IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v206y2026ics0965856426000583.html

Impact of shared micro-mobility on local economy: Market sales and regional disparities

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Minju
  • Zo, Hangjung

Abstract

We examine the impact of shared e-scooters on regional accessibility and local economic development, focusing on different types of commercial districts—alleyway markets, traditional markets, and developed districts—in Seoul, Korea. Using a two-way fixed-effects model to account for both time-specific shocks and time-invariant district characteristics, we find that an increase in e-scooter returns is associated with higher sales based on within-district variation rather than cross-sectional differences. However, the magnitude of this effect varies by district type. The findings indicate that the impact of e-scooter usage on sales growth is more pronounced in alleyway markets, where baseline accessibility is structurally limited and mobility improvements generate larger marginal gains. These districts benefit more significantly due to their reliance on local foot traffic and limited accessibility via traditional transit systems. In addition, the effect also varies by store type, with quick-consumption venues such as coffee shops and convenience stores showing stronger responses than full-service restaurants, consistent with the higher sensitivity of short-duration, convenience-driven consumption to improvements in short-distance accessibility. This study suggests that shared e-scooters may improve mobility and access in regions underserved by transit infrastructure. The findings suggest that shared micro-mobility may play a contributing role in fostering differentiated and economically meaningful improvements, particularly in walkable but commercially constrained districts, thereby contributing to more inclusive forms of urban economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Minju & Zo, Hangjung, 2026. "Impact of shared micro-mobility on local economy: Market sales and regional disparities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:206:y:2026:i:c:s0965856426000583
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2026.104917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856426000583
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2026.104917?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niedzielski, Michał A., 2021. "Grocery store accessibility: Different metrics – Different modal disparity results and spatial patterns," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Jin, Scarlett T. & Sui, Daniel Z., 2024. "Bikesharing and equity: A nationwide study of bikesharing accessibility in the U.S," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    3. Ying Liu & Han Gu & Yuyu Shi, 2022. "Spatial Accessibility Analysis of Medical Facilities Based on Public Transportation Networks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Jordan J Norris & Heyu Xiong, 2023. "Ride-Sharing and the Geography of Consumption Industries," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(654), pages 2449-2482.
    5. Tiznado-Aitken, Ignacio & Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2021. "Public transport accessibility accounting for level of service and competition for urban opportunities: An equity analysis for education in Santiago de Chile," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Bert van Wee & Karst Geurs & Caspar Chorus, 2013. "Information, communication, travel behavior and accessibility," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16.
    7. Judd Cramer & Alan B. Krueger, 2016. "Disruptive Change in the Taxi Business: The Case of Uber," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 177-182, May.
    8. Faghih-Imani, Ahmadreza & Eluru, Naveen, 2016. "Incorporating the impact of spatio-temporal interactions on bicycle sharing system demand: A case study of New York CitiBike system," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 218-227.
    9. Meihan Jin & Lu Liu & De Tong & Yongxi Gong & Yu Liu, 2019. "Evaluating the Spatial Accessibility and Distribution Balance of Multi-Level Medical Service Facilities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-19, March.
    10. Chen, Ching-Fu & Lee, Chia-Han, 2023. "Investigating shared e-scooter users’ customer value co-creation behaviors and their antecedents: Perceived service quality and perceived value," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 147-154.
    11. Pajares, Elias & Büttner, Benjamin & Jehle, Ulrike & Nichols, Aaron & Wulfhorst, Gebhard, 2021. "Accessibility by proximity: Addressing the lack of interactive accessibility instruments for active mobility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    12. Deboosere, Robbin & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2018. "Evaluating equity and accessibility to jobs by public transport across Canada," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 54-63.
    13. Baker, Dwayne Marshall & Kim, Seunghoon, 2020. "What remains? The influence of light rail transit on discretionary income," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Small Kenneth A. & Song Shunfeng, 1994. "Population and Employment Densities: Structure and Change," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 292-313, November.
    15. Christiansen, Petter & Engebretsen, Øystein & Fearnley, Nils & Usterud Hanssen, Jan, 2017. "Parking facilities and the built environment: Impacts on travel behaviour," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 198-206.
    16. Jin, Scarlett T. & Wang, Lei & Sui, Daniel, 2023. "How the built environment affects E-scooter sharing link flows: A machine learning approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    17. Kristoffersson, Ida & Daly, Andrew & Algers, Staffan, 2018. "Modelling the attraction of travel to shopping destinations in large-scale modelling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 52-62.
    18. Moinse, Dylan & L'Hostis, Alain, 2024. "Optimizing intermodal commuting by way of detours and breaks: Evidence of micromobility users in France," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    19. Rokicki, Bartlomiej & Stępniak, Marcin, 2018. "Major transport infrastructure investment and regional economic development – An accessibility-based approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 36-49.
    20. Chen, Shaopei & Claramunt, Christophe & Ray, Cyril, 2014. "A spatio-temporal modelling approach for the study of the connectivity and accessibility of the Guangzhou metropolitan network," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 12-23.
    21. Colovic, Aleksandra & Prencipe, Luigi Pio & Giuffrida, Nadia & Ottomanelli, Michele, 2024. "A multi-objective model to design shared e-kick scooters parking spaces in large urban areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    22. Li, Peilin & Zhao, Pengjun & Schwanen, Tim, 2020. "Effect of land use on shopping trips in station areas: Examining sensitivity to scale," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 969-985.
