IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p14021-d955590.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influence Mechanism of Urban Staggered Shared Parking Policy on Behavioral Intentions of Users and Providers Based on Extended Planned Behavior Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Ziyue Shan

    (Beijing Laboratory of General Aviation Technology, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Chenjing Zhou

    (Beijing Laboratory of General Aviation Technology, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Xiafei Song

    (Beijing Laboratory of General Aviation Technology, Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Siyang Liu

    (Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China)

Abstract

Shared parking has been widely accepted as an effective way to deal with the mismatch between parking demand and supply. Especially for adjacent construction areas with mixed residential and commercial land, staggered shared parking has broad application prospects. From the previous practice, the public welfare from the government, the commercial interests of parking enterprises, and the individual income of residents will be the key elements to promote a staggered parking policy in adjacent construction areas. However, the current research on shared parking mainly focused on the commercial factors to improve the operating efficiency and operating benefit for parking enterprises; there is a lack of research on the implementation process of staggered parking policies which will solve residential areas’ parking problem with the interests of residents as the core. Here, this paper focuses on exploring residents’ and businesses’ intention to participate in the process of a staggered shared parking policy, where businesses have certain location and condition qualifications. Firstly, this study used two extended theoretical models of planned behavior to explore the behavioral intentions of users and providers in this staggered shared parking event, respectively. Secondly, the research hypothesis was examined using a structural equation approach, and a questionnaire was designed to survey 323 residents and 282 enterprises in the core urban area of Beijing. Ultimately, the study indicated that, for residents, perceptual behavior control has the greatest impact on the perceived intention, while the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness play a crucial influential role in the willingness to use staggered shared parking. For companies, attitude has the strongest impact on the perceived intention. Our findings reveal the intrinsic impact mechanism of the policies in the decision-making process, contributing to the precise policy implementation to alleviate the problem of difficult parking for residents, thus improving the city’s parking management.

