IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v179y2024ics0965856423003543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimization of the location and capacity of shared multimodal mobility hubs to maximize travel utility in urban areas

Author

Listed:
  • Xanthopoulos, Stavros
  • van der Tuin, Marieke
  • Sharif Azadeh, Shadi
  • Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida
  • van Oort, Niels
  • Snelder, Maaike

Abstract

Nowadays, urban areas are exposed to various challenges such as climate change, social inequalities, and congestion. Shared mobility hubs present the opportunity to reshape our cities and mitigate the previously mentioned challenges by contributing to a more sustainable transport system. These are places where shared cars, mopeds, and e-bikes are offered to improve connectivity in urban areas. In this paper, we investigate the impact of efficiently allocating multimodal shared mobility hubs on modal split, service level, and environmental factors while assuring economic feasibility. Given a limited budget, cities would like to optimize the hubs’ locations to maximize the population’s benefits. For that purpose, we introduce a multi-stage design algorithm model that distributes the hubs and allocates fleets of shared cars, mopeds, and e-bikes to maximize travel utility for all the population traveling using traditional and/or shared modes while accounting for multimodal trips. The model is divided into several modules: computational modules that calculate the demand for the hubs; an optimization module to optimize the hubs’ capacities, availability, and relocation of shared vehicles; and finally, a genetic algorithm to find the optimal hub distribution. Our proposed model is one of the first that optimizes the location and capacity of multimodal hubs by considering multimodal trips in a large network. Additionally, it allows to assess mobility, spatial, and environmental impact of shared modes. The model is applied to the case of Amsterdam, the capital of The Netherlands, with around 800,000 inhabitants. After running several scenarios with different budgets allocated to build the hubs, results show that having more hubs with a lower number of shared vehicles is more beneficial than having fewer hubs with higher capacity. That is because the travel time savings increase considerably when investments lead to complete coverage of the area by the hubs network. A modal split of 5% for the shared modes is expected when Amsterdam is covered by 288 hubs. From an environmental point of view, only 32% of the shared trips replace trips previously made by ICE and electric cars, leading to a limited CO2 emissions reduction of 1.27%. Hence, introducing shared modes and mobility hubs without push measures for the use of private cars appears to offer limited benefits to decrease the negative impacts of private car usage.

