IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i18p7600-d413870.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bike Share Equity for Underrepresented Groups: Analyzing Barriers to System Usage in Baltimore, Maryland

Author

Listed:
  • Susan Hull Grasso

    (Institute for Public Administration, Biden School of Public Policy and Administration, University of Delaware, Newark, NJ 19716, USA)

  • Philip Barnes

    (Institute for Public Administration, Biden School of Public Policy and Administration, University of Delaware, Newark, NJ 19716, USA)

  • Celeste Chavis

    (Department of Transportation & Urban Infrastructure Studies, School of Engineering, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD 21251, USA)

Abstract

Bike share systems are a standard feature of the urban mobility ecosystem but they have received criticism for serving a narrow demographic band of residents and visitors while underrepresenting others. This analysis employed Chi-square and multivariate linear regression analyses to understand effect sizes associated with how various demographic groups in Baltimore, MD perceive barriers to utilizing the city’s new Baltimore Bike Share (BBS) system. The analysis revealed that people of color, Hispanics, the less-educated, females, low income earners, and the unemployed are underrepresented in system membership. Regression analysis of non-user survey data suggested that nonwhite individuals are associated with a moderate increase in perceiving BBS to be challenging when riding with children or cargo. Being female is associated with concerns about system use, the ability to ride comfortably, maintaining personal hygiene, being a victim of crime or harassment, and an overall lack of interest in biking in Baltimore. Identifying as having low income or less education was not observed to be associated with any of the barrier conditions examined in this study. These findings can be leveraged to develop programs and policies to improve participation rates within underrepresented groups and enhance system equity.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan Hull Grasso & Philip Barnes & Celeste Chavis, 2020. "Bike Share Equity for Underrepresented Groups: Analyzing Barriers to System Usage in Baltimore, Maryland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7600-:d:413870
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7600/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7600/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goodman, Anna & Cheshire, James, 2014. "Inequalities in the London bicycle sharing system revisited: impacts of extending the scheme to poorer areas but then doubling prices," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 272-279.
    2. Ainhoa Serna & Tomas Ruiz & Jon Kepa Gerrikagoitia & Rosa Arroyo, 2019. "Identification of Enablers and Barriers for Public Bike Share System Adoption using Social Media and Statistical Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-21, November.
    3. repec:cdl:itsrrp:qt1x26m6z7 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Xu Zhao & Jie Zhang & Ning Zhang & Yiik Diew Wong & Yufang Zhou & Meng Meng, 2021. "A GIS-CA Model for Planning Bikeways upon the Footpath Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Suhaib Alshayeb & Aleksandar Stevanovic & Nemanja Dobrota, 2021. "Impact of Various Operating Conditions on Simulated Emissions-Based Stop Penalty at Signalized Intersections," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-30, September.
    3. Dehdari Ebrahimi, Zhila & Momenitabar, Mohsen & Nasri, Arefeh A. & Mattson, Jeremy, 2022. "Using a GIS-based spatial approach to determine the optimal locations of bikeshare stations: The case of Washington D.C," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 48-60.
    4. 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).
    5. Elizabeth K. McClain & Kaitlynn Walker & Ganesh Kumar & Ashley Bright & Klare Aziz & Ann W. Banchoff & Zakaria N. Doueiri & Abby C. King & Suman K. Mitra, 2024. "Partnering with Communities to Understand Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) Impacts on Access to Shared Micromobility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(11), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Mohiuddin, Hossain & Fitch-Polse, Dillon T. & Handy, Susan L., 2023. "Does bike-share enhance transport equity? Evidence from the Sacramento, California region," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 109(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. Humberto, Mateus & Moura, Filipe & Giannotti, Mariana, 2020. "Incorporating children's views and perceptions about urban mobility," OSF Preprints yjxfm, Center for Open Science.
    2. 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.
    3. Radzimski, Adam & Dzięcielski, Michał, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between bike-sharing and public transport in Poznań, Poland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 189-202.
    4. Alexandros Nikitas, 2019. "How to Save Bike-Sharing: An Evidence-Based Survival Toolkit for Policy-Makers and Mobility Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Yi Yao & Yifang Zhang & Lixin Tian & Nianxing Zhou & Zhilin Li & Minggang Wang, 2019. "Analysis of Network Structure of Urban Bike-Sharing System: A Case Study Based on Real-Time Data of a Public Bicycle System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Nessa Winston, 2021. "Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities," Working Papers 202106, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    7. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-04017908 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Nixon, Denver V. & Schwanen, Tim, 2019. "Bike sharing beyond the norm," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    10. Martin Zajac & Jiří Horák & Joaquín Osorio-Arjona & Pavel Kukuliač & James Haworth, 2022. "Public Transport Tweets in London, Madrid and Prague in the COVID-19 Period—Temporal and Spatial Differences in Activity Topics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille, 2019. "The contradictions of bike-share benefits, purposes and outcomes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 401-419.
    12. Beairsto, Jeneva & Tian, Yufan & Zheng, Linyu & Zhao, Qunshan & Hong, Jinhyun, 2020. "Identifying locations for new bike-sharing stations in Glasgow: an analysis of spatial equity and demand factors," OSF Preprints apyfn, Center for Open Science.
    13. Chiou, Yu-Chiun & Wu, Kuo-Chi, 2024. "Bikesharing: The first- and last-mile service of public transportation? Evidence from an origin–destination perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    14. Prati, Gabriele, 2018. "Gender equality and women's participation in transport cycling," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 369-375.
    15. Zhao, Chunkai & Wang, Yuhang & Ge, Zhenyu, 2023. "Is digital finance environmentally friendly in China? Evidence from shared-bike trips," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 129-143.
    16. Zhou, Zhaoqi & Schwanen, Tim, 2024. "Exploring the production of spatial inequality in dockless bicycle sharing in Shenzhen," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    17. Todd, James & O'Brien, Oliver & Cheshire, James, 2021. "A global comparison of bicycle sharing systems," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    18. Cai, Xiao & Gu, Xinyue & Silm, Siiri & Hadachi, Amnir & Jin, Tanhua & Witlox, Frank, 2025. "Differences in bike-sharing usage and its associations with station-surrounding characteristics: A multi-group analysis using machine learning techniques," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    19. Zheng, Zhiguo & Chen, Yunfeng & Zhu, Debao & Sun, Huijun & Wu, Jianjun & Pan, Xing & Li, Daqing, 2021. "Extreme unbalanced mobility network in bike sharing system," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 563(C).
    20. Raux, Charles & Zoubir, Ayman & Geyik, Mirkan, 2017. "Who are bike sharing schemes members and do they travel differently? The case of Lyon’s “Velo’v” scheme," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 350-363.
    21. Chen, Zhiwei & Guo, Yujie & Stuart, Amy L. & Zhang, Yu & Li, Xiaopeng, 2019. "Exploring the equity performance of bike-sharing systems with disaggregated data: A story of southern Tampa," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 529-545.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7600-:d:413870. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (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. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.