IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt3j722968.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Evaluation Of Free- Floating Carsharing In Oakland, California

Author

Listed:
  • Martin, Elliot PhD
  • Pan, Alexandra
  • Shaheen, Susan

Abstract

GIG Car Share is a free-floating carsharing system that began operations in the East Bay in April 2017. Similar to other free-floating carsharing systems, such as car2go and ReachNow (which later combined as ShareNow), members of GIG have access to a fleet of vehicles which they can book and unlock via an app. Once booking the vehicle, members can drive anywhere, but must park back in the home zone in order to terminate their session. The price of driving a GIG vehicle is charged per hour, per mile, or per day, and is calculated based on the lowest cost to the user. This report uses the results from a pre- and post-survey of GIG members in Oakland to measure the changes in travel behavior, with special attention paid to changes in personal vehicle use that occurred as a result of joining GIG. The pre-survey (N = 362) was conducted in December 2017 and the postsurvey (N = 221) was conducted in January 2019. The demographics of GIG survey respondents in Oakland are similar to previous findings from evaluations of shared mobility in other cities. The sample of post-survey respondents was younger than the general Oakland population, with 50% of the sample under the age of 34 compared to 36% for the general population. The survey sample was also highly educated; 88% of respondents have at least a 4- year college degree, compared to only 40% in the general population. Income distribution was relatively similar, though GIG survey respondents had a slightly higher income than the rest of Oakland. However, the race/ethnicity distribution was more imbalanced, where 60% of survey respondents were White, while only 27% of the Oakland population is White. African Americans and Hispanic/Latinos were relatively underrepresented; 12% of survey respondents were African American compared to 23% of the Oakland population and 7% of survey respondents were Hispanic/Latino compared to 30% of the population. Table 1 presents a distribution of demographics for key attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin, Elliot PhD & Pan, Alexandra & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "An Evaluation Of Free- Floating Carsharing In Oakland, California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3j722968, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt3j722968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/3j722968.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yanbo Ge & Christopher R. Knittel & Don MacKenzie & Stephen Zoepf, 2016. "Racial and Gender Discrimination in Transportation Network Companies," NBER Working Papers 22776, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Martin, Elliot W & Shaheen, Susan A, 2011. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts of Carsharing in North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6wr90040, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    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. Harold, Brian MBA & Rodier, Caroline PhD & Zhang, Yunwan MS, 2022. "Retrospective User Survey for a Rural Electric Vehicle Carsharing Pilot in California’s Central Valley," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5ks6j0qk, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Marcin Jacek Kłos & Grzegorz Sierpiński, 2021. "Building a Model of Integration of Urban Sharing and Public Transport Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-26, March.

    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. Emmanuelle Reuter, 2022. "Hybrid business models in the sharing economy: The role of business model design for managing the environmental paradox," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 603-618, February.
    2. Valeria Andreoni, 2020. "The Trap of Success: A Paradox of Scale for Sharing Economy and Degrowth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Wagner, Sebastian & Brandt, Tobias & Neumann, Dirk, 2016. "In free float: Developing Business Analytics support for carsharing providers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PA), pages 4-14.
    4. Kas, Judith, 2022. "The effect of online reputation systems on intergroup inequality," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Zhi (Aaron) Cheng & Min-Seok Pang & Paul A. Pavlou, 2020. "Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of Intelligent Transportation Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 653-674, September.
    6. Lee, Kyungwon & Hakstian, Anne-Marie & Williams, Jerome D., 2021. "Creating a world where anyone can belong anywhere: Consumer equality in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 221-231.
    7. Yongwook Paik & Christos A. Makridis, 2023. "The social value of a ridesharing platform: a hedonic pricing approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 64(5), pages 2125-2150, May.
    8. Yun Wang & Xuedong Yan & Yu Zhou & Qingwan Xue & Li Sun, 2017. "Individuals’ Acceptance to Free-Floating Electric Carsharing Mode: A Web-Based Survey in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, May.
    9. 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.
    10. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam & Farrar, Emily, 2019. "Carsharing's Impact and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt2f5896tp, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    11. van der Kam, Mart & van Sark, Wilfried, 2015. "Smart charging of electric vehicles with photovoltaic power and vehicle-to-grid technology in a microgrid; a case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 20-30.
    12. Anne Brown & Whitney LaValle, 2021. "Hailing a change: comparing taxi and ridehail service quality in Los Angeles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 1007-1031, April.
    13. Xiaowei Chen & Hongyu Zheng & Ze Wang & Xiqun Chen, 2021. "Exploring impacts of on-demand ridesplitting on mobility via real-world ridesourcing data and questionnaires," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1541-1561, August.
    14. Brad Greenwood & Idris Adjerid & Corey M. Angst & Nathan L. Meikle, 2022. "How Unbecoming of You: Online Experiments Uncovering Gender Biases in Perceptions of Ridesharing Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 499-518, January.
    15. Junhee Kang & Keeyeon Hwang & Sungjin Park, 2016. "Finding Factors that Influence Carsharing Usage: Case Study in Seoul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-12, July.
    16. Du, Mingyang & Cheng, Lin & Li, Xuefeng & Liu, Qiyang & Yang, Jingzong, 2022. "Spatial variation of ridesplitting adoption rate in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 13-37.
    17. Chen, T. Donna & Kockelman, Kara M. & Hanna, Josiah P., 2016. "Operations of a shared, autonomous, electric vehicle fleet: Implications of vehicle & charging infrastructure decisions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 243-254.
    18. Sweet, Matthias N. & Scott, Darren M., 2021. "Shared mobility adoption from 2016 to 2018 in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area: Demographic or geographic diffusion?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    19. Jose Esteves & Daniel Alonso-Martínez & Guillermo de Haro, 2021. "Profiling Spanish Prospective Buyers of Electric Vehicles Based on Demographics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    20. Feng, Xuan & Lin, Qinping & Jia, Ning & Tian, Junfang, 2024. "The actual impact of ride-splitting: An empirical study based on large-scale GPS data," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 94-112.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Engineering;

    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:itsrrp:qt3j722968. 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/itucbus.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.