DOCSLIB.ORG

User Profiles and Adoption Attributes of Innovative Bike-Sharing Systems: the Case of Bicimad (Madrid)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
User Profiles and Adoption Attributes of Innovative Bike-Sharing Systems: the Case of Bicimad (Madrid) UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS DE CAMINOS, CANALES Y PUERTOS USER PROFILES AND ADOPTION ATTRIBUTES OF INNOVATIVE BIKE-SHARING SYSTEMS: THE CASE OF BICIMAD (MADRID) TESIS DOCTORAL ANDRÁS CSABA MUNKÁCSY Máster en Ciencias Económicas 2017 DEPARTAMENTO DE INGENIERÍA CIVIL: TRANSPORTE Y TERRITORIO ESCUELA TÉCNICA SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS DE CAMINOS, CANALES Y PUERTOS USER PROFILES AND ADOPTION ATTRIBUTES OF INNOVATIVE BIKE-SHARING SYSTEMS: THE CASE OF BICIMAD (MADRID) ANDRÁS CSABA MUNKÁCSY Máster en Ciencias Económicas Director de tesis: ANDRÉS MONZÓN DE CÁCERES Doctor Ingeniero de Caminos, Canales y Puertos 2017 Tribunal nombrado por el Mgfco. y Excmo. Sr. Rector de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, el día 18 de julio de 2017. Presidente: D. Javier Gutiérrez Puebla, Catedrático de Universidad Facultad de Geografía e Historia – Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) Vocal: D. David Lois García, Profesor Ayudante Doctor Facultad de Psicología – Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED) Vocal: D. Álvaro Fernández Heredia, Profesor Adjunto Escuela de Arquitectura, Ingeniería y Diseño – Universidad Europea de Madrid Vocal: Dña. Sigal Kaplan, Associate Professor Department of Transport – Technion – Israel Institute of Technology Secretario: Dña. María Eugenia López Lambas, Profesora Contrada Doctora ETSI Caminos, Canales y Puertos – Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Suplente: D. Julio Alberto Soria Lara, Profesor Ayudante Doctor ETSI Caminos, Canales y Puertos – Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Suplente: D. Imre Keserű, Postdoctoral Researcher MOBI – Vrije Universiteit Brussel Realizado el acto de defensa y lectura de la Tesis el día _____ de __________ de 2017 en la E.T.S. de Ingenieros de Canales, Caminos y Puertos de la U.P.M. Acuerda otorgarle la calificación de: ______________________________________________ Madrid, ___ de _________________de 2017. EL PRESIDENTE LOS VOCALES EL SECRETARIO Szüleimnek To my parents Πάντων χρημάτων μέτρον ἐστὶν ἄνθρωπος Man is the measure of all things (Protagoras) Acknowledgment Although my name is the only one on the front page, this dissertation reflects the efforts of many people. (Naturally, I take full responsibility for any errors.) I thank here all who have contributed to the realization of this PhD project. First of all, to my supervisor Andrés Monzón for inviting me to join the doctorate programme and trusting me during these years. Special thanks for the understanding and encouragement when it was really necessary. I am very grateful to Judy (Jutka) Benchaya, who selflessly helped proofread several portions of this manuscript. Thanks to the (mostly anonymous) reviewers who commented on previous versions of the dissertation or individual chapters. I mention here the name of only three, but many thanks to all my fellows at TRANSyT-UPM. It was a privilege to work with this team of outstanding researchers, supported by a great staff. The contribution by Andrés García Martínez and Guillermo Velázquez Romera have been crucial. Carmen Pérez Martínez kindly helped me several times not to be lost in bureaucracy. Thanks to my colleagues at the Embassy of Hungary in Madrid and KTI Institute for Transport Sciences in Budapest to facilitate the elaboration of this dissertation. Thanks to Jászberényi Melinda, for starting and unceasingly looking after my career. To Pálfalvi József, for introducing me to research and kindly guiding me during the first years after graduation. To Harald Beutl, for the inspiring conversations about the long way to achieve a PhD. And thanks to my family, who had to miss me in this extremely important and difficult period of our lives. To my long passed grandparents, Horváth Mária and Munkácsy Gyula, for teaching me how to think critically. To my parents, Bajkó Judit and Munkácsy Gyula, for everything… Particularly for showing me diversity in life and letting me find and walk my own way. To my brother, Munkácsy Márton, for the nice times we spent in sector C6 during the last two years of this PhD project. Finally to my wife, Mészáros Nóra, without whom this would not have been started, and