IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt8x67x360.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Best Practices for the Public Management of Electric Scooters

Author

Listed:
  • Reinhardt, Karl
  • Deakin, Elizabeth SM., J.D.

Abstract

This research projects evaluates the social, environmental, and safety impacts of shared electric scooters (e-scooters)’ through a literature review, a nationwide scan of state and local laws and regulations, and a case study of Oakland’s experience with e-scooters, including an analysis of the city’s user survey and our own in-depth interviews. E-scooters offer an enjoyable, low-cost travel option, but are used mainly by young, affluent, white males. To improve equity, cities are requiring e-scooter rental companies to serve low-income and minority communities and some further mandate that a share of the e-scooters accommodate people with disabilities. E-scooters are quiet and produce no tailpipe emissions, but their cumulative environmental impact depends on their manufacture, useful life, disposal, and use. In early applications, rental e-scooters survived less than a year. Some 30-50 percent of e-scooter trips replace short auto trips. Cities and states can improve e-scooter safety by encouraging helmet use, offering rider training, limiting speeds, improving pavements, managing parking, and calming traffic.

Suggested Citation

  • Reinhardt, Karl & Deakin, Elizabeth SM., J.D., 2020. "Best Practices for the Public Management of Electric Scooters," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt8x67x360, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt8x67x360
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/8x67x360.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social and Behavioral Sciences; Scooters; electric vehicles; vehicle sharing; regulations; travel behavior; traffic safety; equity; environmental impacts;
    All these 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:itsrrp:qt8x67x360. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.