IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v159y2024icp215-229.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ambivalent relationship of e-scooters and public transport: Evidence from France

Author

Listed:
  • Psarrou Kalakoni, Anna Mariam
  • Christoforou, Zoi
  • Gioldasis, Christos

Abstract

This paper aims at assessing competitiveness of shared e-scooters relative to public transport proposing a methodology that uses empirical data at the individual trip level and comparing e-scooter trips with the alternative public transit route available to the traveler at the time of the trip, as estimated by a navigation and public transit application. This allows us to obtain information at the individual transit trip level, such as in-vehicle time, walking, waiting, and other. We then explore the competitiveness between the two alternatives using two performance measures – travel time (TT) and an estimation of the generalized cost (GC) of a trip – for different levels of aggregation. Results show that in general, e-scooters are more competitive in terms of travel time. However, due to the higher pricing, generalized cost of transit is generally lower than that of e-scooter. In 60% of the cases users would lower their generalized cost by using public transport instead of e-scooter. On average, e-scooter is a better option for trips up to 15min, while public transit is better for longer trips. They are also more competitive during hours when transit frequency is reduced, as well as in areas with reduced service. Finally, we also find that one in five trips complement public transport service offering transportation outside of transit service hours or between areas with no connectivity. Further research should include surveys in order to obtain more details on the psychological constructs of the users.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:159:y:2024:i:c:p:215-229
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.10.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X24003123
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.10.023?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. Foissaud, Nicolas & Gioldasis, Christos & Tamura, Shun & Christoforou, Zoi & Farhi, Nadir, 2022. "Free-floating e-scooter usage in urban areas: A spatiotemporal analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Casello, Jeffrey M., 2007. "Transit competitiveness in polycentric metropolitan regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 19-40, January.
    3. Yen, Barbara T.H. & Mulley, Corinne & Tseng, Wen-Chun, 2018. "Inter-modal competition in an urbanised area: Heavy rail and busways," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 77-85.
    4. Aarhaug, Jørgen & Fearnley, Nils & Johnsson, Espen, 2023. "E-scooters and public transport – Complement or competition?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Sanders, Rebecca L. & Branion-Calles, Michael & Nelson, Trisalyn A., 2020. "To scoot or not to scoot: Findings from a recent survey about the benefits and barriers of using E-scooters for riders and non-riders," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 217-227.
    7. Wardman, Mark, 2004. "Public transport values of time," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 363-377, October.
    8. Pritchard, John P. & Tomasiello, Diego Bogado & Giannotti, Mariana & Geurs, Karst, 2019. "Potential impacts of bike-and-ride on job accessibility and spatial equity in São Paulo, Brazil," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 386-400.
    9. 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.
    10. Small, Kenneth A., 2012. "Valuation of travel time," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 2-14.
    11. Haitao Jin & Fengjun Jin & Jiao’e Wang & Wei Sun & Libo Dong, 2019. "Competition and Cooperation between Shared Bicycles and Public Transit: A Case Study of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, March.
    12. Lee, Hasik & Park, Ho-Chul & Kho, Seung-Young & Kim, Dong-Kyu, 2019. "Assessing transit competitiveness in Seoul considering actual transit travel times based on smart card data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    13. Ziedan, Abubakr & Darling, Wesley & Brakewood, Candace & Erhardt, Greg & Watkins, Kari, 2021. "The impacts of shared e-scooters on bus ridership," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 20-34.
    14. Zoi Christoforou & Etienne Corbille & Nadir Farhi & Fabien Leurent, 2016. "Managing planned disruptions of mass transit systems," Post-Print hal-01240155, HAL.
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. Mohammed Hamad Almannaa & Faisal Adnan Alsahhaf & Huthaifa I. Ashqar & Mohammed Elhenawy & Mahmoud Masoud & Andry Rakotonirainy, 2021. "Perception Analysis of E-Scooter Riders and Non-Riders in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Survey Outputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Nikolaos-Fivos Galatoulas & Konstantinos N. Genikomsakis & Christos S. Ioakimidis, 2020. "Spatio-Temporal Trends of E-Bike Sharing System Deployment: A Review in Europe, North America and Asia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, June.
    19. Berrada, Jaâfar & Mouhoubi, Ilyes & Christoforou, Zoi, 2020. "Factors of successful implementation and diffusion of services based on autonomous vehicles: users’ acceptance and operators’ profitability," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    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. 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).
    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. 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.
    4. Kimpton, Anthony & Loginova, Julia & Pojani, Dorina & Bean, Richard & Sigler, Thomas & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2022. "Weather to scoot? How weather shapes shared e-scooter ridership patterns," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    5. Roig-Costa, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme & Marquet, Oriol, 2024. "Shared bikes vs. private e-scooters. Understanding patterns of use and demand in a policy-constrained micromobility environment," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 116-125.
    6. Samira Dibaj & Aryan Hosseinzadeh & Miloš N. Mladenović & Robert Kluger, 2021. "Where Have Shared E-Scooters Taken Us So Far? A Review of Mobility Patterns, Usage Frequency, and Personas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-27, October.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Cloud, Cannon & Heß, Simon & Kasinger, Johannes, 2023. "Shared e-scooter services and road safety: Evidence from six European countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    10. Yang, Hongtai & Zheng, Rong & Li, Xuan & Huo, Jinghai & Yang, Linchuan & Zhu, Tong, 2022. "Nonlinear and threshold effects of the built environment on e-scooter sharing ridership," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    11. Abouelela, Mohamed & Chaniotakis, Emmanouil & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2023. "Understanding the landscape of shared-e-scooters in North America; Spatiotemporal analysis and policy insights," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    12. Mohammed Hamad Almannaa & Faisal Adnan Alsahhaf & Huthaifa I. Ashqar & Mohammed Elhenawy & Mahmoud Masoud & Andry Rakotonirainy, 2021. "Perception Analysis of E-Scooter Riders and Non-Riders in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Survey Outputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    13. Fei-Hui Huang, 2021. "User Behavioral Intentions toward a Scooter-Sharing Service: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Krčál, Ondřej & Peer, Stefanie & Staněk, Rostislav & Karlínová, Bára, 2019. "Real consequences matter: Why hypothetical biases in the valuation of time persist even in controlled lab experiments," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    17. Berrada, Jaâfar & Poulhès, Alexis, 2021. "Economic and socioeconomic assessment of replacing conventional public transit with demand responsive transit services in low-to-medium density areas," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 317-334.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Monchambert, Guillaume, 2020. "Why do (or don’t) people carpool for long distance trips? A discrete choice experiment in France," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 911-931.

    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:159:y:2024:i:c:p:215-229. 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.