DOCSLIB.ORG

Twenty Years of Car Sharing: a Case Study on the City of Vancouver’S Role in the Growth of Car Sharing in Vancouver

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Twenty Years of Car Sharing: a Case Study on the City of Vancouver’S Role in the Growth of Car Sharing in Vancouver Twenty Years of Car Sharing: A case study on the City of Vancouver’s role in the growth of car sharing in Vancouver By Mitchell Shaw B.A. (International Studies), Simon Fraser University, 2012 Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Urban Studies in the Urban Studies Program Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences © Mitchell Shaw 2018 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Fall 2018 Copyright in this work rests with the author. Please ensure that any reproduction or re-use is done in accordance with the relevant national copyright legislation. Approval Name: Mitchell Shaw Degree: Master of Urban Studies Title: Twenty Years of Car Sharing: A case study on the City of Vancouver’s role in the growth of car sharing in Vancouver Examining Committee: Chair: Peter V. Hall Professor of Urban Studies and Geography Anthony Perl Senior Supervisor Professor of Urban Studies and Political Science Patrick J. Smith Supervisor Professor of Urban Studies and Political Science Emmanuel Brunet-Jailly External Examiner Professor of Public Policy and Jean Monnet Chair in Innovative Governance University of Victoria Date Defended: May 23, 2018 ii Ethics Statement iii Abstract This thesis explores the City of Vancouver’s role in supporting the growth of car sharing in Vancouver from 1997 to 2016. In December 2016, Vancouver had the highest number of car share members and vehicles in a single city across North America. Using a mixed methods approach, City documents and interviews are used to assess the impact that City policies have had on the development of this mobility service. The research found that City policies, including the provision of permit and dedicated on- street parking, parking incentives for new developments and incorporating car share vehicles into the City’s fleet have had the greatest impact in supporting car share growth in terms of members and usage. The thesis concludes that the City of Vancouver has strongly supported the growth of car sharing; however, given the absence of a broader car sharing planning framework, existing policies remain disconnected. City car share policies that were introduced in the 2000s should be updated to incorporate advances in technology: autonomous driving, fleet electrification, and ride sharing. More robust terms of measurement would also improve the City’s opportunity to leverage positive outcomes that car sharing brings, such as a reduction in private vehicle ownership and use. Keywords: car share; transportation; City of Vancouver; Modo; Zipcar; car2go iv Acknowledgements I would like to express the sincerest appreciation to my Senior Supervisor, Dr. Anthony Perl for his support and continual guidance throughout the completion of my research project. Professor Perl’s patience, expertise, and insight made this a stronger thesis and I am very appreciative of his work. I would like to give a special thanks to Professor Patrick Smith, my external examiner Dr. Emmanuel Brunet-Jailly and my examining committee for their diligent oversight and insightful commentary. I would like to thank my interviewees for volunteering their time and sharing their wisdom with me. A big thank-you to the Urban Studies Program and my classmates who have taught me a great deal about the cities we passionately strive to improve. I would like to thank my loving wife Elizabeth for her patience and support throughout the completion of this project. Her encouragement was instrumental in the completion of this thesis. Lastly, I am grateful to my family and friends for encouraging me to pursue my passions. v Table of Contents Approval ......................................................................................................................... ii Ethics Statement ........................................................................................................... iii Abstract ......................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ v Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ................................................................................................................ ix List of Acronyms ........................................................................................................... x Chapter 1. Introduction and Purpose of Research ................................................... 1 1.1. What is car sharing? .......................................................................................... 8 1.2. The history of car sharing ................................................................................. 9 1.3. Car Sharing and Vancouver ........................................................................... 13 1.4. Impacts of car sharing ..................................................................................... 22 1.5. Maximizing positive impacts from car sharing ............................................. 28 Chapter 2. Literature Review ................................................................................... 31 2.1. The Role of Cities in Policy Formulation ....................................................... 