to my baby son Máté, without whom it likely would not have been finished. Munkácsy András 25 June 2017 Abstract Bike-sharing nowadays is a must-have element of the urban transport system that is changing mobility patterns in cities worldwide. BiciMAD, introduced in Madrid in June 2014, is an example of the latest generation (demand responsive multimodal systems), a unique technology at the moment of implementation and a new element in the urban mobility of Madrid. It is also a relatively new topic of academic research, thus many issues have not yet been analysed in detail. Accordingly, the introduction of BiciMAD may be considered relevant in at least two aspects: locally, as a new (active and eco-friendly) mode of transport in the specific context of Madrid, and universally, as one of the first large fleets of bicycles with electric pedal assistance (pedelecs) and as a unique smart service configuration, including advanced mobility management measures. The present dissertation aims to respond to these research gaps. It comprises three main parts that follow the conceptual line of (1) reviewing the circumstances that influence the transition towards the massive use of bicycles and exploring the evolution of bike-sharing schemes in cities, (2) analysing a recently introduced pedelec-sharing system through user and non-user surveys and statistical methods, as well as (3) making conclusions to extend knowledge about potential user profiles, the bike-sharing adoption process and impacts on mobility in order to better understand the bike-sharing phenomenon and related travel behaviour. A combination of personal intercepts and online questionnaires has been employed to study user (and some non-user) characteristics in three survey phases (2014: 1859 responses; 2015: 584; 2016: 534), including a before-and-after panel survey (205 responses). Statistical methods (factor analysis, cluster analysis, measures of correlation) have been applied to identify and typify groups of (non-)users, as well as reveal the determinants and evolution of their willingness to use the service. For the analysis of bike-sharing as a new element in the urban transport system, the Innovation Diffusion Theory has been applied and amended by the employment of cycling familiarity as a potential adoption attribute. Outcomes indicate that the diffusion of bike- sharing is different from typical innovation adoption processes. One of the main conclusions is that those who report an experience of riding a bicycle in the city centre mostly are among the first and last adopters. Impacts of BiciMAD on individual travel behaviour (mode choice, bicycle use, etc.) and urban mobility patterns (modal shift, number of trips, etc.) have also been examined. Findings indicate that it has contributed to promote active travel and improve cycling culture. It has also increased mobility (total number and distance of trips) and decreased perceived travel time, which may be considered a key impact of bike-sharing. Resumen Los sistemas de bicicleta pública constituyen actualmente elementos imprescindibles del transporte urbano, que están cambiando las pautas de movilidad en ciudades de todo el mundo. BiciMAD, inaugurado en Madrid en junio de 2014, es un ejemplo de la última generación (sistemas multimodales adaptados a la demanda), de tecnología única en el momento de su introducción y un nuevo elemento de la movilidad urbana de Madrid. La bicicleta pública es un tema reciente en la investigación académica, por lo tanto, muchas cuestiones no se han analizado profundamente todavía. Por lo tanto, la implantanción de BiciMAD puede ser considerada relevante como mínimo en dos aspectos: a nivel local, como un modo de transporte nuevo (activo y ecológico) en el contexto específico de Madrid, y a nivel global, como una de las primeras grandes flotas de bicicletas con asistencia al pedaleo y como una configuración inteligente única que constituye una medida de gestión de movilidad avanzada. La presente tesis doctoral tiene como objetivo general dar respuesta a este vacío científico. Abarca tres partes clave en la línea de investigación de (1) revisar las circunstancias que influyen la transición hacia el uso masivo de la bicicleta y explorar la evolución de sistemas de bicicleta pública en ciudades; (2) analizar un nuevo sistema de bicicletas con asistencia al pedaleo a través de encuestas entre usuarios y no usuarios y métodos estadísticos; y (3) sacar conclusiones para ampliar el conocimiento sobre perfiles