IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i4p2467-d754735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shared Micromobility: Between Physical and Digital Reality

Author

Listed:
  • Daria Bylieva

    (Social Science Department, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University (SPbPU), 195251 Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

  • Victoria Lobatyuk

    (Social Science Department, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University (SPbPU), 195251 Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

  • Irina Shestakova

    (Department of Philosophy, Saint Petersburg Mining University, 199106 Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

Abstract

Moving around the city is a problem for the development of most megacities. Due to digital technologies, each city dweller is connected by information and communication channels with the city infrastructure, receiving information and choosing the available modes of movement. Shared micromobility in terms of digital solutions is a convenient service, while reducing congestion and emissions, and preventing air and noise pollution; however, the physical and social dimension of the city is experiencing problems, with growing public health concerns, high overall environmental costs, clutter in the streets, etc. This presentation presents a case study of the relatively recent emergence of shared micromobility in St. Petersburg and attitudes towards its users. In addition to the direct process of use and the experience gained, the factors that determine the social influence and perception of micromobility are highlighted. The highest ratings of the digital component and the rather high importance of such factors as environmental friendliness and safety make it possible to recommend the creation of an interactive digital system that unites riders.

Suggested Citation

  • Daria Bylieva & Victoria Lobatyuk & Irina Shestakova, 2022. "Shared Micromobility: Between Physical and Digital Reality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:4:p:2467-:d:754735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2467/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2467/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tuncer, Sylvaine & Laurier, Eric & Brown, Barry & Licoppe, Christian, 2020. "Notes on the practices and appearances of e-scooter users in public space," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. Lu-Yi Qiu & Ling-Yun He, 2018. "Bike Sharing and the Economy, the Environment, and Health-Related Externalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-10, April.
    3. Cao, Zhejing & Zhang, Xiaohu & Chua, Kelman & Yu, Honghai & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "E-scooter sharing to serve short-distance transit trips: A Singapore case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 177-196.
    4. Lazarus, Jessica & Pourquier, Jean Carpentier & Feng, Frank & Hammel, Henry & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "Micromobility evolution and expansion: Understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete – A case study of San Francisco," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    5. Lazarus, Jessica & Pourquier, Jean Carpentier & Feng, Frank & Hammel, Henry & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "Micromobility evolution and expansion: Understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete – A case study of San Francisco," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt96g9c9nd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    6. 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.
    7. Hannele Ahvenniemi & Aapo Huovila, 2021. "How do cities promote urban sustainability and smartness? An evaluation of the city strategies of six largest Finnish cities," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 4174-4200, March.
    8. Gao, Kun & Yang, Ying & Li, Aoyong & Li, Junhong & Yu, Bo, 2021. "Quantifying economic benefits from free-floating bike-sharing systems: A trip-level inference approach and city-scale analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 89-103.
    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. Rocio de la Torre & Canan G. Corlu & Javier Faulin & Bhakti S. Onggo & Angel A. Juan, 2021. "Simulation, Optimization, and Machine Learning in Sustainable Transportation Systems: Models and Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, February.
    11. 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.
    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. Nadezhda N. Pokrovskaia & Veronika L. Leontyeva & Marianna Yu. Ababkova & Lucio Cappelli & Fabrizio D’Ascenzo, 2021. "Digital Communication Tools and Knowledge Creation Processes for Enriched Intellectual Outcome—Experience of Short-Term E-Learning Courses during Pandemic," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, February.
    14. Filippo Celata & Cary Yungmee Hendrickson & Venere Stefania Sanna, 2017. "The sharing economy as community marketplace? Trust, reciprocity and belonging in peer-to-peer accommodation platforms," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(2), pages 349-363.
    15. Peraphan Jittrapirom & Valeria Caiati & Anna-Maria Feneri & Shima Ebrahimigharehbaghi & María J. Alonso González & Jishnu Narayan, 2017. "Mobility as a Service: A Critical Review of Definitions, Assessments of Schemes, and Key Challenges," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 13-25.
    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. Medina-Molina, Cayetano & Pérez-Macías, Noemí & Fernández-Fernádez, José Luis, 2023. "The use of micromobility in different contexts. An explanation through the multilevel perspective and QCA," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(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. Gao, Kun & Yang, Ying & Li, Aoyong & Li, Junhong & Yu, Bo, 2021. "Quantifying economic benefits from free-floating bike-sharing systems: A trip-level inference approach and city-scale analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 89-103.
    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. 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.
    4. Tim De Ceunynck & Gert Jan Wijlhuizen & Aslak Fyhri & Regine Gerike & Dagmar Köhler & Alice Ciccone & Atze Dijkstra & Emmanuelle Dupont & Mario Cools, 2021. "Assessing the Willingness to Use Personal e-Transporters (PeTs): Results from a Cross-National Survey in Nine European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, March.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Arias-Molinares, Daniela & Romanillos, Gustavo & García-Palomares, Juan Carlos & Gutiérrez, Javier, 2021. "Exploring the spatio-temporal dynamics of moped-style scooter sharing services in urban areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Xiaojia Guo & Chengpeng Lu & Dongqi Sun & Yexin Gao & Bing Xue, 2021. "Comparison of Usage and Influencing Factors between Governmental Public Bicycles and Dockless Bicycles in Linfen City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Cheng, Long & Huang, Jie & Jin, Tanhua & Chen, Wendong & Li, Aoyong & Witlox, Frank, 2023. "Comparison of station-based and free-floating bikeshare systems as feeder modes to the metro," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Meng, Si'an & Brown, Anne, 2021. "Docked vs. dockless equity: Comparing three micromobility service geographies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Fei-Hui Huang, 2021. "User Behavioral Intentions toward a Scooter-Sharing Service: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    13. Bach, Xavier & Marquet, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme, 2023. "Assessing social and spatial access equity in regulatory frameworks for moped-style scooter sharing services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 154-162.
    14. 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.
    15. Hyungkyoo Kim, 2020. "Seasonal Impacts of Particulate Matter Levels on Bike Sharing in Seoul, South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-17, June.
    16. 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.
    17. Tina Ringenson & Peter Arnfalk & Anna Kramers & Liridona Sopjani, 2018. "Indicators for Promising Accessibility and Mobility Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Hosseinzadeh, Aryan & Algomaiah, Majeed & Kluger, Robert & Li, Zhixia, 2021. "Spatial analysis of shared e-scooter trips," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    19. Fukushige, Tatsuya & Fitch, Dillon T. & Handy, Susan, 2022. "Can an Incentive-Based approach to rebalancing a Dock-less Bike-share system Work? Evidence from Sacramento, California," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 181-194.
    20. Elnert Coenegrachts & Joris Beckers & Thierry Vanelslander & Ann Verhetsel, 2021. "Business Model Blueprints for the Shared Mobility Hub Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, 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:4:p:2467-:d:754735. 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.