31 2.2. Vancouver and Transportation Planning ...................................................... 35 2.3. The Sharing Economy ..................................................................................... 46 2.4. Mobility and the Environment ....................................................................... 49 Chapter 3. Methodology and Data Collection ......................................................... 53 3.1. Developing a Conceptual Framework ............................................................ 53 3.2. Content Analysis .............................................................................................. 59 3.3. Qualitative Interviews ..................................................................................... 60 Chapter 4. Evaluating Vancouver’s Support for Car Sharing .............................. 63 4.1. Levels of Support ............................................................................................. 63 4.2. Types of Support .............................................................................................. 64 4.2.1. Marketing ...................................................................................................... 65 4.2.2. Administration .............................................................................................. 66 4.2.3. Parking .......................................................................................................... 68 4.2.4. Financial Contribution .................................................................................. 72 4.2.5. Memberships/Fleet ....................................................................................... 74 4.2.6. Planning Support .......................................................................................... 76 4.2.7. Development Process ................................................................................... 78 4.2.8. Tax-Related Solutions .................................................................................. 84 4.3. Evidence that Vancouver Supports Car Sharing .......................................... 84 Chapter 5. Findings and Discussion ......................................................................... 87 5.1. The Importance of Policy ................................................................................ 91 5.1.1. Learning from Within ................................................................................... 91 5.1.2. Learning from other cities ............................................................................ 96 5.2. The Role of Pioneers and Champions ............................................................ 97 vi 5.3. The Future of Car Sharing.............................................................................. 98 5.4. Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 102 References ...................................................................................................................... 105 Appendix A. ................................................................................................................... 118 Appendix B. ................................................................................................................... 119 Appendix C. ................................................................................................................... 120 vii List of Figures Figure 1. Transportation Hierarchy (© City of Vancouver, 2012) .............................2 Figure 2. Car2go Membership in Vancouver (© Shaw, 2017) ...................................3 Figure 3. European Car Share Growth (© Shaheen & Cohen, 2016) .......................10 Figure 4. North American Car Share Growth (© Shaheen & Cohen, 2016) ............12 Figure 5. Canadian Car Sharing Growth (© Shaheen, et. al., 2008) ........................13 Figure 6. Car2go Home Area (© car2go, 2017 .........................................................18 Figure 7. Evo
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toronto Urban Sharing Team
    URBAN SHARING City report no 2 in TORONTO URBAN SHARING TEAM URBAN SHARING IN TORONTO City report no. 2 URBAN SHARING TEAM: Oksana Mont, Andrius Plepys, Yuliya Voytenko Palgan, Jagdeep Singh, Matthias Lehner, Steven Curtis, Lucie Zvolska, and Ana Maria Arbelaez Velez 2020 Cover design: Lucie Zvolska Cover photo: Oksana Mont Copyright: URBAN SHARING TEAM ISBN: 978-91-87357-62-6. Print Urban Sharing in Toronto, City report no.2 ISBN: 978-91-87357-63-3. Pdf Urban Sharing in Toronto, City report no. 2 Printed in Sweden by E-print, Stockholm 2020 Table of contents 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1 2 THE CITY CONTEXT ................................................................................. 5 2.1 Geography and demographics ................................................................ 5 2.1.1 Topography and urban sprawl .................................................. 5 2.1.2 Socio-demographics.................................................................. 6 2.1.3 Tourism ..................................................................................... 6 2.2 City governance ....................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Governance structure ................................................................ 6 2.2.2 City regulatory policies for sharing ............................................ 8 2.3 Economy ................................................................................................ 11 2.3.1
