IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2006.16920.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Interdependence in active mobility adoption: Joint modelling and motivational spill-over in walking, cycling and bike-sharing

Author

Listed:
  • M Said
  • A Biehl
  • A Stathopoulos

Abstract

Active mobility offers an array of physical, emotional, and social wellbeing benefits. However, with the proliferation of the sharing economy, new nonmotorized means of transport are entering the fold, complementing some existing mobility options while competing with others. The purpose of this research study is to investigate the adoption of three active travel modes; namely walking, cycling and bikesharing, in a joint modeling framework. The analysis is based on an adaptation of the stages of change framework, which originates from the health behavior sciences. Multivariate ordered probit modeling drawing on U.S. survey data provides well-needed insights into individuals preparedness to adopt multiple active modes as a function of personal, neighborhood and psychosocial factors. The research suggests three important findings. 1) The joint model structure confirms interdependence among different active mobility choices. The strongest complementarity is found for walking and cycling adoption. 2) Each mode has a distinctive adoption path with either three or four separate stages. We discuss the implications of derived stage-thresholds and plot adoption contours for selected scenarios. 3) Psychological and neighborhood variables generate more coupling among active modes than individual and household factors. Specifically, identifying strongly with active mobility aspirations, experiences with multimodal travel, possessing better navigational skills, along with supportive local community norms are the factors that appear to drive the joint adoption decisions. This study contributes to the understanding of how decisions within the same functional domain are related and help to design policies that promote active mobility by identifying positive spillovers and joint determinants.

