IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v146y2024icp31-41.html

User preference and willingness-to-pay for operation strategies that enhance safety and convenience of E-scooter sharing services

Author

Listed:
  • Kang, Seongmin
  • Chung, Yongjin
  • Yang, Byungsoo
  • Lee, Hyukseong
  • Lee, Jun
  • Kim, Jinhee

Abstract

An electric scooter sharing (ESS) service offers improved convenience by providing accessibility to public transportation stations and mobility for short-distance trips. However, with the growing global popularity of ESS services, concerns related to safety and accidents have also increased. Previous studies explored the factors impacting preferences for ESS services; however, few have considered ways to enhance safety and convenience for users. Therefore, this study investigated the factors that influence people's choice of ESS service for enhancing safety and convenience. Data was collected in Seoul, Korea, and a latent class model was developed, allowing us to estimate the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of various attributes. The estimation results revealed that the “Exclusive e-scooter lane” attribute was the most preferred, followed by “provision of real-time driving information.” The WTP for “Exclusive e-scooter lane” was 47.1% above the base fare. In the estimation results of the class membership model, the preferred attributes were different depending on the class characteristics. The study further revealed variations in WTP for safety and convenience among users and non-users, as well as among non-users depending on their intent to use the ESS service. Furthermore, the proposed attributes constituted factors that affect the safety and convenience of ESS users, and that users were willing to pay an additional cost for them.

Suggested Citation

  • Kang, Seongmin & Chung, Yongjin & Yang, Byungsoo & Lee, Hyukseong & Lee, Jun & Kim, Jinhee, 2024. "User preference and willingness-to-pay for operation strategies that enhance safety and convenience of E-scooter sharing services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 31-41.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:146:y:2024:i:c:p:31-41
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X23003062
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.11.005?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. Paula Brezovec & Nina Hampl, 2021. "Electric Vehicles Ready for Breakthrough in MaaS? Consumer Adoption of E-Car Sharing and E-Scooter Sharing as a Part of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Lee, Jaehyung & Lee, Euntak & Yun, Jaewoong & Chung, Jin-Hyuk & Kim, Jinhee, 2021. "Latent heterogeneity in autonomous driving preferences and in-vehicle activities by travel distance," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Draženko Glavić & Marina Milenković & Aleksandar Trifunović & Igor Jokanović & Jelica Komarica, 2023. "Influence of Dockless Shared E-Scooters on Urban Mobility: WTP and Modal Shift," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-17, June.
    5. 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.
    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. Shiva Pourfalatoun & Jubaer Ahmed & Erika E. Miller, 2023. "Shared Electric Scooter Users and Non-Users: Perceptions on Safety, Adoption and Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, June.
    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. Kavta, Kuldeep & Bösehans, Gustav & Bell, Margaret Carol & Liao, Fanchao & Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & Dissanayake, Dilum, 2024. "Assessing the spatial transferability of mode choice models: A case of shared electric mobility hubs (eHUBS) in Amsterdam and Manchester," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 101-111.
    2. 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.
    3. Varameth Vichiensan & Vasinee Wasuntarasook & Sathita Malaitham & Atsushi Fukuda & Wiroj Rujopakarn, 2025. "Willingness to Pay for Station Access Transport: A Mixed Logit Model with Heterogeneous Travel Time Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Chae, Kyung Soo & Kim, Sung Hoo & Yan, Xiang, 2025. "Exploring attitudinal group differences in preferences for shared e-scooter use and its integration with public transit," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 196(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. Ching-Fu Chen & Chiang Fu & Ming-Cheng Yen, 2025. "Friend or foe? Exploring the choice preference between E-moped sharing and public transport: an integrated heteroskedastic generalized choice and latent variable (IHGLV) approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 2281-2310, December.
    3. Elena Carrara & Rebecca Ciavarella & Stefania Boglietti & Martina Carra & Giulio Maternini & Benedetto Barabino, 2021. "Identifying and Selecting Key Sustainable Parameters for the Monitoring of e-Powered Micro Personal Mobility Vehicles. Evidence from Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Frank, Laura & Klopfer, Antonia & Walther, Grit, 2024. "Designing corporate mobility as a service – Decision support and perspectives," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    7. Daria Bylieva & Victoria Lobatyuk & Irina Shestakova, 2022. "Shared Micromobility: Between Physical and Digital Reality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. repec:osf:osfxxx:5xgch_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Tim De Ceunynck & Gert Jan Wijlhuizen & Aslak Fyhri & Regine Gerike & Dagmar Köhler & Alice Ciccone & Atze Dijkstra & Emmanuelle Dupont & Mario Cools, 2021. "Assessing the Willingness to Use Personal e-Transporters (PeTs): Results from a Cross-National Survey in Nine European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, March.
    15. Laura Gebhardt & Christian Wolf & Robert Seiffert, 2021. "“I’ll Take the E-Scooter Instead of My Car”—The Potential of E-Scooters as a Substitute for Car Trips in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, June.
    16. 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.
    17. Mohiuddin, Hossain & Bunch, David S. & Fukushige, Tatsuya & Fitch-Polse, Dillon T. & Handy, Susan L., 2025. "What factors influence the adoption and use of dockless electric bike-share? A case study from the Sacramento region," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Mariano Gallo & Mario Marinelli, 2020. "Sustainable Mobility: A Review of Possible Actions and Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-39, September.
    20. 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.
    21. Mingwei He & Jianbo Li & Zhuangbin Shi & Yang Liu & Chunyan Shuai & Jie Liu, 2022. "Exploring the Nonlinear and Threshold Effects of Travel Distance on the Travel Mode Choice across Different Groups: An Empirical Study of Guiyang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-23, November.

    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:trapol:v:146:y:2024:i:c:p:31-41. 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.