    23. 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.
    24. Chrysa Vizmpa & George Botzoris & Panagiotis Lemonakis & Athanasios Galanis, 2023. "Micromobility in Urban Trail Paths: Expanding and Strengthening the Planning of 15-Minute Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, December.
    25. Younes, Hannah & Zou, Zhenpeng & Wu, Jiahui & Baiocchi, Giovanni, 2020. "Comparing the Temporal Determinants of Dockless Scooter-share and Station-based Bike-share in Washington, D.C," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 308-320.
    26. 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.
    27. 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.
    28. 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).
    29. Saif Benjaafar & Ming Hu, 2020. "Operations Management in the Age of the Sharing Economy: What Is Old and What Is New?," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 93-101, January.
    30. Gao, Jing & Li, Sen, 2024. "Synergizing shared micromobility and public transit towards an equitable multimodal transportation network," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    31. Guzman, Luis A. & Oviedo, Daniel, 2018. "Accessibility, affordability and equity: Assessing ‘pro-poor’ public transport subsidies in Bogotá," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 37-51.
    32. Kailai Wang & Xiaodong Qian & Dillon Taylor Fitch & Yongsung Lee & Jai Malik & Giovanni Circella, 2023. "What travel modes do shared e-scooters displace? A review of recent research findings," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 5-31, January.
    33. Watanabe, Chihiro & Naveed, Kashif & Neittaanmäki, Pekka, 2016. "Co-evolution of three mega-trends nurtures un-captured GDP – Uber’s ride-sharing revolution," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 164-185.
    34. Shah, Nitesh R. & Guo, Jing & Han, Lee D. & Cherry, Christopher R., 2023. "Why do people take e-scooter trips? Insights on temporal and spatial usage patterns of detailed trip data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    35. Mitropoulos, Lambros & Karolemeas, Christos & Tsigdinos, Stefanos & Vassi, Avgi & Bakogiannis, Efthimios, 2023. "A composite index for assessing accessibility in urban areas: A case study in Central Athens, Greece," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    36. Weschke, Jan, 2023. "Scooting when the metro arrives — Estimating the impact of public transport stations on shared e-scooter demand," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    37. Kim, Kibum & Baek, Chulwoo & Lee, Jeong-Dong, 2018. "Creative destruction of the sharing economy in action: The case of Uber," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 118-127.
    38. Sujae Kim & Sangho Choo & Gyeongjae Lee & Sanghun Kim, 2022. "Predicting Demand for Shared E-Scooter Using Community Structure and Deep Learning Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-15, February.
    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. Jin, Scarlett T. & Sui, Daniel Z., 2024. "A comparative analysis of the spatial determinants of e-bike and e-scooter sharing link flows," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Izquierdo-Herazo, Ely & Orozco-Fontalvo, Mauricio & Gutiérrez, Margareth & Ramos, Raúl & Cantillo, Víctor, 2026. "How do regulations and safety perceptions affect the willingness to use e-scooters?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Psarrou Kalakoni, Anna Mariam & Christoforou, Zoi & Gioldasis, Christos, 2024. "The ambivalent relationship of e-scooters and public transport: Evidence from France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 215-229.
    6. Öztürk, İbrahim & Akay, Nazlı, 2025. "Exploring attitudes and behavioural intentions towards e-scooter use in Türkiye: Differences between users and non-users," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    7. Wu, Yuhang & Liu, Tao & Du, Bo, 2024. "Fleet sizing and static rebalancing strategies for shared E-scooters: A case study in Indianapolis, USA," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    8. Levent Çallı & Büşra Alma Çallı, 2024. "Value‐centric analysis of user adoption for sustainable urban micro‐mobility transportation through shared e‐scooter services," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(6), pages 6408-6433, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Chien, Yu-Shyun & Lu, Chung-Cheng, 2025. "Investigating users’ intention to re-use shared electric scooters through a combined behavioral model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 533-544.
    11. Shah, Nitesh R. & Ziedan, Abubakr & Brakewood, Candace & Cherry, Christopher R., 2023. "Shared e-scooter service providers with large fleet size have a competitive advantage: Findings from e-scooter demand and supply analysis of Nashville, Tennessee," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Daniel Oviedo & Lynn Scholl & Marco Innao & Lauramaria Pedraza, 2019. "Do Bus Rapid Transit Systems Improve Accessibility to Job Opportunities for the Poor? The Case of Lima, Peru," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    13. Lee, Junmin & Kim, Keungoui & Kim, Jiyong & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "The relationship between shared mobility and regulation in South Korea: A system dynamics approach from the socio-technical transitions perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Gabriella Vitorino Guimarães & Tálita Floriano Santos & Vicente Aprigliano Fernandes & Jorge Eliécer Córdoba Maquilón & Marcelino Aurélio Vieira da Silva, 2020. "Assessment for the Social Sustainability and Equity under the Perspective of Accessibility to Jobs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    15. Shr, Yau-Huo & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2024. "The effects of participating in digital ride-hailing on taxi drivers’ business operations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    16. Brousseau, Eric & Côme, Etienne & Coulombel, Nicolas & Olave-Cruz, Isac, 2025. "Harmonizing dockless E-scooters: insights from Paris," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    17. 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).
    18. Abouelela, Mohamed & Durán-Rodas, David & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2024. "Do we all need shared E-scooters? An accessibility-centered spatial equity evaluation approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    19. Rémy Le Boennec & Frédéric Salladarré, 2023. "Investigating the use of privately-owned micromobility modes for commuting in four European countries," Post-Print hal-04296400, HAL.
    20. Krauss, Konstantin & Gnann, Till & Burgert, Tobias & Axhausen, Kay W., 2024. "Faster, greener, scooter? An assessment of shared e-scooter usage based on real-world driving data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:transa:v:206:y:2026:i:c:s0965856426000583. 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.