Suggested Citation

  • Xanthopoulos, Stavros & van der Tuin, Marieke & Sharif Azadeh, Shadi & Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & van Oort, Niels & Snelder, Maaike, 2024. "Optimization of the location and capacity of shared multimodal mobility hubs to maximize travel utility in urban areas," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:179:y:2024:i:c:s0965856423003543
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2023.103934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856423003543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103934?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nair, Rahul & Miller-Hooks, Elise, 2014. "Equilibrium network design of shared-vehicle systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 47-61.
    2. Joeri F. P. Mil & Tessa S. Leferink & Jan Anne Annema & Niels Oort, 2021. "Insights into factors affecting the combined bicycle-transit mode," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 649-673, October.
    3. Weustenenk, Anne Gerda & Mingardo, Giuliano, 2023. "Towards a typology of mobility hubs," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Li, Xiaopeng & Ma, Jiaqi & Cui, Jianxun & Ghiasi, Amir & Zhou, Fang, 2016. "Design framework of large-scale one-way electric vehicle sharing systems: A continuum approximation model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 21-45.
    5. Papu Carrone, Andrea & Hoening, Valerie Maria & Jensen, Anders Fjendbo & Mabit, Stefan Eriksen & Rich, Jeppe, 2020. "Understanding car sharing preferences and mode substitution patterns: A stated preference experiment," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 139-147.
    6. Mounce, Richard & Nelson, John D., 2019. "On the potential for one-way electric vehicle car-sharing in future mobility systems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 17-30.
    7. Frade, Ines & Ribeiro, Anabela, 2015. "Bike-sharing stations: A maximal covering location approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 216-227.
    8. Caggiani, Leonardo & Colovic, Aleksandra & Ottomanelli, Michele, 2020. "An equality-based model for bike-sharing stations location in bicycle-public transport multimodal mobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-265.
    9. Frank, Laura & Dirks, Nicolas & Walther, Grit, 2021. "Improving rural accessibility by locating multimodal mobility hubs," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    10. Shelat, Sanmay & Huisman, Raymond & van Oort, Niels, 2018. "Analysing the trip and user characteristics of the combined bicycle and transit mode," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 68-76.
    11. van Kuijk, Roy J. & de Almeida Correia, Gonçalo Homem & van Oort, Niels & van Arem, Bart, 2022. "Preferences for first and last mile shared mobility between stops and activity locations: A case study of local public transport users in Utrecht, the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 285-306.
    12. Rahul Nair & Elise Miller-Hooks, 2016. "Equilibrium design of bicycle sharing systems: the case of Washington D.C," EURO Journal on Transportation and Logistics, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 5(3), pages 321-344, August.
    13. Weibo Li & Maria Kamargianni, 2020. "Steering short-term demand for car-sharing: a mode choice and policy impact analysis by trip distance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2233-2265, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Frank, Laura & Dirks, Nicolas & Walther, Grit, 2021. "Improving rural accessibility by locating multimodal mobility hubs," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Nigro, Marialisa & Castiglione, Marisdea & Maria Colasanti, Fabio & De Vincentis, Rosita & Valenti, Gaetano & Liberto, Carlo & Comi, Antonio, 2022. "Exploiting floating car data to derive the shifting potential to electric micromobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 78-93.
    3. Song, Jiatong & Li, Baicheng & Szeto, W.Y. & Zhan, Xingbin, 2024. "A station location design problem in a bike-sharing system with both conventional and electric shared bikes considering bike users’ roaming delay costs," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    4. Gabriella Balacco & Mario Binetti & Leonardo Caggiani & Michele Ottomanelli, 2021. "A Novel Distributed System of e-Vehicle Charging Stations Based on Pumps as Turbine to Support Sustainable Micromobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    5. Stefan Illgen & Michael Höck, 2020. "Establishing car sharing services in rural areas: a simulation-based fleet operations analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 811-826, April.
    6. Illgen, Stefan & Höck, Michael, 2019. "Literature review of the vehicle relocation problem in one-way car sharing networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 193-204.
    7. Shichao Sun & Yuanqian Liu & Yukun Yao & Zhengyu Duan & Xiaokun Wang, 2021. "The Determinants to Promote College Students’ Use of Car-Sharing: An Empirical Study at Dalian Maritime University, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-12, June.
    8. Timmer, Sebastian & Merfeld, Katrin & Henkel, Sven, 2023. "Exploring motivations for multimodal commuting: A hierarchical means-end chain analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Yun, Lifen & Wang, Xifu & Fan, Hongqiang & Li, Xiaopeng, 2020. "Reliable facility location design with round-trip transportation under imperfect information Part I: A discrete model," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    10. Kim, Kyoungok, 2023. "Investigation of modal integration of bike-sharing and public transit in Seoul for the holders of 365-day passes," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    11. Saldanha-da-Gama, Francisco, 2022. "Facility Location in Logistics and Transportation: An enduring relationship," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    12. Huang, Kai & An, Kun & Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida, 2020. "Planning station capacity and fleet size of one-way electric carsharing systems with continuous state of charge functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1075-1091.
    13. Yixi Xue & Yi Zhang & Yi Chen, 2019. "An Evaluation Framework for the Planning of Electric Car-Sharing Systems: A Combination Model of AHP-CBA-VD," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.
    14. Anastasia Roukouni & Gonçalo Homem de Almeida Correia, 2020. "Evaluation Methods for the Impacts of Shared Mobility: Classification and Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Gilbert Laporte & Frédéric Meunier & Roberto Wolfler Calvo, 2018. "Shared mobility systems: an updated survey," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(1), pages 105-126, December.
    16. Golalikhani, Masoud & Oliveira, Beatriz Brito & Carravilla, Maria Antónia & Oliveira, José Fernando & Antunes, António Pais, 2021. "Carsharing: A review of academic literature and business practices toward an integrated decision-support framework," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    17. Zhang, Yingheng & Li, Haojie & Ren, Gang, 2022. "Quantifying the social impacts of the London Night Tube with a double/debiased machine learning based difference-in-differences approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 288-303.
    18. Çelebi, Dilay & Yörüsün, Aslı & Işık, Hanife, 2018. "Bicycle sharing system design with capacity allocations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 86-98.
    19. Arias-Molinares, Daniela & Xu, Yihan & Büttner, Benjamin & Duran-Rodas, David, 2023. "Exploring key spatial determinants for mobility hub placement based on micromobility ridership," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    20. Legros, Benjamin, 2019. "Dynamic repositioning strategy in a bike-sharing system; how to prioritize and how to rebalance a bike station," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 740-753.

    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:transa:v:179:y:2024:i:c:s0965856423003543. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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.