de usuarios potenciales, el proceso de adopción de bicicleta pública e impactos en la movilidad para entender mejor el fenómeno de la bicicleta pública y el comportamiento de sus usuarios. Para lograr el objetivo, se ha empleado una combinación de entrevistas personales y cuestionarios en línea para estudiar características de usuarios (y algunos no usuarios) en tres fases (2014: 1859 respuestas; 2015: 584; 2016: 534), incluyendo una encuesta panel de antes y después (205 respuestas). Se han aplicado métodos estadísticos (análisis factorial, análisis cluster, medidas de correlación) para identificar y tipificar grupos de (no) usuarios y revelar los determinantes y la evolución de su disposición a usar el servicio. Para el análisis de bicicleta pública como un elemento nuevo del sistema de transporte urbano, se ha empleado la teoría de difusión de innovaciones, incluyendo la familiaridad
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CONNECTING the RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio
    RUTGERS UNIVERSITY BIKE SHARE CONNECTING THE RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio ABOUT THE STUDIO This studio project is an analysis of the health impacts of the We met with Bloustein professors, with planning professionals, potential new Bike Share program planned for the Rutgers-New and with the organizers and staff of bike shares across the coun- Brunswick community. It builds upon our client’s – the Rutgers try in order to ask questions and gain invaluable advice on how University Department of Institutional Planning and Opera- to proceed with our analysis. We used this collected knowledge tion (IPO) – Internal Bicycle Share Proposal. The IPO report to build impact projections and develop a list of actionable rec- highlighted existing bicycle infrastructure, robust public trans- ommendations targeted at maximizing positive health outcomes portation infrastructure, and the high concentration of bicycle while mitigating health concerns. commuters in the study area as support for their proposal. This studio expanded on that analysis by examining the physical, This studio course is intended to advance the goals of Healthier mental, social, and economic health of the users and residents New Brunswick, a network of partners in the City of New Bruns- of Rutgers campus and the surrounding areas. Our targeted wick that are working together to ensure that all residents have audience for this analysis was people who currently do not bike; equal access to the services and conditions that allow for good we paid close attention to equity issues and vulnerable popula- health and well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • By the Numbers
    By the Numbers Quantifying Some of Our Environmental & Social Work 6.2 MILLION 100 Dollars we donated this fiscal year Percentage of Patagonia products we take to fund environmental work back for recycling 70 MILLION 164,062 Cash and in-kind services we’ve donated since Pounds of Patagonia products recycled our tithing program began in 1985 or upcycled since 2004 741 84 Environmental groups that received Percentage of water saved through our new a Patagonia grant this year denim dyeing technology as compared to environmental + social initiatives conventional synthetic indigo denim dyeing 116,905 Dollars given to nonprofits this year through 100 our Employee Charity Match program Percentage of Traceable Down (traceable to birds that were never live-plucked, 20 MILLION & CHANGE never force-fed) we use in our down products 2 Dollars we’ve allocated to invest in environmentally and socially responsible companies through our 1996 venture capital fund Year we switched to the exclusive use of organically grown cotton 0 8 New investments we made this year through 10,424 $20 Million & Change Hours our employees volunteered this year 1 on the company dime 5 Mega-dams that will not be built on Chile’s Baker 30,000 and Pascua rivers thanks to a worldwide effort Approximate number of Patagonia products 5 in which we participated repaired this year at our Reno Service Center 380 15 MILLION Public screenings this year for DamNation Acres of degraded grassland we hope to restore in the Patagonia region of South America by buying and supporting the purchase of responsibly sourced 75,000 merino wool Signatures collected this year petitioning the Obama administration to remove four dams initiatives social + environmental on the lower Snake River 774,671 Single-driver car-trip miles avoided this year 192 through our Drive-Less program Fair Trade Certified™ styles in the Patagonia line as of fall 2015 100 MILLION Dollars 1% for the Planet® has donated to nonprofit environmental groups cover: Donnie Hedden © 2015 Patagonia, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • KKKR – Közbringa
