julia Schuppan, 2022. "A Multi-Perspective Assessment of the Introduction of E-Scooter Sharing in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    19. Hrelja, Robert, 2019. "Cars. Problematisations, measures and blind spots in local transport and land use policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    20. Joachim Scheiner & Christian Holz-Rau, 2007. "Travel mode choice: affected by objective or subjective determinants?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 487-511, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:89:y:2020:i:c:s0966692320309510. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-transport-geography .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.