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Mobility Technologies and Trends
    Emerging Mobility Technologies and Trends And Their Role in Creating “Mobility-As-A-System” For the 21st Century and Beyond OWNERSHIP RIGHTS All reports are owned by Energy Systems Network (ESN) and protected by United States copyright and international copyright/intellectual property laws under applicable treaties and/or conventions. User agrees not to export any report into a country that does not have copyright/ intellectual property laws that will protect ESN’s rights therein. GRANT OF LICENSE RIGHTS ESN hereby grants user a non-exclusive, non-refundable, non- transferable Enterprise License, which allows you to (i) distribute the report within your organization across multiple locations to its representatives, employees or agents who are authorized by the organization to view the report in support of the organization’s internal business purposes; and (ii) display the report within your organization’s privately hosted internal intranet in support of your organization’s internal business purposes. Your right to distribute the report under an Enterprise License allows distribution among multiple locations or facilities to Authorized Users within your organization. ESN retains exclusive and sole ownership of this report. User agrees not to permit any unauthorized use, reproduction, distribution, publication or electronic transmission of any report or the information/forecasts therein without the express written permission of ESN. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY AND LIABILITY ESN has used its best efforts in collecting and preparing each report. ESN, its employees, affi liates, agents, and licensors do not warrant the accuracy, completeness, correctness, non-infringement, merchantability, or fi tness for a particular purpose of any reports covered by this agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • EN160706 BMW Group and Sixt SE Extend Car Sharing Programme
    Corporate Communications Media Information 6 July 2016 BMW Group and Sixt SE extend car sharing programme Brussels becomes 10th DriveNow city in Europe Five years of premium car sharing More than 600,000 customers Car sharing most important driving force of electric mobility More than three million electric kilometres since 2013 Consistent implementation of strategy NUMBER ONE > NEXT Munich - Brussels. As it celebrates its fifth anniversary, DriveNow is extending its service to Brussels. The Belgian capital is the tenth European city where the premium car sharing joint venture from BMW Group and Sixt SE will operate. Car sharing without a branch office has been allowed in Brussels since June and the service will offer a range of BMW and MINI models on the proven free-floating car sharing concept. Speaking on the occasion of DriveNow’s fifth anniversary, Peter Schwarzenbauer, BMW AG management board member responsible for MINI, BMW Motorrad, Rolls- Royce, Aftersales and Mobility Services said, “We are delighted to welcome Brussels as the tenth DriveNow city, a fitting way to celebrate five years of premium car sharing in Europe. In terms of customers, we already lead the car-sharing market in Germany and our aim is to achieve that across Europe. We are convinced that our premium individual mobility services will be a key factor for success in the future. Of course services will not replace the automotive sector, but they are an important additional area for our business. That’s why we are constantly looking at where we can take DriveNow next.” Following its launch in Munich in June 2011, DriveNow has constantly expanded its mobility services in Europe and now has more than 600,000 customers.
    [Show full text]
  • L'écho-Mobile
    L’écho -mobile COMMUNAUTo’s newsletter · APRIL 2011 · VOL. XVII, NO 1 Communatuo’s first incursion in an out-of-province market (page 6 ) In this issue/ And more/ Editorial (page 2 ) CarShare HFX Halifax (page 6 ) The Competition Is Not What It Seems Communauto becomes a shareholder Improved agreements (page 4 ) BIXI-AUTO and BIXI-AUTO-BUS (page 6 ) The network reservation is better than ever The DUO and the TRIO are exclusively back for this summer Long distance rates (page 4 ) Caisse d’économie solidaire (page 3 ) Easier access and other improvements A $500 loan to switch to a member subscription and more / > EDITORIAL The Competition Is Not What It Seems Daimler’s car2go, BMW’s premium carsharing Edinburgh, Scotland (a more motivated local service, the upcoming Volkswagen project in firm saved the project at the last minute.) In Hanover and Renault-Nissan’s New Mobility 2008, Honda withdrew from the Singapore Concept, are radically changing the car market after six years, its efforts deemed industry. unsuccessful, despite praise from the critics and the community’s disappointment (And The arrival of the automobile industry’s major yet how difficult would it be for such a large players on the “mobility-on-demand” market company to manage a fleet of just under 100 will hopefully accelerate the concept’s large- vehicles?). scale development over the next few years. Benoît Robert It is sometimes disconcerting that, para- Chief Executive Officer It may seem surprising at first that manu- doxically, companies with the most resources Communauto facturers are investing in the carsharing lack perseverance when it comes to industry, given that it helps reduce household innovation.