    KKKR – közbringa Közbringa versus kerékpárkölcsönzés – áttekintés Közbringa Kerékpárkölcsönzés általában speciális kerékpárok szériakerékpárok a városi közlekedés egyik alágazata elsősorban turisztikai céllal felvevő- és leadópont különbözik felvevő- és leadópont azonos ingyenesség vagy kedvező, majd progresszív régiónként eltérő, de mindenképpen magasabb, díjszabás degresszív díjszabás szabályosan felszerelt kerékpárok gyakran hiányosan felszerelt kerékpárok városi/önkormányzati szolgáltatás magánvállalkozás A közbringa rövid története Az első KKKR rendszer Amsterdamban épült ki az 1960-as évek közepén, mely teljességgel bizalmi alapon állt, azaz regisztrációs és díjfizetési kötelezettség nélkül. Ugyanakkor a vonzó feltételek okozták a rendszer bukását is: a számos kerékpárlopás miatt a rendszert néhány hónappal beindítása után fel kellett számolni. Az első sikeres közbringa-rendszert a franciák üzemeltették az 1970-es években, La Rochelle városában. A La Rochelle-i példát a világon számos város vette át az 1990-es években – ekkor volt az első nagy „közbringa-boom” –, igaz, ezek közül sok dőlt be a sorozatos lopások és értelmetlen vandalizmus, vagy éppen a politikai támogatás hiánya miatt. Néhány azonban – így például a Koppenhágában működő ByCyklen (1995) – napjainkig létezik. A második közbringa-hullám a 2000-es évekre tehető: számos európai nagyváros állított fel saját közbringa- hálózatot: az amszterdami központú (és szinte az egész országot lefedő) 2002-es „OV-fiets”; a 2003-ban indult bécsi „Citybike”; a 2003-as berlini „Call a Bike”; a 2007-ben indult párizsi „Vélib’”; vagy éppen a 2010-es londoni „Barcalays Cycle Hire” (avagy közkeletű nevén – Boris Johnson, London polgármestere után elnevezve – a „Boris Bikes”) mind-mind azóta is működő és sikeres hálózatok. Sőt, ami a legfontosabb, a politikai akarat is segíti működésüket. Közbringa-generációk Első generáció: a szabadon vihető Az első generációs közbringa-rendszerek mindenféle megkötés nélkül vehetők igénybe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bike- Share Planning Guide
    THE BIKE- SHARE PLANNING GUIDE Introduction Sub 1 Introduction Sub 2 THE BIKE- SHARE PLANNING GUIDE Introduction Sub 3 The Bike-share Planning Guide Cover Photo: Mexico City's Ecobici has helped to increase cycling mode share in Mexico City. Cover Photo By: Udayalaksmanakartiyasa Halim 9 East 19th Street, 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10003 tel +1 212 629 8001 www.itdp.org Introduction Sub 4 Authors and Acknowledgements The writing of this report was a collaborative effort across ITDP and our partners. Contributing authors include: Aimee Gauthier, Colin Hughes, Christopher Kost, Shanshan Li, Clarisse Linke, Stephanie Lotshaw, Jacob Mason, Carlosfelipe Pardo, Clara Rasore, Bradley Schroeder, and Xavier Treviño. The authors would also like to thank Christopher Van Eyken, Jemilah Magnusson, and Gabriel Lewenstein for their support in the creation of the guide. ITDP is especially grateful to the following people for providing comments on and contributions to sections of this report: Alison Cohen, Director of Bike Share Services, Toole Design Group (with many thanks to Shomik Mehndiratta and the World Bank for their support of Ms. Cohen’s research) Dani Simons, Director of Marketing, NYC Bike Share Matteo Martignoni, International Human Powered Vehicle Association and former ITDP board member Jeff Olson, Alta Planning and Design Chris Holben, former Project Manager for Capital Bikeshare District Department of Transportation. Introduction Sub 5 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 The Benefits of Bike-share 14 1.2 History of Bike-share 19 1.3 New Developments and Trends 25 1.4 Building Political Will 26 1.5 Elements of Bike-share 27 2 THE PLANNING PROCESS 28 AND FEASIBILITY STUDY 2.1 Overview of Planning Process 30 2.2 Feasibility Study 32 2.3 Bike-Share Metrics 40 2.3.1 Basic Context Data and System Metrics 40 2.3.2 Performance Metrics 41 2.4 Coverage Area 43 2.5 System Sizing: Three Basic 44 Planning Parameters 2.6 Financial Analysis 48 3 DETAILED PLANNING AND DESIGN 52 3.1 Station Location 57 3.2 Station Sizing 63 3.3 Station Type and Design 64 3.3.1 Manual vs.