Suggested Citation

  • Ziyue Shan & Chenjing Zhou & Xiafei Song & Siyang Liu, 2022. "Influence Mechanism of Urban Staggered Shared Parking Policy on Behavioral Intentions of Users and Providers Based on Extended Planned Behavior Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-25, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14021-:d:955590
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14021/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14021/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yangbeibei Ji & Xueqing Lu & Hanwan Jiang & Xinyang Zhu & Jiao Wang, 2022. "Layout Optimization for Shared Parking Spaces Considering Shared Parking Walking Time and Parking Fee," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Ange Wang & Hongzhi Guan & Zhengtao Qin & Junze Zhu & Abdul Qadeer Khan, 2021. "Study on the Intention of Private Parking Space Owners of Different Levels of Cities to Participate in Shared Parking in China," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-16, May.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Irfan Ullah & Kai Liu & Tran Vanduy, 2019. "Examining Travelers’ Acceptance towards Car Sharing Systems—Peshawar City, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Ning, Yu & Yan, Mian & Xu, Su Xiu & Li, Yina & Li, Lixu, 2021. "Shared parking acceptance under perceived network externality and risks: Theory and evidence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 1-15.
    6. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for Parking," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt55s7079f, University of California Transportation Center.
    7. Jiang, Bowen & Fan, Zhi-Ping, 2020. "Optimal allocation of shared parking slots considering parking unpunctuality under a platform-based management approach," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    8. Liang, Jyun-Kai & Eccarius, Timo & Lu, Chung-Cheng, 2019. "Investigating factors that affect the intention to use shared parking: A case study of Taipei City," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 799-812.
    9. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for parking," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 479-486, November.
    10. Barnes, Stuart J. & Mattsson, Jan, 2017. "Understanding collaborative consumption: Test of a theoretical model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 281-292.
    11. Anna Lower & Agnieszka Szumilas, 2021. "Parking Policy as a Tool of Sustainable Mobility-Parking Standards in Poland vs. European Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Hu, Jia-Wei & Javaid, Aneeque & Creutzig, Felix, 2021. "Leverage points for accelerating adoption of shared electric cars: Perceived benefits and environmental impact of NEVs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Shao, Saijun & Xu, Su Xiu & Yang, Hai & Huang, George Q., 2020. "Parking reservation disturbances," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 83-97.
    14. Daozhi Zhao & Di Wang, 2019. "The Research of Tripartite Collaborative Governance on Disorderly Parking of Shared Bicycles Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior and Motivation Theories—A Case of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-21, September.
    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. Liang, Jyun-Kai & Eccarius, Timo & Lu, Chung-Cheng, 2019. "Investigating factors that affect the intention to use shared parking: A case study of Taipei City," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 799-812.
    2. Ning, Yu & Yan, Mian & Xu, Su Xiu & Li, Yina & Li, Lixu, 2021. "Shared parking acceptance under perceived network externality and risks: Theory and evidence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 1-15.
    3. Yan, Qianqian & Feng, Tao & Timmermans, Harry, 2023. "A model of household shared parking decisions incorporating equity-seeking household dynamics and leadership personality traits," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    4. Tan, Bing Qing & Xu, Su Xiu & Kang, Kai & Xu, Gangyan & Qin, Wei, 2021. "A reverse Vickrey auction for physical internet (PI) enabled parking management systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    5. Tang, Zhe-Yi & Tian, Li-Jun & Wang, David Z.W., 2021. "Multi-modal morning commute with endogenous shared autonomous vehicle penetration considering parking space constraint," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Santos, Georgina & Behrendt, Hannah & Teytelboym, Alexander, 2010. "Part II: Policy instruments for sustainable road transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 46-91.
    7. Ardeshiri, Ali & Safarighouzhdi, Farshid & Hossein Rashidi, Taha, 2021. "Measuring willingness to pay for shared parking," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 186-202.
    8. Xie, Minghui & Zhang, Xinying & Wu, Zhouhao & Wei, Sen & Gao, Yanan & Wang, Yuanqing, 2023. "A shared parking optimization framework based on dynamic resource allocation and path planning," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 616(C).
    9. Yunxiang Zhang & Xianmin Song & Pengfei Tao & Haitao Li & Tianshu Zhan & Qian Cao, 2023. "Investigating Factors for Travelers’ Parking Behavior Intentions in Changchun, China, under the Influence of Smart Parking Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-16, July.
    10. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng, 2022. "Modelling bidding behaviors in shared parking auctions considering anticipated regrets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 88-106.
    11. Niu, Zhipeng & Hu, Xiaowei & Qi, Shouming & Yang, Haihua & Wang, Siqing & An, Shi, 2021. "Determinants to parking mode alternatives: A model integrating technology acceptance model and satisfaction–loyalty model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 216-234.
    12. Simona Mikšíková & David Ulčák & František Kuda, 2022. "Analysis of Malfunctions in Selected Parking Systems in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-10, February.
    13. Wang, Rui & Yuan, Quan, 2013. "Parking practices and policies under rapid motorization: The case of China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 109-116.
    14. Tscharaktschiew, Stefan & Reimann, Felix, 2021. "On employer-paid parking and parking (cash-out) policy: A formal synthesis of different perspectives," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 499-516.
    15. Joan Torrent-Sellens & Cristian Salazar-Concha & Pilar Ficapal-Cusí & Francesc Saigí-Rubió, 2021. "Using Digital Platforms to Promote Blood Donation: Motivational and Preliminary Evidence from Latin America and Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Ling-Ling Xiao & Tian-Liang Liu & Hai-Jun Huang, 2021. "Tradable permit schemes for managing morning commute with carpool under parking space constraint," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1563-1586, August.
    17. Xu Kuang & Fuquan Zhao & Han Hao & Zongwei Liu, 2019. "Assessing the Socioeconomic Impacts of Intelligent Connected Vehicles in China: A Cost–Benefit Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-28, June.
    18. Scheiner, Joachim & Faust, Nico & Helmer, Johannes & Straub, Michael & Holz-Rau, Christian, 2020. "What's that garage for? Private parking and on-street parking in a high-density urban residential neighbourhood," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    19. Francis Ostermeijer & Hans RA Koster & Leonardo Nunes & Jos van Ommeren, 2021. "Citywide parking policy and traffic: Evidence from Amsterdam," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-015/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    20. Činjarević Merima & Kožo Amra & Berberović Denis, 2019. "Sharing is Caring, and Millennials Do Care: Collaborative Consumption through the Eyes of Internet Generation," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 49-60, June.

    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:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14021-:d:955590. 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.