    [Show full text]
  • Joel Deyoung I Am a Technology-Focused Business Leader with Extensive Experience in Strategic Planning, Team Building and Co-Operative Governance
    Joel DeYoung I am a technology-focused business leader with extensive experience in strategic planning, team building and co-operative governance. EXPERIENCE March 2006 – Present Director of Technology, Chief Operating Officer, HOTHEAD GAMES As a co-founder of Hothead Games, I have led operations and core technology for our 200- person studio. I currently oversee four teams working on our proprietary game engine, our proprietary big data analytics platform, our cloud-based backend server operation, and core IT serving our two offices in Vancouver and Halifax. Hothead is the largest independent video game developer and publisher in British Columbia. January 2011 – April 2018 Director, MODO CO-OPERATIVE During my seven years on Modo’s Board I served on multiple committees including Finance and Audit, Governance, Nominations, CEO Search and HR. During my three years as Board Chair we hired the co-op’s first CEO and executed an amalgamation with Victoria Car Share Co-op. Other highlights from my time on the Board include undertaking a major review and overhaul of Modo’s official rules and increasing participation in our Director elections by transitioning to online voting. As a delegate to The Co-operators I also represented Modo’s membership at that organization’s regional meetings and AGMs. October 1997 – February 2006 Producer, Technical Director, Lead Programmer, RADICAL ENTERTAINMENT As a technology-focused lead, I managed multiple teams in the creation of numerous hit video game titles for console and handheld gaming platforms. June 1996 – September 1997 Programmer, SEAGATE SOFTWARE I contributed to the development of the company's flagship database reporting and business intelligence software.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of E-Mobility in Carsharing Business Models
    Evolution of E-Mobility in Carsharing Business Models Susan A. Shaheen1 and Nelson D. Chan2 Transportation Sustainability Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Carsharing continues to grow worldwide as a powerful strategy to provide an alternative to solo driving. The viability of electric vehicles, or EVs, has been examined in various carsharing business models. Moreover, new technologies have given rise to electromobility, or e-mobility, systems. This paper discusses the evolution of e-mobility in carsharing business models and the challenges and opportunities that EVs present to carsharing operators around the world. Operators are now anticipating increased EV proliferation into vehicle fleets over the next 5- 10 years as technology, infrastructure, and public policy shift toward support of e- mobility systems. Thus, research is still needed to quantify impacts of EVs in changing travel behavior toward more sustainable transport. 1 Introduction Carsharing enables a group of members to share a vehicle fleet that is maintained, managed, and insured by a third-party organization. Primarily used for short-term trips, carsharing can provide affordable, self-service vehicle access 24-h per day for those who do not have a car, want to reduce the number of vehicles in their household, or do not use their vehicle during the day for long periods of time. Rates include fuel, insurance, and maintenance. Ideally, carsharing works best in a neighborhood, business, or campus setting where users could walk, bike, share rides, or take public transit to access the shared-use vehicles. Carsharing has evolved through several phases since the first carsharing system began in Europe in 1948.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Car Sharing on Urban Sustainability
    sustainability Review Impact of Car Sharing on Urban Sustainability Vasja Roblek 1 , Maja Meško 2,3 and Iztok Podbregar 3,* 1 Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo Mesto, 8000 Novo Mesto, Slovenia; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Management, University of Primorska, 6000 Koper, Slovenia; [email protected] 3 Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Maribor, 4000 Kranj, Slovenia * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The article gives us an insight into the key issues of car sharing and its impact on urban sus- tainability. A selection of 314 articles published in peer-reviewed journals from the Scopus database were analysed using Leximancer 5.0 for Automated Content analysis. A total of seven themes were identified explaining the researched topic of the car sharing situation in Europe, which are sharing, economy, model, systems, electrical car sharing, policy and travel. There are two ways of sharing owned cars in Europe; access to cars from the fleet of private organisations and P2P car sharing. Sustainable environmental solutions in the context of the electrification of cars are used. Car sharing usually takes place online and can be free or for a fee as defined by The European Economic and Social Committee. The article provides an overview of understanding the concept of urban car sharing in Europe. Keywords: sustainability; urban sustainability; car sharing; Europe 1. Introduction This article aims to provide an overview of understanding the concept of urban car sharing, whose growth and development has been influenced by the recent financial crisis Citation: Roblek, V.; Meško, M.; that caused an economic recession in both the US and Europe between 2007 and mid-2009, Podbregar, I.
