IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v134y2023icp1-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulation of shared electric kick scooters in urban areas: Key drivers from expert stakeholders

Author

Listed:
  • Sobrino, Natalia
  • Gonzalez, Juan Nicolas
  • Vassallo, Jose Manuel
  • Baeza, Maria de los Angeles

Abstract

Shared electric kick scooters (SEKS) have become widespread in many cities worldwide with great expectations from both users and municipalities. Most cities have not yet passed specific legislation to regulate this new phenomenon, thereby increasing uncertainties across different players such as users, operators, etc. This research provides guidelines for regulating SEKS in urban areas for their successful implementation, taking advantage of a collaborative approach with expert stakeholders that look at the regulation problem from different perspectives. The study focuses on the case of Spain where SEKS have been booming over the last few years. The methodology applied follows a three-step process consisting of the identification of crucial issues and key expert stakeholders, a general survey to them, and a final focus group intended to reach consensus. The paper provides regulatory recommendations in four main areas: market access, technical requirements, traffic and safety, and supervision. It finds large agreement on key aspects such as promoting a homogeneous regulation across the municipalities within the same metropolitan area; establishing fixed bases for parking in the city centre while allowing free floating in low density areas located in the outskirts; and promoting an integration with the public transportation system.

Suggested Citation

  • Sobrino, Natalia & Gonzalez, Juan Nicolas & Vassallo, Jose Manuel & Baeza, Maria de los Angeles, 2023. "Regulation of shared electric kick scooters in urban areas: Key drivers from expert stakeholders," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-18.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:134:y:2023:i:c:p:1-18
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.02.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X23000343
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.02.009?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. Lazarus, Jessica & Pourquier, Jean Carpentier & Feng, Frank & Hammel, Henry & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "Micromobility evolution and expansion: Understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete – A case study of San Francisco," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Lazarus, Jessica & Pourquier, Jean Carpentier & Feng, Frank & Hammel, Henry & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "Micromobility evolution and expansion: Understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete – A case study of San Francisco," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt96g9c9nd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    3. Maria Lindholm, 2013. "Urban freight transport from a local authority perspective – a literature review," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 54, pages 1-3.
    4. Laa, Barbara & Emberger, Günter, 2020. "Bike sharing: Regulatory options for conflicting interests – Case study Vienna," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 148-157.
    5. Riggs, William & Kawashima, Matt & Batstone, David, 2021. "Exploring best practice for municipal e-scooter policy in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 18-27.
    6. 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.
    7. Stefania Boglietti & Benedetto Barabino & Giulio Maternini, 2021. "Survey on e-Powered Micro Personal Mobility Vehicles: Exploring Current Issues towards Future Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-34, March.
    8. Button, Kenneth & Frye, Hailey & Reaves, David, 2020. "Economic regulation and E-scooter networks in the USA," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    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. Jiang, Guoyin & Yang, Wanqiang, 2023. "Signal effect of government regulations on ride-hailing drivers’ intention to mobile-based transportation platform governance: Evidence from China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 63-78.

    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. Bach, Xavier & Marquet, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme, 2023. "Assessing social and spatial access equity in regulatory frameworks for moped-style scooter sharing services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 154-162.
    2. 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.
    3. Arias-Molinares, Daniela & Romanillos, Gustavo & García-Palomares, Juan Carlos & Gutiérrez, Javier, 2021. "Exploring the spatio-temporal dynamics of moped-style scooter sharing services in urban areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Elnert Coenegrachts & Joris Beckers & Thierry Vanelslander & Ann Verhetsel, 2021. "Business Model Blueprints for the Shared Mobility Hub Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, June.
    5. Ma, Xinwei & Ji, Yanjie & Yuan, Yufei & Van Oort, Niels & Jin, Yuchuan & Hoogendoorn, Serge, 2020. "A comparison in travel patterns and determinants of user demand between docked and dockless bike-sharing systems using multi-sourced data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 148-173.
    6. Cheng, Long & Huang, Jie & Jin, Tanhua & Chen, Wendong & Li, Aoyong & Witlox, Frank, 2023. "Comparison of station-based and free-floating bikeshare systems as feeder modes to the metro," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Riggs, William & Kawashima, Matt & Batstone, David, 2021. "Exploring best practice for municipal e-scooter policy in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 18-27.
    8. Daniela Arias-Molinares & Juan Carlos García-Palomares & Gustavo Romanillos & Javier Gutiérrez, 2023. "Uncovering spatiotemporal micromobility patterns through the lens of space–time cubes and GIS tools," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 403-427, July.
    9. 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.
    10. Shahram Heydari & Garyfallos Konstantinoudis & Abdul Wahid Behsoodi, 2021. "Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on bike-sharing demand and hire time: Evidence from Santander Cycles in London," Papers 2107.11589, arXiv.org.
    11. Post, Alison PhD & Ratan, Ishana & Hill, Mary & Huang, Amy & Soga, Kenichi PhD & Zhao, Bingyu PhD, 2021. "Benchmarking “Smart City” Technology Adoption in California: An Innovative Web Platform for Exploring New Data and Tracking Adoption," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt5mt4m51n, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    12. Karina Hermawan & Diem-Trinh Le, 2022. "Examining Factors Influencing the Use of Shared Electric Scooters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    13. 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).
    14. Georgia Ayfantopoulou & Josep Maria Salanova Grau & Zisis Maleas & Alexandros Siomos, 2022. "Micro-Mobility User Pattern Analysis and Station Location in Thessaloniki," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-14, May.
    15. Daria Bylieva & Victoria Lobatyuk & Irina Shestakova, 2022. "Shared Micromobility: Between Physical and Digital Reality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Bretones, Alexandra & Marquet, Oriol, 2022. "Sociopsychological factors associated with the adoption and usage of electric micromobility. A literature review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 230-249.
    17. Hosseinzadeh, Aryan & Algomaiah, Majeed & Kluger, Robert & Li, Zhixia, 2021. "Spatial analysis of shared e-scooter trips," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Xiaojia Guo & Chengpeng Lu & Dongqi Sun & Yexin Gao & Bing Xue, 2021. "Comparison of Usage and Influencing Factors between Governmental Public Bicycles and Dockless Bicycles in Linfen City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    20. 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.

    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:trapol:v:134:y:2023:i:c:p:1-18. 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/30473/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.