DOCSLIB.ORG

Chinese Dock-Less Bike-Sharing Model the Market Situation and Underlying Implications

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chinese Dock-Less Bike-Sharing Model the Market Situation and Underlying Implications Master’s Degree programme in Languages, Economics and Institutions of Asia and North Africa Second Cycle (D.M. 270/2004) Final Thesis Chinese dock-less bike-sharing model The market situation and underlying implications Supervisor Ch. Prof. Renzo Riccardo Cavalieri Assistant Supervisor Ch. Prof. Lala Hu Graduand Anna Zhu Matriculation Number 846501 Academic Year 2017 / 2018 SUMMARY 前言 ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 8 CHAPTER 1 – BIKE-SHARING: HISTORY AND THE MARKET .............................................................................. 11 1.1 BIKE-SHARING: DEFINITION AND TERMINOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 11 1.1.1 Bike-sharing: four generations history and characteristics ................................................................. 13 1.1.2 Bike-sharing schemes features ............................................................................................................ 29 1.1.3 Business models ................................................................................................................................... 32 1.1.4 Bike-sharing schemes operations ........................................................................................................ 36 1.1.5 Bike-sharing adoption .......................................................................................................................... 39 1.2 THE MARKET CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................................................................... 47 1.2.1 The sharing economy ........................................................................................................................... 47 1.2.2 Bike-sharing and other shared mobility models .................................................................................. 51 CHAPTER 2 – BIKE-SHARING IN CHINA ............................................................................................................ 56 2.1 CHINESE BICYCLE HISTORY AND THE PUBLIC BIKE-SHARING ........................................................................................ 56 2.1.1 Bicycles development in china ............................................................................................................. 57 2.1.2 Institutional framework and policies ................................................................................................... 59 2.2 THE DOCK-LESS BIKE-SHARING SYSTEM ................................................................................................................. 65 2.2.1 Terminology and definition: public bike-sharing vs. dock-less bike-sharing ........................................ 67 2.2.2 The Chinese dock-less bike-sharing model ........................................................................................... 68 2.2.3 Phase 1: the birth of the bike-sharing startups and rapid growth ....................................................... 70 2.2.4 Phase 2: chinese bike-sharing market saturation and difficulties ....................................................... 76 2.2.5 Chinese style bike-sharing outside mainland China ............................................................................. 93 2.2.6 The current situation and future prospects ....................................................................................... 106 2.3 DOCK-LESS BIKE-SHARING INDUSTRY: IMPACTS ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 129 2.3.1 The cities ............................................................................................................................................ 129 2.3.2 The bicycle industry ............................................................................................................................ 132 2.3.3 The users ............................................................................................................................................ 136 2.3.4 The legislation and regulation ........................................................................................................... 138 CHAPTER 3 – DOCK-LESS BIKE-SHARING COMPANIES: SOME PROFILES ........................................................ 145 3.1 OFO ........................................................................................................................................................... 145 3.1.1 About the company ............................................................................................................................ 146 3.1.2 The service and products ................................................................................................................... 146 3.1.3 Major events and financial situation ................................................................................................. 148 3.2 MOBIKE ....................................................................................................................................................... 149 1 3.2.1 About the company ............................................................................................................................ 149 3.2.2 The service and products ................................................................................................................... 150 3.2.3 Major events and financial situation ................................................................................................. 151 3.3 HELLOBIKE / YOUON .................................................................................................................................... 152 3.3.1 YOUON .............................................................................................................................................. 152 3.3.2 Hellobike ............................................................................................................................................ 152 3.3.3 Major events and financial situation ................................................................................................. 154 3.4 BLUEGOGO ................................................................................................................................................... 155 3.4.1 About the company ............................................................................................................................ 155 3.4.2 The service and the product ............................................................................................................... 156 3.4.3 Major events and financial situation ................................................................................................. 157 3.5 OTHER CHINESE DOCK-LESS BIKE-SHARING BRANDS .............................................................................................. 157 3.5.1 UniBike ............................................................................................................................................... 