IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p226-d1012768.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Exploration of the Decline in E-Scooter Ridership after the Introduction of Mandatory E-Scooter Parking Corrals on Virginia Tech’s Campus in Blacksburg, VA

Author

Listed:
  • Ralph Buehler

    (Urban Affairs and Planning, Virginia Tech Research Center, Arlington, VA 22203, USA)

  • Andrea Broaddus

    (Ford Motor Company, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA)

  • Elizabeth White

    (VTTI, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • Ted Sweeney

    (Spin, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA)

  • Chris Evans

    (Urban Affairs and Planning, Virginia Tech Research Center, Arlington, VA 22203, USA)

Abstract

We report shared e-scooter ridership and rider perceptions on Virginia Tech’s Blacksburg campus before and after introduction of mandatory e-scooter parking corrals in January 2022. The analysis relies on a panel of 131 e-scooter riders surveyed in Fall 2021 and Spring 2022. Although parking corrals were perceived favorably prior to implementation, perceptions became more negative afterwards. Respondents said corrals were not located where needed, difficult to find, fully occupied, and took too much extra time to use. After parking corrals were introduced, ridership declined 72% overall and also fell for all socio-economic subgroups. The heaviest user groups, like undergraduate males, were most likely to quit. The first study identifying desired and actual egress times for e-scooters, we found that roughly two-thirds of riders desired egress times under 2 min and one quarter under 1 min. Prior to the introduction of parking corrals, 82% of riders reported actual egress times under 2 min, and 43% under 1 min. Those who kept riding after the introduction of e-scooter corrals reported longer actual egress times and a stronger stated desire for egress times under 2 min. Communities should be careful when imposing e-scooter parking restrictions to ensure that e-scooter egress time is sufficiently low—ideally within an easy 2 min walk of popular origins and destinations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ralph Buehler & Andrea Broaddus & Elizabeth White & Ted Sweeney & Chris Evans, 2022. "An Exploration of the Decline in E-Scooter Ridership after the Introduction of Mandatory E-Scooter Parking Corrals on Virginia Tech’s Campus in Blacksburg, VA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:226-:d:1012768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/226/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/226/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laura Gebhardt & Christian Wolf & Robert Seiffert, 2021. "“I’ll Take the E-Scooter Instead of My Car”—The Potential of E-Scooters as a Substitute for Car Trips in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Peter T. Dunn, 2020. "Participatory Infrastructures: The Politics of Mobility Platforms," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 335-346.
    4. Clare Field & Ihnji Jon, 2021. "E-Scooters: A New Smart Mobility Option? The Case of Brisbane, Australia," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 368-396, May.
    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. Yunus Emre Ayözen, 2023. "Statistical Optimization of E-Scooter Micro-Mobility Utilization in Postal Service," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-25, January.

    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. Kimpton, Anthony & Loginova, Julia & Pojani, Dorina & Bean, Richard & Sigler, Thomas & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2022. "Weather to scoot? How weather shapes shared e-scooter ridership patterns," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Tomasz Bieliński & Łukasz Dopierała & Maciej Tarkowski & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    3. McQueen, Michael & Clifton, Kelly J., 2022. "Assessing the perception of E-scooters as a practical and equitable first-mile/last-mile solution," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 395-418.
    4. Cannon Cloud & Simon He{ss} & Johannes Kasinger, 2022. "Do shared e-scooter services cause traffic accidents? Evidence from six European countries," Papers 2209.06870, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    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. Kalina Grzesiuk & Dorota Jegorow & Monika Wawer & Anna Głowacz, 2023. "Energy-Efficient City Transportation Solutions in the Context of Energy-Conserving and Mobility Behaviours of Generation Z," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-28, August.
    7. Yang, Hongtai & Zheng, Rong & Li, Xuan & Huo, Jinghai & Yang, Linchuan & Zhu, Tong, 2022. "Nonlinear and threshold effects of the built environment on e-scooter sharing ridership," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    8. Bartkowiak Paweł & Michalak Szymon & Młodzik Maciej, 2021. "Motives for and Barriers to the Use of Electric Moped Scooter Sharing Services," Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations, Sciendo, vol. 42(4), pages 17-34, December.
    9. Abouelela, Mohamed & Chaniotakis, Emmanouil & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2023. "Understanding the landscape of shared-e-scooters in North America; Spatiotemporal analysis and policy insights," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    10. Yang, Hongtai & Huo, Jinghai & Bao, Yongxing & Li, Xuan & Yang, Linchuan & Cherry, Christopher R., 2021. "Impact of e-scooter sharing on bike sharing in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 23-36.
    11. 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.
    12. Tomasz Bieliński & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Electric Scooter Sharing and Bike Sharing User Behaviour and Characteristics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-13, November.
    13. 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.
    14. Esztergár-Kiss, Domokos & Tordai, Dániel & Lopez Lizarraga, Julio C., 2022. "Assessment of travel behavior related to e-scooters using a stated preference experiment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 389-405.
    15. Draženko Glavić & Marina Milenković & Aleksandar Trifunović & Igor Jokanović & Jelica Komarica, 2023. "Influence of Dockless Shared E-Scooters on Urban Mobility: WTP and Modal Shift," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-17, June.
    16. Panagiotis G. Tzouras & Lambros Mitropoulos & Katerina Koliou & Eirini Stavropoulou & Christos Karolemeas & Eleni Antoniou & Antonis Karaloulis & Konstantinos Mitropoulos & Eleni I. Vlahogianni & Kons, 2023. "Describing Micro-Mobility First/Last-Mile Routing Behavior in Urban Road Networks through a Novel Modeling Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Meng, Si'an & Brown, Anne, 2021. "Docked vs. dockless equity: Comparing three micromobility service geographies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    18. Noland, Robert B., 2021. "Scootin’ in the rain: Does weather affect micromobility?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 114-123.
    19. Samira Dibaj & Aryan Hosseinzadeh & Miloš N. Mladenović & Robert Kluger, 2021. "Where Have Shared E-Scooters Taken Us So Far? A Review of Mobility Patterns, Usage Frequency, and Personas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-27, October.
    20. Shirgaokar, Manish & Reynard, Darcy & Collins, Damian, 2021. "Using twitter to investigate responses to street reallocation during COVID-19: Findings from the U.S. and Canada," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 300-312.

    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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:226-:d:1012768. 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.