IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p15444-d979153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolutionary Game Analysis on Sharing Bicycles and Metro Strategies: Impact of Phasing out Subsidies for Bicycle–Metro Integration Model

Author

Listed:
  • Cai Jia

    (School of Geography and Tourism, Anhui Normal University, Huajin Campus, South 189 Jiuhua Rd, Wuhu 241002, China
    Engineering Technology Research Center of Resources Environment and GIS, Wuhu 241008, China)

  • Yanyan Chen

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

  • Tingzhao Chen

    (School of Transportation Engineering, Shandong Jianzhu University, Jinan 250101, China)

  • Yanan Li

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

  • Luzhou Lin

    (QTT Location Network Co., Ltd., Beijing Economic and Technological Development Zone, No. 2, Liangshuihe 1st Street, Beijing 100163, China)

Abstract

The rapid development of sharing bicycles has facilitated the last mile of travel and provided new opportunities for the sustainable development of metro transportation. However, there is still insufficient literature on how to promote the bicycle–metro integration mode. This paper designs a bicycle–metro integrated model based on evolutionary game theory and explores the evolutionary mechanism of the sharing of bicycles connection system and metro system under the subsidy phasing out. The conditions for achieving different equilibrium states were discussed based on the replication dynamics equation. In order to prove the evolutionary game analysis, the system dynamics simulation model was used to reveal the effects of the cost factor, subsidy factor, reward, and penalty factors on the equilibrium of the integrated model. Moreover, the values of the influence factors that make the system reach the optimal equilibrium were obtained through sensitivity analysis. The results show that by reasonably adjusting the values of the parameters, sharing bicycles connection systems, metro systems and connection travelers can reach an equilibrium state where they are willing to cooperate. Subsidy phasing-out policies for travelers were key to promoting the equilibrium of the model. The unit price of shared bicycles has a greater impact on users, and the irregular parking ratio changes have a greater impact on the benefits of travelers compared to the benefits of the metro system. In order to promote bicycle–metro integration and enhance the attractiveness of metro transportation, policies designed for participants should be integrated with dynamic evolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Cai Jia & Yanyan Chen & Tingzhao Chen & Yanan Li & Luzhou Lin, 2022. "Evolutionary Game Analysis on Sharing Bicycles and Metro Strategies: Impact of Phasing out Subsidies for Bicycle–Metro Integration Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15444-:d:979153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15444/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15444/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Elliot Fishman, 2016. "Bikeshare: A Review of Recent Literature," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 92-113, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Xuesong Feng & Mitsuru Saito & Quan Wang, 2017. "Reducing average comprehensive travel cost by rationally allocating trips to different travel modes," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(6), pages 679-688, August.
    5. Yuanyuan Guo & Linchuan Yang & Wenke Huang & Yi Guo, 2020. "Traffic Safety Perception, Attitude, and Feeder Mode Choice of Metro Commute: Evidence from Shenzhen," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Parkes, Stephen & Mardsen, Greg & Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam, 2013. "Understanding the Diffusion of Public Bikesharing Systems: Evidence from Europe and North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3qr9h2pr, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    7. 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.
    8. Sun, Lian-Ju & Gao, Zi-You, 2007. "An equilibrium model for urban transit assignment based on game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(1), pages 305-314, August.
    9. 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.
    10. Parkes, Stephen D. & Marsden, Greg & Shaheen, Susan A. & Cohen, Adam P., 2013. "Understanding the diffusion of public bikesharing systems: evidence from Europe and North America," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 94-103.
    11. Rietveld, Piet & Daniel, Vanessa, 2004. "Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 531-550, August.
    12. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Fayong & Kwan, Mei-Po & Wang, Ke & Zuo, Zejun & Xia, Shaotian & Zhang, Zhiyong & Zhao, Xinpei, 2020. "Space-time demand cube for spatial-temporal coverage optimization model of shared bicycle system: A study using big bike GPS data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Zhao, Pengjun & Li, Shengxiao, 2017. "Bicycle-metro integration in a growing city: The determinants of cycling as a transfer mode in metro station areas in Beijing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 46-60.
    14. Martens, Karel, 2007. "Promoting bike-and-ride: The Dutch experience," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 326-338, May.
    15. Yaron Hollander & Joseph Prashker, 2006. "The applicability of non-cooperative game theory in transport analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 481-496, 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. 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. Ma, Xinwei & Ji, Yanjie & Yang, Mingyuan & Jin, Yuchuan & Tan, Xu, 2018. "Understanding bikeshare mode as a feeder to metro by isolating metro-bikeshare transfers from smart card data," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 57-69.
    3. 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.
    4. Saberi, Meead & Ghamami, Mehrnaz & Gu, Yi & Shojaei, Mohammad Hossein (Sam) & Fishman, Elliot, 2018. "Understanding the impacts of a public transit disruption on bicycle sharing mobility patterns: A case of Tube strike in London," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 154-166.
    5. Umer Mansoor & Mohammad Tamim Kashifi & Fazal Rehman Safi & Syed Masiur Rahman, 2022. "A review of factors and benefits of non-motorized transport: a way forward for developing countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1560-1582, February.
    6. Jiaoe Wang & Jie Huang & Michael Dunford, 2019. "Rethinking the Utility of Public Bicycles: The Development and Challenges of Station-Less Bike Sharing in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, March.
    7. 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, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. 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, vol. 12(8), pages 1-29, April.
    9. Wang, Mingshu & Zhou, Xiaolu, 2017. "Bike-sharing systems and congestion: Evidence from US cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 147-154.
    10. Kwiatkowski Michał Adam, 2018. "Urban Cycling as an Indicator of Socio-Economic Innovation and Sustainable Transport," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 37(4), pages 23-32, December.
    11. Xavier Bach & Carme Miralles-Guasch & Oriol Marquet, 2023. "Spatial Inequalities in Access to Micromobility Services: An Analysis of Moped-Style Scooter Sharing Systems in Barcelona," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, January.
    12. Wang, Yacan & Douglas, Matthew & Hazen, Benjamin, 2021. "Diffusion of public bicycle systems: Investigating influences of users’ perceived risk and switching intention," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 1-13.
    13. Suzanne Maas & Paraskevas Nikolaou & Maria Attard & Loukas Dimitriou, 2021. "Heat, Hills and the High Season: A Model-Based Comparative Analysis of Spatio-Temporal Factors Affecting Shared Bicycle Use in Three Southern European Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-21, March.
    14. 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).
    15. Morton, Craig & Kelley, Scott & Monsuur, Fredrik & Hui, Tianwen, 2021. "A spatial analysis of demand patterns on a bicycle sharing scheme: Evidence from London," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    16. Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "Measuring immediate impacts of a new mass transit system on an existing bike-share system in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 20-39.
    17. Pucher, John & Buehler, Ralph & Seinen, Mark, 2011. "Bicycling renaissance in North America? An update and re-appraisal of cycling trends and policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 451-475, July.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:22:p:15444-:d:979153. 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.