157 3.5.2 U-bicycle............................................................................................................................................. 158 3.5.3 Ming Bike ........................................................................................................................................... 159 3.5.4 Wukong Bicycle .................................................................................................................................. 159 3.5.5 3Vbike ................................................................................................................................................ 160 3.5.6 Ding Ding Bike .................................................................................................................................... 161 3.5.7 Kuqi Bike ............................................................................................................................................ 162 3.5.8 Qingjie Bike ........................................................................................................................................ 164 3.6 GOBEE.BIKE .................................................................................................................................................. 165 3.6.1 About the company ........................................................................................................................... 165 3.6.2 The product and the service ............................................................................................................... 165 3.6.2 Major events ...................................................................................................................................... 166 3.7 OBIKE .......................................................................................................................................................... 166 3.7.1 About the company ........................................................................................................................... 166 3.7.2 The product and the service ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Official Record of Proceedings
    LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 3 November 2010 1399 OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Wednesday, 3 November 2010 The Council met at Eleven o'clock MEMBERS PRESENT: THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE JASPER TSANG YOK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN IR DR THE HONOURABLE RAYMOND HO CHUNG-TAI, S.B.S., S.B.ST.J., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN DR THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FRED LI WAH-MING, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE MARGARET NG THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG MAN-KWONG THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS SOPHIE LEUNG LAU YAU-FUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG DR THE HONOURABLE PHILIP WONG YU-HONG, G.B.S. 1400 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 3 November 2010 THE HONOURABLE WONG YUNG-KAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU KONG-WAH, J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW CHENG KAR-FOO THE HONOURABLE TIMOTHY FOK TSUN-TING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ABRAHAM SHEK LAI-HIM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LI FUNG-YING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TOMMY CHEUNG YU-YAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Platform Innovation in Urban Mobility Transitions the Case of Dockless Bike Sharing
    platform innovation in urban mobility transitions the case of dockless bike sharing arnoud van waes colofon Dit proefschrift werd (mede) mogelijk gemaakt met financiële steun van de Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) als onder- deel van het onderzoeksprogramma Smart Urban Regions of the Future (no. 438-15-160 397). Platform innovation in urban mobility transitions: The case of dockless bike sharing. PhD thesis. Author: Arnoud van Waes Bookdesign & illustrations: Ilse Schrauwers; isontwerp.nl Printing: Gildeprint Enschede; gildeprint.nl ISBN: 9789492303424 © Arnoud van Waes, 2021 All rights reserved. No part of this production may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without prior written permission by the author. Platform innovation in urban mobility transitions The case of dockless bike sharing Platform innovatie in stedelijke mobiliteitstransities Een studie naar innovatieve deelfietssystemen (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands) Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof.dr. H.R.B.M. Kummeling, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 27 mei 2021 des ochtends te 10.15 uur door Arnoud Harry Marianne van Waes geboren op 21 oktober 1987 te Terneuzen promotor Prof. dr. R.P.J.M. Raven copromotoren Dr. J.C.M. Farla Dr. A. Nikolaeva manuscriptcommissie Prof. dr. N.M.P. Bocken Prof. dr. M.C.G. te Brömmelstroet Prof. dr. C. Castaldi Prof. dr. ir. Q.C. van Est Prof. dr. A. Meijer 1 content Preface .
    [Show full text]
  • Accessibility and the Crowded Sidewalk: Micromobility’S Impact on Public Space CYNTHIA L
    Accessibility and The Crowded Sidewalk: Micromobility’s Impact on Public Space CYNTHIA L. BENNETT Carnegie Mellon University, [email protected] EMILY E. ACKERMAN Univerisity of Pittsburgh, [email protected] BONNIE FAN Carnegie Mellon University, [email protected] JEFFREY P. BIGHAM Carnegie Mellon University, [email protected] PATRICK CARRINGTON Carnegie Mellon University, [email protected] SARAH E. FOX Carnegie Mellon University, [email protected] Over the past several years, micromobility devices—small-scale, networked vehicles used to travel short distances—have begun to pervade cities, bringing promises of sustainable transportation and decreased congestion. Though proponents herald their role in offering lightweight solutions to disconnected transit, smart scooters and autonomous delivery robots increasingly occupy pedestrian pathways, reanimating tensions around the right to public space. Drawing on interviews with disabled activists, government officials, and commercial representatives, we chart how devices and policies co-evolve to fulfill municipal sustainability goals, while creating obstacles for people with disabilities whose activism has long resisted inaccessible infrastructure. We reflect on efforts to redistribute space, institute tech governance, and offer accountability to those who involuntarily encounter interventions on the ground. In studying micromobility within spatial and political context, we call for the HCI community to consider how innovation transforms as it moves out from centers of development toward peripheries of design consideration. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing~Accessibility~Empirical studies in accessibility Additional Keywords and Phrases: Micromobility, Accessibility, Activism, Governance, Public space ACM Reference Format: Cynthia L. Bennett, Emily E. Ackerman, Bonnie Fan, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Patrick Carrington, and Sarah E. Fox. 2021. Accessibility and The Crowded Sidewalk: Micromobility’s Impact on Public Space.