    [Show full text]
  • On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Program Evaluation Report
    On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Evaluation On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Program Evaluation Report JANUARY 2017 SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY | SUSTAINABLE STREETS DIVISION | PARKING 1 On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Evaluation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GOAL: “MAKE TRANSIT, WALKING, BICYCLING, TAXI, RIDE SHARING AND CARSHARING THE PREFERRED MEANS OF TRAVEL.” (SFMTA STRATEGIC PLAN) As part of SFpark and the San Francisco Findings Municipal Transportation Agency’s (SFMTA) effort to better manage parking demand, • On-street car share vehicles were in use an the SFMTA conducted a pilot of twelve on- average of six hours per day street car share spaces (pods) in 2011-2012. • 80% of vehicles were shared by at least ten The SFMTA then carried out a large-scale unique users pilot to test the use of on-street parking • An average of 19 unique users shared each spaces as pods for shared vehicles. The vehicle monthly On-Street Car Share Parking Permit Pilot (Pilot) was approved by the SFMTA’s Board • 17% of car share members reported selling of Directors in July 2013 and has been or donating a car due to car sharing operational since April 2014. This report presents an evaluation of the Pilot. Placing car share spaces on-street increases shared vehicle access, Data from participating car share convenience, and visibility. We estimate organizations show that the Pilot pods that car sharing as a whole has eliminated performed well, increased awareness of thousands of vehicles from San Francisco car sharing overall, and suggest demand streets. The Pilot showed promise as a tool for on-street spaces in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • 20-03 Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area
    Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area Final Report | Report Number 20-03 | February 2020 NYSERDA’s Promise to New Yorkers: NYSERDA provides resources, expertise, and objective information so New Yorkers can make confident, informed energy decisions. Mission Statement: Advance innovative energy solutions in ways that improve New York’s economy and environment. Vision Statement: Serve as a catalyst – advancing energy innovation, technology, and investment; transforming New York’s economy; and empowering people to choose clean and efficient energy as part of their everyday lives. Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area Final Report Prepared for: New York State Energy Research and Development Authority New York, NY Robyn Marquis, PhD Project Manager, Clean Transportation Prepared by: WXY Architecture + Urban Design New York, NY Adam Lubinsky, PhD, AICP Managing Principal Amina Hassen Associate Raphael Laude Urban Planner with Barretto Bay Strategies New York, NY Paul Lipson Principal Luis Torres Senior Consultant and Empire Clean Cities NYSERDA Report 20-03 NYSERDA Contract 114627 February 2020 Notice This report was prepared by WXY Architecture + Urban Design, Barretto Bay Strategies, and Empire Clean Cities in the course of performing work contracted for and sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (hereafter the "Sponsors"). The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect those of the Sponsors or the State of New York, and reference to any specific product, service, process, or method does not constitute an implied or expressed recommendation or endorsement of it. Further, the Sponsors, the State of New York, and the contractor make no warranties or representations, expressed or implied, as to the fitness for particular purpose or merchantability of any product, apparatus, or service, or the usefulness, completeness, or accuracy of any processes, methods, or other information contained, described, disclosed, or referred to in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Cusecar – Community Car-Sharing Program: Car Sharing Lessons Learned
    CuseCar – Community Car-Sharing Program: Car Sharing Lessons Learned The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority Joseph D. Tario Project Manager and New York State Department of Transportation Robert Ancar Project Manager Prepared by Sarah Stephens Director of Business Development and Public Relations CuseCar of Syracuse Syracuse, NY August 2011 1 1. Report No. C-08-26 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date CuseCar – Community Car-Sharing Program: Car Sharing Lessons Learned August 2011 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) Sarah Stephens 8. Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. 11. Contract or Grant No CuseCar of Syracuse, 360 Erie Blvd. East, Syracuse, NY 13202 Contract No. 11103 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered NYSERDA, 17 Columbia Circle, Albany, NY 12203 Final Report (2008 – 2011) NYS DOT, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12232 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes Project funded in part with funds from the Federal Highway Administration. 16. Abstract CuseCar of Syracuse launched services in December 2008 with 3 Toyota Prius Hybrids. CuseCar initially, due to concerns about availability, limited membership to Origination Sponsor Locations, which in turn developed few members. In 2009 CuseCar opened to the general public and has seen a small growth in membership and usage. CuseCar to date has close to 100 members. CuseCar has vehicles centralized in the City of Syracuse Downtown area, with 4 vehicles located within a few city blocks of one another.
