IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1904.06695.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Eliciting Preferences of Ridehailing Users and Drivers: Evidence from the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Prateek Bansal
  • Akanksha Sinha
  • Rubal Dua
  • Ricardo Daziano

Abstract

Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) are changing the transportation ecosystem, but micro-decisions of drivers and users need to be better understood to assess the system-level impacts of TNCs. In this regard, we contribute to the literature by estimating a) individuals' preferences of being a rider, a driver, or a non-user of TNC services; b) preferences of ridehailing users for ridepooling; c) TNC drivers' choice to switch to vehicles with better fuel economy, and also d) the drivers' decision to buy, rent or lease new vehicles with driving for TNCs being a major consideration. Elicitation of drivers' preferences using a unique sample (N=11,902) of the U.S. population residing in TNC-served areas is the key feature of this study. The statistical analysis indicates that ridehailing services are mainly attracting personal vehicle users as riders, without substantially affecting demand for transit. Moreover, around 10% of ridehailing users reported postponing the purchase of a new car due to the availability of TNC services. The model estimation results indicate that the likelihood of being a TNC user increases with the increase in age for someone younger than 44 years, but the pattern is reversed post 44 years. This change in direction of the marginal effect of age is insightful as the previous studies have reported a negative association. We also find that postgraduate drivers who live in metropolitan regions are more likely to switch to fuel-efficient vehicles. These findings would inform transportation planners and TNCs in developing policies to improve the fuel economy of the fleet.

Suggested Citation

  • Prateek Bansal & Akanksha Sinha & Rubal Dua & Ricardo Daziano, 2019. "Eliciting Preferences of Ridehailing Users and Drivers: Evidence from the United States," Papers 1904.06695, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1904.06695
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.06695
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexandra König & Tabea Bonus & Jan Grippenkoven, 2018. "Analyzing Urban Residents’ Appraisal of Ridepooling Service Attributes with Conjoint Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Hidrue, Michael K. & Parsons, George R. & Kempton, Willett & Gardner, Meryl P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 686-705, September.
    3. Jun Guan Neoh & Maxwell Chipulu & Alasdair Marshall, 2017. "What encourages people to carpool? An evaluation of factors with meta-analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 423-447, March.
    4. Clewlow, Regina R. & Mishra, Gouri S., 2017. "Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt82w2z91j, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    5. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Chan, Nelson & Gaynor, Theresa, 2016. "Casual Carpooling in the San Francisco Bay Area: Understanding User Characteristics, Behaviors, and Motivations," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt4dh2h0rf, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    6. Greenblatt, Jeffery & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2015. "Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility and Environmental Impacts," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt23r1h80t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    7. Yu, Haitao & Peng, Zhong-Ren, 2019. "Exploring the spatial variation of ridesourcing demand and its relationship to built environment and socioeconomic factors with the geographically weighted Poisson regression," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 147-163.
    8. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Chan, Nelson, 2016. "Mobility and the Sharing Economy: Potential to Overcome First- and Last-Mile Public Transit Connections," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt8042k3d7, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    9. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2011. "Consumer Preferences for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: A Discrete Choice Analysis," FCN Working Papers 20/2011, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    10. Erdem, Cumhur & Sentürk, Ismail & Simsek, Türker, 2010. "Identifying the factors affecting the willingness to pay for fuel-efficient vehicles in Turkey: A case of hybrids," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3038-3043, June.
    11. Hall, Jonathan D. & Palsson, Craig & Price, Joseph, 2018. "Is Uber a substitute or complement for public transit?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 36-50.
    12. Martin, Elliot W & Shaheen, Susan A, 2011. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts of Carsharing in North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6wr90040, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    13. Lee, Jae Hyun & Goulias, Konstadinos G., 2018. "A decade of dynamics of residential location, car ownership, activity, travel and land use in the Seattle metropolitan region," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 272-287.
    14. Saarenpää, Jukka & Kolehmainen, Mikko & Niska, Harri, 2013. "Geodemographic analysis and estimation of early plug-in hybrid electric vehicle adoption," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 456-464.
    15. Jonathan V. Hall & Alan B. Krueger, 2018. "An Analysis of the Labor Market for Uber’s Driver-Partners in the United States," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 71(3), pages 705-732, May.
    16. Shaheen, Susan A. & Chan, Nelson D. & Gaynor, Teresa, 2016. "Casual carpooling in the San Francisco Bay Area: Understanding user characteristics, behaviors, and motivations," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 165-173.
    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. Nadine Kostorz & Eva Fraedrich & Martin Kagerbauer, 2021. "Usage and User Characteristics—Insights from MOIA, Europe’s Largest Ridepooling Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.