    [Show full text]
  • New Mobility Playbook
    Seattle Department of Transportation NEW MOBILITY PLAYBOOK Version 1.0 September 2017 MORE MOBILITY MORE INFORMATION MORE SEATTLE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SDOT PROJECT TEAM INTERAGENCY PROJECT Evan Corey | Project Lead TEAM Andrew Glass Hastings | Division Director, Carol Cooper and Jean Paul Velez | Transit and Mobility King County Metro Tracy Krawczyk | Division Director, Policy Kara Main-Hester | Seattle Department of and Planning Finance and Administrative Services Benjamin de la Peña | Deputy Director for Policy, Sean Bouffiou | King County Records and Planning, Mobility and Right of Way Licensing Services Mayumi Thompson | Communications Mafara Hobson | Communications Director CONSULTANT SUPPORT Scott Kubly | Department of Transportation Joe Iacobucci and Ellen Gottschling | Director Sam Schwartz Engineering Leslie Carlson, Mike Westling, Heidi Nielsen, CITY OF SEATTLE and Erin Halasz | Brink Communications INTERDEPARTMENTAL TEAM Cristina Van Valkenburgh, Mike Estey, EXPERT REVIEWERS Mary Catherine Snyder, Candida Lorenzana, Mollie Pellon and Corinne Kisner | NACTO Ben Smith, Naomi Doerner, and Kyle Rowe | Russell Brooks and Rob Benner | SDOT Transit and Mobility Division Transportation for America Jonathan Lewis | SDOT Policy and Planning Greg Lindsay | New Cities Foundation Division Katja Schechtner | OECD/MIT Media Lab Mark Bandy and Adiam Emery | Stonly Baptiste | Urban.Us SDOT Transportation Operations Division Gabe Klein | CityFi Darby Watson | SDOT Project Development Division Kevin O’Neill | SDOT Street Use Division Michael Mattmiller
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Share Hubs • Defined “No Parking” Areas • System Growth Based on Operator Compliance
    6B City of Transportation Commission Bellevue Study Session DATE: March 8, 2018 TO: Chair Bishop and Members of the Transportation Commission FROM: Andreas Piller, Associate Transportation Planner [email protected] 425-452-2931 Franz Loewenherz, Principal Transportation Planner [email protected] 425-452-4077 SUBJECT: Citywide Bike Share Pilot Program DIRECTION REQUESTED X Action X Discussion X Information At the March 8, 2018 Transportation Commission meeting, staff seeks Commission endorsement of the strategies for implementing a citywide bike share pilot program. In accordance with its Bylaws approved on December 14, 2017, the Commission must also authorize a person to represent this feedback to the City Council. Note: Multiple hyperlinks are included in this memo, requiring extensive Commission consideration. It will not be possible to review these materials in depth in the 60 minutes allotted to this topic at the March 8 meeting. Staff offers to meet with Commissioners to review materials and answer questions in advance of the March 8 meeting. Background Bellevue’s Comprehensive Plan, adopted in August 2015, aims to “maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system to serve all members of the community” (Transportation Element Goal). The plan notes that “mobility in Bellevue means providing people with an assortment of mobility options that help people get where they need to go,” and that this “contributes to a quality of life that Bellevue residents expect, and that attracts employers and businesses” (Transportation Element Introduction). Policies direct the City to “evaluate and facilitate car-sharing and bike sharing programs” (TR-16) and to “support the establishment and operation of a bicycle sharing program in Bellevue” (TR-115).
