IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i23p6240-d451812.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System

Author

Listed:
  • Tomasz Bieliński

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland)

  • Łukasz Dopierała

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland)

  • Maciej Tarkowski

    (Faculty of Oceanography and Geography, University of Gdansk, 80-309 Gdańsk, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Ważna

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Gdansk, 81-824 Sopot, Poland)

Abstract

Electrically assisted bicycles are anticipated to become an effective tool to limit not only the use of cars in cities but also their negative impact on health, the environment, and passenger transportation in cities. In this paper, we examine the effects of implementing the first fully electric bike (e-bike) sharing system in the Metropolitan Area of Gdańsk–Gdynia–Sopot in Northern Poland, where no other bike sharing system had been introduced before. The aims of this article were to determine the impact of the new e-bike sharing system on the modal choice of citizens, identify barriers to its usage, and find differences between the usage of the system in the core of the metropolitan area and in the suburbs. We used two primary data sets: the survey data collected using the computer-assisted personal interviewing technique (CAPI technique) and the data automatically acquired from the website that monitored the system activities. We performed the analysis by using nonparametric tests and correspondence analysis. We found no evidence suggesting that e-bike sharing can replace large number of private car trips, but we found it likely to be competitive to carsharing, moped, and taxi services. E-bike sharing competes also with public transportation services, but it is also used as the first/last mile of the transportation supplementing public transport system. The major barrier to using this system in central cities of the metropolitan area was the lack of available public bikes, and possession of private bicycles, whereas for residents of the suburbs, the obstacles were the need to transport children, the high price of the bicycle rental/subscription, and the long distance to the docking stations.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomasz Bieliński & Łukasz Dopierała & Maciej Tarkowski & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:23:p:6240-:d:451812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/23/6240/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/23/6240/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diana, Marco & Pronello, Cristina, 2010. "Traveler segmentation strategy with nominal variables through correspondence analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 183-190, May.
    2. Jones, Tim & Harms, Lucas & Heinen, Eva, 2016. "Motives, perceptions and experiences of electric bicycle owners and implications for health, wellbeing and mobility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 41-49.
    3. Shaheen, Susan & Guzman, Stacey & Zhang, Hua, 2010. "Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present, and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt79v822k5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    4. Cherry, Christopher R. & Yang, Hongtai & Jones, Luke R. & He, Min, 2016. "Dynamics of electric bike ownership and use in Kunming, China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-135.
    5. Shaheen, Susan A & Guzman, Stacey & Zhang, Hua, 2010. "Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6qg8q6ft, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    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. Mingyang Du & Lin Cheng, 2018. "Better Understanding the Characteristics and Influential Factors of Different Travel Patterns in Free-Floating Bike Sharing: Evidence from Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    8. Wang, Kailai & Akar, Gulsah & Chen, Yu-Jen, 2018. "Bike sharing differences among Millennials, Gen Xers, and Baby Boomers: Lessons learnt from New York City’s bike share," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-14.
    9. Cherry, Christopher & Cervero, Robert, 2007. "Use characteristics and mode choice behavior of electric bike users in China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 247-257, May.
    10. Pucher, John & Garrard, Jan & Greaves, Stephen, 2011. "Cycling down under: a comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies in Sydney and Melbourne," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 332-345.
    11. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Mazzei, Armando, 2014. "Barriers to bikesharing: an analysis from Melbourne and Brisbane," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 325-337.
    12. 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, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, June.
    13. Gil Solá, Ana & Vilhelmson, Bertil & Larsson, Anders, 2018. "Understanding sustainable accessibility in urban planning: Themes of consensus, themes of tension," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Watson, Angela, 2015. "Factors influencing bike share membership: An analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 17-30.
    15. Zhiwei Chen & Yucong Hu & Jutint Li & Xing Wu, 2020. "Optimal Deployment of Electric Bicycle Sharing Stations: Model Formulation and Solution Technique," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 99-136, March.
    16. Cairns, S. & Behrendt, F. & Raffo, D. & Beaumont, C. & Kiefer, C., 2017. "Electrically-assisted bikes: Potential impacts on travel behaviour," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 327-342.
    17. Wafic El-Assi & Mohamed Salah Mahmoud & Khandker Nurul Habib, 2017. "Effects of built environment and weather on bike sharing demand: a station level analysis of commercial bike sharing in Toronto," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 589-613, May.
    18. Plazier, Paul A. & Weitkamp, Gerd & van den Berg, Agnes E., 2017. "“Cycling was never so easy!” An analysis of e-bike commuters' motives, travel behaviour and experiences using GPS-tracking and interviews," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 25-34.
    19. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    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. Katarzyna Turoń & Andrzej Kubik & Feng Chen, 2021. "Electric Shared Mobility Services during the Pandemic: Modeling Aspects of Transportation," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Miriam Magdolen & Sascha von Behren & Lukas Burger & Bastian Chlond, 2021. "Mobility Styles and Car Ownership—Potentials for a Sustainable Urban Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, March.