    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. Xiaowei Chen & Hongyu Zheng & Ze Wang & Xiqun Chen, 2021. "Exploring impacts of on-demand ridesplitting on mobility via real-world ridesourcing data and questionnaires," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1541-1561, August.
    2. Sigma Dolins & Helena Strömberg & Yale Z. Wong & MariAnne Karlsson, 2021. "Sharing Anxiety Is in the Driver’s Seat: Analyzing User Acceptance of Dynamic Ridepooling and Its Implications for Shared Autonomous Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    3. Soria, Jason & Stathopoulos, Amanda, 2021. "Investigating socio-spatial differences between solo ridehailing and pooled rides in diverse communities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    4. Aguilera-García, Álvaro & Gomez, Juan & Velázquez, Guillermo & Vassallo, Jose Manuel, 2022. "Ridesourcing vs. traditional taxi services: Understanding users’ choices and preferences in Spain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 161-178.
    5. Simona Bigerna & Silvia Micheli, 2018. "Attitudes Toward Electric Vehicles: The Case of Perugia Using a Fuzzy Set Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    6. Ye Ma & Biying Yu & Meimei Xue, 2018. "Spatial Heterogeneous Characteristics of Ridesharing in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region of China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-21, November.
    7. Zgheib, Najib & Abou-Zeid, Maya & Kaysi, Isam, 2020. "Modeling demand for ridesourcing as feeder for high capacity mass transit systems with an application to the planned Beirut BRT," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 70-91.
    8. André de Palma & Lucas Javaudin & Patrick Stokkink & Léandre Tarpin-Pitre, 2021. "Modelling Ridesharing in a Large Network with Dynamic Congestion," THEMA Working Papers 2021-16, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    9. Shaheen, Susan & Cohen, Adam, 2020. "Chapter 3 - Mobility on demand (MOD) and mobility as a service (MaaS): early understanding of shared mobility impacts and public transit partnerships," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt5030f0cd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    10. Yi, Xu & Lian, Feng & Yang, Zhongzhen, 2022. "Research on commuters’ carpooling behavior in the mobile internet context," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 14-25.
    11. Amirmahdi Tafreshian & Neda Masoud & Yafeng Yin, 2020. "Frontiers in Service Science: Ride Matching for Peer-to-Peer Ride Sharing: A Review and Future Directions," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2-3), pages 44-60, June.
    12. Hossain Mohiuddin, 2021. "Planning for the First and Last Mile: A Review of Practices at Selected Transit Agencies in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    13. He, Zhengbing, 2021. "Portraying ride-hailing mobility using multi-day trip order data: A case study of Beijing, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 152-169.
    14. Marc Kuhn & Viola Marquardt & Sarah Selinka, 2021. "“Is Sharing Really Caring?”: The Role of Environmental Concern and Trust Reflecting Usage Intention of “Station-Based” and “Free-Floating”—Carsharing Business Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    15. Lazarus, Jessica R. & Caicedo, Juan D. & Bayen, Alexandre M. & Shaheen, Susan A., 2021. "To Pool or Not to Pool? Understanding opportunities, challenges, and equity considerations to expanding the market for pooling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 199-222.
    16. Bi, Hui & Ye, Zhirui & Zhao, Jiahui & Chen, Enhui, 2020. "Real trip costs: Modelling intangible costs of urban online car-hailing in Haikou," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 128-140.
    17. Qing Shen & Yiyuan Wang & Casey Gifford, 2021. "Exploring partnership between transit agency and shared mobility company: an incentive program for app-based carpooling," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2585-2603, October.
    18. Wenbo Li & Ruyin Long & Hong Chen & Jichao Geng, 2017. "Household factors and adopting intention of battery electric vehicles: a multi-group structural equation model analysis among consumers in Jiangsu Province, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 945-960, June.
    19. Dean, Matthew D. & Kockelman, Kara M., 2021. "Spatial variation in shared ride-hail trip demand and factors contributing to sharing: Lessons from Chicago," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. Kong, Hui & Zhang, Xiaohu & Zhao, Jinhua, 2020. "How does ridesourcing substitute for public transit? A geospatial perspective in Chengdu, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:1904.06695. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.