    [Show full text]
  • License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to Operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Encinitas
    MEETING DATE: April 17, 2019 PREPARED BY: Crystal Najera, CAP DEPT. DIRECTOR: Karen P. Brust Program Administrator DEPARTMENT: City Manager CITY MANAGER: Karen P. Brust SUBJECT: License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Encinitas. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Authorize the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, to execute a license agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC (in substantial form as attached) to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Encinitas (Attachment 5). STRATEGIC PLAN: This item is related to the following Strategic Plan focus areas: • Environment—promotes the use of emissions-free bicycles as an alternative mode of transportation. • Transportation—supports a transportation mode that accommodates more people with minimal impact on the community. • Recreation—promotes active lifestyles and community health. • Economic Development—addresses the “last mile” gap between public transit and local businesses and promotes tourism. FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommendation. Gotcha will bear the sole cost of deploying and operating the bike share program. Minimal City staff time will be needed to coordinate with Gotcha to ensure that the program operates in a manner beneficial to the City. BACKGROUND: Bike share is a service through which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a very short-term basis, allowing them to rent a bicycle at one location and return it either at the same location or at a different location within a defined geographic boundary. Transportation, especially travel via single occupancy vehicle, is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions in Encinitas and the North County coastal region.
    [Show full text]
  • Events in 2013
    Events in 2013 The 16.5 metre-high yellow Rubber Duck, a floating sculpture created by Dutch artist Florentijn Hofman, arrives at Ocean Terminal/Harbour City in Kowloon in May on its world tour. 1 1. The Chief Executive, Mr C Y Leung (second from left), rings the closing bell at the New York Stock Exchange in June. 2. The Ceremonial Opening of the Legal Year in January. 3. The Chief Executive meets the President of Mexico, Mr Enrique Peña Nieto, at Government House in April. 4. The Secretary for Justice, Mr Rimsky Yuen, SC (left), the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mrs Carrie Lam, and the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Raymond Tam, launch the public consultation on electoral reform in December. 5. The Financial Secretary, Mr John C Tsang (right), meets the French Minister of the 3 Economy and Finance, Mr Pierre Moscovici, in Paris in November. 2 5 4 1 2 1. Sarah Lee Wai-sze wins gold in the Women’s 500 metre time trial race at the UCI Track Cycling World Championships in Minsk, Belarus, in February. (Photo courtesy of Hong Kong Cycling Association) 2. The Mariner of the Seas is welcomed at the inaugural berthing at the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal in June. 3. ‘Big Waster’ headlined the year’s ‘Food Wise Hong Kong’ campaign to reduce food waste. 4. The Hong Kong Maritime Museum opened in February. 3 4 4 1 1. Visitors enjoy the ‘Journey to Hong Kong’ exhibition in Moscow in October. 2. Hong Kong cartoon characters McDull and McMug at the City of London Lord Mayor’s Show in November.