    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. 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.
    2. Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "To be or not to be dockless: Empirical analysis of dockless bikeshare development in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 122-147.
    3. Wang, Kailai & Akar, Gulsah, 2019. "Gender gap generators for bike share ridership: Evidence from Citi Bike system in New York City," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Cheng, Long & Yang, Junjian & Chen, Xuewu & Cao, Mengqiu & Zhou, Hang & Sun, Yu, 2020. "How could the station-based bike sharing system and the free-floating bike sharing system be coordinated?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Jain, Taru & Wang, Xinyi & Rose, Geoffrey & Johnson, Marilyn, 2018. "Does the role of a bicycle share system in a city change over time? A longitudinal analysis of casual users and long-term subscribers," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 45-57.
    6. Zhou, Xiaolu & Wang, Mingshu & Li, Dongying, 2019. "Bike-sharing or taxi? Modeling the choices of travel mode in Chicago using machine learning," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Wang, Jueyu & Lindsey, Greg, 2019. "Do new bike share stations increase member use: A quasi-experimental study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-11.
    8. Nematchoua, ModesteKameni & Deuse, Caroline & Cools, Mario & Reiter, Sigrid, 2020. "Evaluation of the potential of classic and electric bicycle commuting as an impetus for the transition towards environmentally sustainable cities: A case study of the university campuses in Liege, Bel," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    9. Qing Yu & Weifeng Li & Dongyuan Yang & Yingkun Xie, 2020. "Policy Zoning for Efficient Land Utilization Based on Spatio-Temporal Integration between the Bicycle-Sharing Service and the Metro Transit," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    10. Wang, Jueyu & Lindsey, Greg, 2019. "Neighborhood socio-demographic characteristics and bike share member patterns of use," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Yuanyuan Zhang & Yuming Zhang, 2018. "Associations between Public Transit Usage and Bikesharing Behaviors in The United States," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Maas, Suzanne & Attard, Maria & Caruana, Mark Anthony, 2020. "Assessing spatial and social dimensions of shared bicycle use in a Southern European island context: The case of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 81-97.
    13. Ton, Danique & Duives, Dorine, 2021. "Understanding long-term changes in commuter mode use of a pilot featuring free e-bike trials," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 134-144.
    14. Elżbieta Macioszek & Paulina Świerk & Agata Kurek, 2020. "The Bike-Sharing System as an Element of Enhancing Sustainable Mobility—A Case Study based on a City in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(8), pages 1-29, April.
    15. Li, Shaoying & Zhuang, Caigang & Tan, Zhangzhi & Gao, Feng & Lai, Zhipeng & Wu, Zhifeng, 2021. "Inferring the trip purposes and uncovering spatio-temporal activity patterns from dockless shared bike dataset in Shenzhen, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    16. Kim, Minjun & Cho, Gi-Hyoug, 2021. "Analysis on bike-share ridership for origin-destination pairs: Effects of public transit route characteristics and land-use patterns," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    17. Qian, Xiaodong & Jaller, Miguel, 2020. "Bikesharing, equity, and disadvantaged communities: A case study in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 354-371.
    18. Zheyan Chen & Dea van Lierop & Dick Ettema, 2020. "Exploring Dockless Bikeshare Usage: A Case Study of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.
    19. Link, Christoph & Strasser, Christoph & Hinterreiter, Michael, 2020. "Free-floating bikesharing in Vienna – A user behaviour analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 168-182.
    20. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille & Caruso, Geoffrey & Thomas, Isabelle, 2017. "Bicycle sharing system ‘success’ determinants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 202-214.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:23:p:6240-:d:451812. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    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: XML Conversion Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.