Suggested Citation

  • M Said & A Biehl & A Stathopoulos, 2020. "Interdependence in active mobility adoption: Joint modelling and motivational spill-over in walking, cycling and bike-sharing," Papers 2006.16920, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2006.16920
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.16920
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greene,William H. & Hensher,David A., 2010. "Modeling Ordered Choices," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521194204, July.
    2. Pucher, John & Garrard, Jan & Greaves, Stephen, 2011. "Cycling down under: a comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies in Sydney and Melbourne," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 332-345.
    3. Clark, Andrew F. & Scott, Darren M., 2013. "Does the social environment influence active travel? An investigation of walking in Hamilton, Canada," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 278-285.
    4. Ruiz, Tomás & Bernabé, José C., 2014. "Measuring factors influencing valuation of nonmotorized improvement measures," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 195-211.
    5. Chorus, Caspar G., 2015. "Models of moral decision making: Literature review and research agenda for discrete choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 69-85.
    6. Rachel Copperman & Chandra Bhat, 2007. "An analysis of the determinants of children’s weekend physical activity participation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 67-87, January.
    7. Evangelia Anagnostopoulou & Efthimios Bothos & Babis Magoutas & Johann Schrammel & Gregoris Mentzas, 2018. "Persuasive Technologies for Sustainable Mobility: State of the Art and Emerging Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, June.
    8. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L, 2008. "How do people respond to congestion mitigation policies? A multivariate probit model of the individual consideration of three travel-related strategy bundles," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt53s553tn, University of California Transportation Center.
    9. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    10. Stathopoulos, Amanda & Cirillo, Cinzia & Cherchi, Elisabetta & Ben-Elia, Eran & Li, Yeun-Touh & Schmöcker, Jan-Dirk, 2017. "Innovation adoption modeling in transportation: New models and data," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 61-68.
    11. Corinne Mulley, 2017. "Mobility as a Services (MaaS) – does it have critical mass?," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 247-251, May.
    12. Sangho Choo & Patricia Mokhtarian, 2008. "How do people respond to congestion mitigation policies? A multivariate probit model of the individual consideration of three travel-related strategy bundles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 145-163, March.
    13. Parkes, Stephen D. & Jopson, Ann & Marsden, Greg, 2016. "Understanding travel behaviour change during mega-events: Lessons from the London 2012 Games," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 104-119.
    14. Gatersleben, Birgitta & Appleton, Katherine M., 2007. "Contemplating cycling to work: Attitudes and perceptions in different stages of change," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 302-312, May.
    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. Taff, Derrick & Newman, Peter & Pettebone, David & White, Dave D. & Lawson, Steven R. & Monz, Christopher & Vagias, Wade M., 2013. "Dimensions of alternative transportation experience in Yosemite and Rocky Mountain National Parks," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 37-46.
    2. 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.
    3. Verma, Meghna & Rahul, T.M. & Reddy, Peesari Vamshidhar & Verma, Ashish, 2016. "The factors influencing bicycling in the Bangalore city," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 29-40.
    4. Lars E. Olsson & Jana Huck & Margareta Friman, 2018. "Intention for Car Use Reduction: Applying a Stage-Based Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-14, January.
    5. Watanabe, Hajime & Maruyama, Takuya, 2023. "A Bayesian instrumental variable model for multinomial choice with correlated alternatives," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    6. Morrison, Geoffrey M. & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2016. "Does employment growth increase travel time to work?: An empirical analysis using military troop movements," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 180-197.
    7. Sonja E. Forward, 2019. "Views on Public Transport and How Personal Experiences Can Contribute to a More Positive Attitude and Behavioural Change," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-23, February.
    8. Evans, Keith S. & Teisl, Mario F. & Lando, Amy. M. & Liu, Sherry T., 2020. "Risk perceptions and food-handling practices in the home," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    9. Tomás Ruiz & Rosa Arroyo & Lidón Mars & Daniel Casquero, 2018. "Effects of a Travel Behaviour Change Program on Sustainable Travel," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    10. Acheampong, Ransford A. & Siiba, Alhassan, 2018. "Examining the determinants of utility bicycling using a socio-ecological framework: An exploratory study of the Tamale Metropolis in Northern Ghana," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-10.
    11. Xiaojian Hu & Nan Wu & Nuo Chen, 2021. "Young People’s Behavioral Intentions towards Low-Carbon Travel: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Li, Shengxiao & Zhao, Pengjun & Zhang, He & Quan, Jing, 2019. "Walking behavior in the old downtown Beijing: The impact of perceptions and attitudes and social variations," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-11.
    13. Delbosc, Alexa & Currie, Graham & Jain, Taru & Aston, Laura, 2022. "The ‘re-norming’ of working from home during COVID-19: A transtheoretical behaviour change model of a major unplanned disruption," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 15-21.
    14. Ingrid Moons & Patrick De Pelsmacker, 2015. "An Extended Decomposed Theory of Planned Behaviour to Predict the Usage Intention of the Electric Car: A Multi-Group Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-34, May.
    15. Yoon-Young Chun & Mitsutaka Matsumoto & Kiyotaka Tahara & Kenichiro Chinen & Hideki Endo, 2019. "Exploring Factors Affecting Car Sharing Use Intention in the Southeast-Asia Region: A Case Study in Java, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-26, September.
    16. Auld, Joshua & Mohammadian, Abolfazl(Kouros), 2012. "Activity planning processes in the Agent-based Dynamic Activity Planning and Travel Scheduling (ADAPTS) model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1386-1403.
    17. Chen, Peng & Yang, Xiankui, 2023. "Revisit employer-based travel demand management: A longitudinal analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 22-31.
    18. Dandan Xu & Yang Bain & Shinan Shu & Xiaodong Zhang, 2022. "Staged Transition Process from Driving to Bicycling Based on the Effects of Latent Variables," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-14, September.
    19. Zhang, Zheng & Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2014. "How does Commuting Behavior Change Due to Incentives? An Empirical Study of the Beijing Subway System," MPRA Paper 54691, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Storme, Tom & De Vos, Jonas & De Paepe, Leen & Witlox, Frank, 2020. "Limitations to the car-substitution effect of MaaS. Findings from a Belgian pilot study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 196-205.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2006.16920. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.