    [Show full text]
  • Niche Innovation Dynamics and the Urban Mobility Transition the Case of Dockless Bike-Sharing in London
    Niche innovation dynamics and the urban mobility transition The case of dockless bike-sharing in London Russell Cannon Urban Studies Master’s Programme (Two-Year) 30 Credits VT2019 Supervisor: Désirée Nilsson 1 Abstract This thesis seeks to provide a detailed understanding of the introduction of dockless bike-sharing to London. As part of a wave of new smart and shared mobility services that are aiming to transform the way people move around cities, this emerging form of transport has created disruptions in London since its launch in 2017. This study aims analyse to what extent dockless bike-sharing aligns or conflicts with the aims and objectives of local authorities governing public space in London. In doing so, it also aims to reveal insights into transformations in contemporary mobility by exploring the dynamics of niche innovations within socio-technical transitions, thus contributing to knowledge in the field of transition studies. To do this, a qualitative case study methodology was employed using document analysis and interviews with four stakeholders integrally involved in the case study, representing both public authorities and a private sector dockless bike-sharing operator, Mobike. The findings demonstrate that dockless bike-sharing is well aligned with the city’s explicit objectives to reduce car dependency and encourage active travel. It has particular potential to make cycling more accessible by bringing bike-sharing to parts of the city that do not have access to the pre-existing, docked bike-sharing scheme, operated by the central transport authority, Transport for London. Despite this, dockless bike-sharing, as a niche innovation, has struggled to break into the existing urban mobility regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Marin County Bicycle Share Feasibility Study
    Marin County Bicycle Share Feasibility Study PREPARED BY: Alta Planning + Design PREPARED FOR: The Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) Bike Sharing Advisory Working Group Alisha Oloughlin, Marin County Bicycle Coalition Benjamin Berto, TAM Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee Representative Eric Lucan, TAM Board Commissioner Harvey Katz, TAM Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee Representative Stephanie Moulton-Peters, TAM Board Commissioner R. Scot Hunter, Former TAM Board Commissioner Staff Linda M. Jackson AICP, TAM Planning Manager Scott McDonald, TAM Associate Transportation Planner Consultants Michael G. Jones, MCP, Alta Planning + Design Principal-in-Charge Casey Hildreth, Alta Planning + Design Project Manager Funding for this study provided by Measure B (Vehicle Registration Fee), a program supported by Marin voters and managed by the Transportation Authority of Marin. i Marin County Bicycle Share Feasibility Study Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................ ii 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Report Contents ................................................................................................................................................... 5 3 What is Bike Sharing? ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • City of Del Mar Staff Report
    City of Del Mar Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Clem Brown, Environmental Sustainability/Special Projects Manager Via Scott Huth, City Manager DATE: May 6, 2019 SUBJECT: License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to Operate the North County Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Del Mar REQUESTED ACTION/RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests that the City Council approve a license agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC (Attachment A) to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Del Mar and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND: The City of Del Mar is committed to reducing local greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to limit the effects of climate change, while also offering viable transportation alternatives to driving. Del Mar has adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that establishes a number of strategies to meet GHG emissions reduction targets, including facilitating safe, convenient, and affordable alternative transportation options. Specifically, Goal 14 in the CAP includes a strategy to “explore implementation of a bike share program…to provide another transportation alternative for traveling in town.” Transportation, especially travel via single occupancy vehicles, is a major source of GHG emissions in Del Mar and the other north San Diego County (North County) coastal cities. Offering and promoting programs like bike share, that replace vehicle trips with bike trips, is one way Del Mar can help to reduce emissions while offering more efficient and more affordable transportation modes for residents, employees, and visitors. Bike share is a service by which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a very short-term basis, allowing them to borrow a bicycle at one location and return it either to the same or an alternate location within a defined geographic boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Influencing Bike Share Membership
    Transportation Research Part A 71 (2015) 17–30 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra Factors influencing bike share membership: An analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane ⇑ Elliot Fishman a, , Simon Washington b,1, Narelle Haworth c,2, Angela Watson c,3 a Department Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, Netherlands b School of Urban Development, Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering and Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety (CARRS-Q), Faculty of Health Queensland University of Technology, 2 George St., GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia c Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland, K Block, Queensland University of Technology, 130 Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, QLD 4059, Australia article info abstract Article history: The number of bike share programs has increased rapidly in recent years and there are cur- Received 17 May 2013 rently over 700 programs in operation globally. Australia’s two bike share programs have Received in revised form 21 August 2014 been in operation since 2010 and have significantly lower usage rates compared to Europe, Accepted 29 October 2014 North America and China. This study sets out to understand and quantify the factors influ- encing bike share membership in Australia’s two bike share programs located in Mel- bourne and Brisbane. An online survey was administered to members of both programs Keywords: as well as a group with no known association with bike share. A logistic regression model Bicycle revealed several significant predictors of membership including reactions to mandatory CityCycle Bike share helmet legislation, riding activity over the previous month, and the degree to which conve- Melbourne Bike Share nience motivated private bike riding.
