IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt6q1382xd.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ridehailing, Uncertainty, and Sustainable Transportation: How Transportation Stakeholders are Responding to the Unknowns Surrounding Ridehailing

Author

Listed:
  • Pike, Susan
  • Pilatwosky Gruner, Raiza

Abstract

This study investigates how stakeholders throughout California view the potential impacts of ridehailing services, such as Uber or Lyft, on transportation systems, and how to address such impacts. The stakeholders surveyed included city planning agencies, regional transportation planning agencies, metropolitan planning organizations, state agencies, ridehailing service providers, interest groups, and non-profits. Ridehailing is one of several emerging shared use mobility alternatives, poised to impact transportation systems, for better or worse. For better, if these new services catalyze the development and maturation of well-integrated multi-model transportation systems that serve all travelers and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and transportation emissions. For worse, if these new services serve merely as a less expensive taxi, allowing more people to forego alternative modes of transportation like public transit and biking, thereby leading to increases in VMT, emissions, and congestion. The high degree of uncertainty surrounding the impacts of these services presents challenges to stakeholders involved in transportation planning and policy making. Through interviews, the researchers investigated the viewpoints of 42 transportation stakeholders throughout the state of California. They find that the diversity of interviewees is reflected in the sentiments they have about ridehailing, what issues are important and potential obstacles to achieving positive outcomes. Nonetheless, interviewees agree that regulations should balance local control with state level guidance. View the NCST Project Webpage

Suggested Citation

  • Pike, Susan & Pilatwosky Gruner, Raiza, 2020. "Ridehailing, Uncertainty, and Sustainable Transportation: How Transportation Stakeholders are Responding to the Unknowns Surrounding Ridehailing," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6q1382xd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt6q1382xd
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6q1382xd.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clewlow, Regina R. & Mishra, Gouri S., 2017. "Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt82w2z91j, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    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. Rick Grahn & Corey D. Harper & Chris Hendrickson & Zhen Qian & H. Scott Matthews, 2020. "Socioeconomic and usage characteristics of transportation network company (TNC) riders," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 3047-3067, December.
    2. Vignon, Daniel & Yin, Yafeng & Ke, Jintao, 2023. "Regulating the ride-hailing market in the age of uberization," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    3. Shiraki, Hiroto & Matsumoto, Ken'ichi & Shigetomi, Yosuke & Ehara, Tomoki & Ochi, Yuki & Ogawa, Yuki, 2020. "Factors affecting CO2 emissions from private automobiles in Japan: The impact of vehicle occupancy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    4. Yu, Haitao & Peng, Zhong-Ren, 2019. "Exploring the spatial variation of ridesourcing demand and its relationship to built environment and socioeconomic factors with the geographically weighted Poisson regression," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 147-163.
    5. Hamid Mostofi & Houshmand Masoumi & Hans-Liudger Dienel, 2020. "The Association between the Regular Use of ICT Based Mobility Services and the Bicycle Mode Choice in Tehran and Cairo," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-19, November.
    6. Mohammadbashir Sedighi & Hamideh Parsaeiyan & Yashar Araghi, 2021. "An Empirical Study of Intention to Continue Using of Digital Ride-hailing Platforms," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 489-515, November.
    7. Bereitschaft, Bradley, 2020. "Gentrification and the evolution of commuting behavior within America's urban cores, 2000–2015," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    8. Alejandro Henao & Wesley E. Marshall, 2019. "The impact of ride-hailing on vehicle miles traveled," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2173-2194, December.
    9. Ting Wang & Yong Zhang & Meiye Li & Lei Liu, 2019. "How Do Passengers with Different Using Frequencies Choose between Traditional Taxi Service and Online Car-Hailing Service? A Case Study of Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-18, November.
    10. Circella, Giovanni & Alemi, Farzad & Tiedeman, Kate & Handy, Susan & Mokhtarian, Patricia, 2018. "The Adoption of Shared Mobility in California and Its Relationship with Other Components of Travel Behavior," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1kq5d07p, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    11. Shaheen, Susan & Cohen, Adam, 2020. "Chapter 3 - Mobility on demand (MOD) and mobility as a service (MaaS): early understanding of shared mobility impacts and public transit partnerships," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt5030f0cd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    12. Silvestri, Alessandro & Foudi, Sébastien & Galarraga, Ibon & Ansuategi, Alberto, 2021. "The contribution of carsharing to low carbon mobility: Complementarity and substitution with other modes," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Brown, Anne, 2022. "Not all fees are created equal: Equity implications of ride-hail fee structures and revenues," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam & Chan, Nelson & Bansal, Apaar, 2020. "Chapter 13 - Sharing strategies: carsharing, shared micromobility (bikesharing and scooter sharing), transportation network companies, microtransit, and other innovative mobility modes," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0z9711dw, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    15. Xiaoxia Dong & Erick Guerra & Ricardo A. Daziano, 2022. "Impact of TNC on travel behavior and mode choice: a comparative analysis of Boston and Philadelphia," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1577-1597, December.
    16. Boeing, Geoff & Riggs, William, 2022. "Converting One-Way Streets to Two-Way Streets to Improve Transportation Network Efficiency and Reduce Vehicle Distance Traveled," SocArXiv fyhbc, Center for Open Science.
    17. Vanderschuren, Marianne & Baufeldt, Jennifer, 2018. "Ride-sharing: A potential means to increase the quality and availability of motorised trips while discouraging private motor ownership in developing cities?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 607-614.
    18. Michael Martin & David Lazarevic & Charlie Gullström, 2019. "Assessing the Environmental Potential of Collaborative Consumption: Peer-to-Peer Product Sharing in Hammarby Sjöstad, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    19. Shouheng Sun & Shengjie Dong & Qi Wu & Xuejiao Tian, 2023. "How to Survive in the Shadow of Sharing Economy Giants: Business Model Innovation for Small and Medium-Sized Platforms," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    20. Amirmahdi Tafreshian & Neda Masoud & Yafeng Yin, 2020. "Frontiers in Service Science: Ride Matching for Peer-to-Peer Ride Sharing: A Review and Future Directions," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2-3), pages 44-60, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cdl:itsdav:qt6q1382xd. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    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.