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Free Floating Bike Share Evaluation Report
    Seattle Department of Transportation 2019 FREE-FLOATING BIKE SHARE EVALUATION REPORT April 2020 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..............................................................................................4 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................5 Seattle’s Vision and Values for Transportation ........................................................5 Background ...............................................................................................................6 Our Approach ............................................................................................................9 2. HOW WELL DID WE ADVANCE OUR GOALS AND HOW CAN WE IMPROVE IN 2020? .................................................................................................15 Key Questions .........................................................................................................16 Goal 1: Support an active, healthy, people-first use of seattle’s streets ...............17 Goal 2: Ensure affordable and equitable service—particularly for cost-burdened communities of color—while expanding access to opportunities .....................23 Goal 3: Be safe and advance our vision zero objectives .........................................30 Goal 4: Fill mobility gaps and improve connections to transit ...............................34 Goal 5: Provide a low-carbon mobility option as part of Seattle’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions ...............................................................................38
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Bicycle Options for Federal Lands: Bike Sharing, Rentals and Employee Fleets
    FHWA-WFL/TD-12-001 JANUARY 2012 EXPLORING BICYCLE OPTIONS FOR FEDERAL LANDS: BIKE SHARING, RENTALS AND EMPLOYEE FLEETS Technical Report published by Technology Deployment Program Western Federal Lands Highway Division Federal Highway Administration 610 East 5th St. Vancouver, WA 98661 For more information or additional copies contact: Susan Law, Planning Team Leader [email protected], 360.619.7840 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-WFL/TD-12-001 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date January 2012 EXPLORING BICYCLE OPTIONS FOR FEDERAL LANDS: BIKE SHARING, RENTALS AND EMPLOYEE FLEETS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Rebecca Gleason, Laurie Miskimins 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Western Transportation Institute P.O. Box 174250 11. Contract or Grant No. Bozeman, MT 59717-4250 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Federal Highway Administration Final Report Western Federal Lands Highway Division August 2009 – July 2011 610 East 5th St. Vancouver, WA 98661 14. Sponsoring Agency Code HFL-17 15. Supplementary Notes COTR: Susan Law – FHWA CFLHD/WFLHD. Advisory Panel Members: Adam Schildge – FTA, Alan Turnbull – NPS RTCA, Andrew Duvall, National Science Foundation IGERT PhD student, Brandon Jutz – FWS, Candace Rutt – CDC, Diana Allen – NPS RTCA, Franz Gimmler – non-motorized consultant, Ivan Levin – Outdoor Foundation, Jane D. Wargo – HHS, Jason Martz – NPS, Jim Evans – NPS, Nathan Caldwell – FWS, Paul DeMaio – Bike Share consultant, Tokey Boswell – NPS. This project was funded by the Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge Road Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstracting Mobility Flows from Bike-Sharing Systems
    Senseable City Lab :.:: Massachusetts Institute of Technology This paper might be a pre-copy-editing or a post-print author-produced .pdf of an article accepted for publication. For the definitive publisher-authenticated version, please refer directly to publishing house’s archive system SENSEABLE CITY LAB Public Transport https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-020-00259-5(0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) ORIGINAL RESEARCH Abstracting mobility flows from bike-sharing systems 1,2 1 1 Fabio Kon • E´derson Ca´ssio Ferreira • Higor Amario de Souza • 2,3 2,4 2 Fa´bio Duarte • Paolo Santi • Carlo Ratti Accepted: 9 November 2020 Ó Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021 Abstract Bicycling has grown significantly in the past ten years. In some regions, the implementation of large-scale bike-sharing systems and improved cycling infra- structure are two of the factors enabling this growth. An increase in non-motorized modes of transportation makes our cities more human, decreases pollution, traffic, and improves quality of life. In many cities around the world, urban planners and policymakers are looking at cycling as a sustainable way of improving urban mobility. Although bike-sharing systems generate abundant data about their users’ travel habits, most cities still rely on traditional tools and methods for planning and policy-making. Recent technological advances enable the collection and analysis of large amounts of data about urban mobility, which can serve as a solid basis for evidence-based policy-making. In this paper, we introduce a novel analytical method that can be used to process millions of bike-sharing trips and analyze bike- sharing mobility, abstracting relevant mobility flows across specific urban areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Equity Policies Bike Share Topics in Bike Share Equity - 1 of 10
    Breaking Barriers to Equity Policies Bike Share Topics in Bike Share Equity - 1 of 10 OVERVIEW Cities and bike share operators should have equity policies that direct or guide the system to serve residents equitably, including making the system accessible to traditionally underserved communities. At its core, equity means understanding and providing people what they need to be successful at an endeavor. The graphic in Figure 1 provides a simple distinction between equality (where each receives the same item), and equity. Articulating a specific equity policy helps to establish goals, build in accountability, and provides an opportunity to assess. A solid equity policy is an important first step in delivering an equitable bike share system. Equality vs. Equity Photo Credit: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation CURRENT APPROACHES In our recent survey of cities and bike share operators, fewer than one in three systems had specific equity policies or statements, while another 20% had either equity definitions passed down from the city that they used, or had working definitions based on programmatic activity. Large systems of 750 bikes or more were most likely to have equity policies or statements. Equity policies may identify: • Who currently is excluded from the benefits • What past injustices and current of bike share? Identify specific underserved circumstances necessitate current action? groups, such as low-income individuals or minority Policies may detail reasons why certain residents communities, or neighborhoods with the greatest have been excluded or face a disadvantage, need and/or fewest transportation options. including describing the consequences of the past • What system actions or program elements injustices.