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Drive NOVEMBER 19, 2018 UPDATED JANUARY 31, 2019
    Miami Beach Neighborhood Greenways Bay Drive NOVEMBER 19, 2018 UPDATED JANUARY 31, 2019 p 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary p. 5 Goals and Objectives p. 7 Bay Drive Neighborhod Greenway p. 9 Existing Conditions p. 11 BAY DRIVE Bay Drive - Segment 1 p. 12 Bay Drive - Segment 2 p. 14 Bay Drive - Segment 3 p. 16 Landscaping p. 18 Safety and Access p. 19 Traffic Calming p. 20 71ST STREET AND NORMANDY DRIVE 71st Street and Normandy Drive p. 23 71st Street East - Segment 1 p. 24 71st Street West - Segment 2 p. 26 Normandy Drive East - Segment 1 p. 28 Normandy Drive West - Segment 2 p. 30 East Bridge p. 32 West Bridge p. 33 Landscaping p. 34 Safety - Bike Box p. 35 Parking Impact Analysis p. 36 Appendix Cost Estimates p. 42 Parking Replacement Analysis p. 48 Sidewalks Gap Analysis p. 56 Summary of Meetings p. 62 p 2 p 3 p 4 BAY DRIVE | City of Miami Beach Neighborhood Greenways EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background The Bay Drive Neighborhood Greenway concepts were then refined and reviewed extensively with Transportation staff and The adopted 2016 Miami Beach Transportation Master Plan internal Miami Beach stakeholders. The concepts were also was built on a mode share goal and modal prioritization strategy presented to the North Beach Steering Committee on October adopted by Resolution 2015-29083 on July 8, 2015, which 25, 2017. Transportation toured the area with TCED staff on places pedestrians first; transit, bicycles, and freight second; December 7, 2017. The Transportation, Parking and Bicycle and private automobiles third. Projects in the Transportation Facilities Committee reviewed the North Beach Neighborhood Master Plan are intended to move Miami Beach towards this Greenways concepts on April 9, 2017 and June 11, 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Mobility Payment Integration: State-Of-The-Practice Scan
    Mobility Payment Integration: State-of-the-Practice Scan OCTOBER 2019 FTA Report No. 0143 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Ingrid Bartinique and Joshua Hassol Volpe National Transportation Systems Center COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Edwin Adilson Rodriguez, Federal Transit Administration DISCLAIMER This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Mobility Payment Integration: State-of-the- Practice Scan OCTOBER 2019 FTA Report No. 0143 PREPARED BY Ingrid Bartinique and Joshua Hassol Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 55 Broadway, Kendall Square Cambridge, MA 02142 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 AVAILABLE ONLINE https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/research-innovation FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i Metric Conversion Table SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liter L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg megagrams T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 Mg (or “t”) (or “metric ton”) TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) o 5 (F-32)/9 o F Fahrenheit Celsius C or (F-32)/1.8 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No.
    [Show full text]
  • Socio-Economic Profile of Cycle Rickshaw Pullers: a Case Study
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by European Scientific Journal (European Scientific Institute) European Scientific Journal January edition vol. 8, No.1 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 UDC:656.12-05:316.35]:303.6(540)"2010" SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF CYCLE RICKSHAW PULLERS: A CASE STUDY Jabir Hasan Khan, PhD Tarique Hassan, PhD candidate Shamshad, PhD candidate Department of Geography Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh Abstract The present paper is an attempt to analyze the socio-economic characteristics of cycle rickshaw pullers and to find out the causes of rickshaw pulling. The adverse effects of this profession on the health of the rickshaw pullers, the problems faced by them and their remedial measures have been also taken into account. The study is based on primary data collected through the field survey and direct questionnaire to the respondents in Aligarh city. The survey was carried out during the months of February and March, 2010. The overall analysis of the study reveals that the rickshaw pullers are one of the poorest sections of the society, living in abject poverty but play a pivotal role in intra-city transportation system. Neither is their working environment regulated nor their social security issues are addressed. They are also unaware about the governmental schemes launched for poverty alleviation and their accessibility in basic amenities and infrastructural facilities is also very poor. Keywords: Abject poverty, breadwinners, cycle rickshaw pullers, disadvantageous, intra- city transport, vulnerability 310 European Scientific Journal January edition vol. 8, No.1 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 Introduction: The word rickshaw originates from the Japanese word ‘jinrikisha’, which literally means human-powered vehicle (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1993).
    [Show full text]