    [Show full text]
  • REVERSE INNOVATION Rethinking Urban Transport Through Global Learning Imprint
    REVERSE INNOVATION Rethinking Urban Transport through Global Learning Imprint Publisher: Authors: German Environment Agency Section I 3, German Environment Agency PO Box 14 06 Alina Ulrich, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale D-06813 Dessau-Roßlau Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Phone: +49 340-2103-0 [email protected] Editors: www.umweltbundesamt.de Claudia Kiso, German Environment Agency Elena Scherer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale //umweltbundesamt.deumweltbundesamt.de Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH //umweltbundesamtumweltbundesamt Citation: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale UBA/GIZ (2017) Reverse Innovation – Rethinking Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) Urban Transport through Global Learning, German Environment Agency. Dessau-Roßlau, 09/2017. Registered offices Bonn and Eschborn, Germany Design: hauer+dörfler GmbH Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 40 53113 Bonn, Germany Publication as pdf: Phone: +49 228 44 60-0 https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/publications Fax: +49 228 44 60-17 66 Photo credits: Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1–5 Cover: shutterstock.com 65760 Eschborn Manfred Breithaupt (S. 5), Amit Bhatt (Raahgiri Day), Daniel Phone: +49 61 96 79-0 Bongardt (MoBike und E-Bus), Fotolia: Philip Lange (S. 8), Fax: +49 61 96 79-11 15 mmphoto (S. 9), Arimbi Jinca (Go-Jek), Carol Mutiso (MPesa), Samira Negm (Raye7), Lincoln Paiva (Permanent Parklets), Email: [email protected] Shengyang Sun (MoBike und E-Bus), Shutterstock.comShutterstock.com:: Internet: www.giz.de Efired (S.7), lornet (S.10), Kalpana Viswanath (SafetiPin), Claudia Weyandt (Gogoro) Last update
    [Show full text]
  • Public Bicycles
    EuroTest http://www.eurotestmobility.com/eurotest.php?itemno=418&la... MEMBERS log in newsletter drivers home | news | EuroTests | downloads | co EuroTests - EuroTest 2012 - Public Bicycles Back to list Results Back to Public Bicycles test Click here to view the overall ranking of the 40 systems Bikes-to-go are looking pretty good Almost all of the 40 public bicycle hire schemes in this first-time comparison of schemes in cities throughout Europe offer their bikes at permanent rental stations in their area. But that's were the similarities end. With such a diverse range of offers, differences in quality have to be expected. This becomes obvious as soon as we look at the number of stations where bikes can be picked up. This ranges from just a single station in the case of BUGA in Aveiro, Portugal, to 1,751 in the case of Vélib' in Paris. France's capital also holds the record for the number of bicycles: 23,900. Compared to second-place Barclay's Cycle Hire in London with its 558 stations and 9,200 bicycles, we can see just how impressive this record is. And the winner is: France But still, Paris, which is certainly setting an example for the rest of the world, only received a "Good" rating and came second in this European comparison. The capital city was nipped at the post by fellow countryman vélo'v in Lyon, the only scheme to receive a "Very good" rating. 343 stations with 4,000 bicycles, available to anyone all year round, linked to local public transport, easy and free registration, fully automated bicycle pick-up and return at any station, information provided in several languages and accessible in many different ways - that's pretty close to the perfect bike-to-go system.
    [Show full text]