    [Show full text]
  • Quickar(PDF 8.49
    7 September 2017 The Secretary, Economy and Infrastructure Committee Parliament House, Spring Street EAST MELBOURNE VIC 3002 Dear Secretary, Please accept this cover letter and attached report as a submission to the Committee’s Inquiry into Electric Vehicles. A mushrooming of Melbourne’s population over the next 20 years combined with the phenomena of significant population detachment from economic hubs driven by growing rates of car ownership and burgeoning investment by government in private car driver-driven infrastructure is a looming urban mobility crisis. We risk sleepwalking into a situation where our once “world’s most livable city” has insufficient public transport, overloaded infrastructures, a default logarithmic expansion of motorised means of transport, a vast rise in air and noise pollution and CO2 emissions, a concomitant parking capacity problem and increasing disparity in the social equity standards between communities of very near proximity. What should the Victorian Government do? The attached report assesses the opportunity for Free Floating Car Sharing in Zero Emission urban transport. This report concludes that Free Floating Car Sharing is an innovative technology with a smart operating model that improves cities. It offers cities a no-cost, scaleable transport alternative to supplement existing transport systems and reduce inner urban vehicle congestion. Moreover, Free Floating Car Sharing offers Melbourne’s best opportunity for a definitive, practical and evolutionary pathway into a sustainable Zero Emission urban mobility future through the accelerated uptake of Electric Vehicles. Quickar Pty Ltd (ABN 99 611 879 513) Melbourne, 3000 Victoria, Australia Page 1 of 66 In light of these conclusions, the Victorian Government should: • Enable Free Floating Car Sharing.
    [Show full text]
  • Benchmarking of Existing Business / Operating Models & Best Practices
    SHared automation Operating models for Worldwide adoption SHOW Grant Agreement Number: 875530 D2.1.: Benchmarking of existing business / operating models & best practices This report is part of a project that has received funding by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement number 875530 Legal Disclaimer The information in this document is provided “as is”, and no guarantee or warranty is given that the information is fit for any particular purpose. The above-referenced consortium members shall have no liability to third parties for damages of any kind including without limitation direct, special, indirect, or consequential damages that may result from the use of these materials subject to any liability which is mandatory due to applicable law. © 2020 by SHOW Consortium. This report is subject to a disclaimer and copyright. This report has been carried out under a contract awarded by the European Commission, contract number: 875530. The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of the SHOW project. D2.1: Benchmarking of existing business / operating models & best practices 2 Executive Summary D2.1 provides the state-of-the-art for business and operating roles in the field of mobility services (MaaS, LaaS and DRT containing the mobility services canvas as description of the selected representative mobility services, the business and operating models describing relevant business factors and operation environment, the user and role analysis representing the involved user and roles for the mobility services (providing, operating and using the service) as well as identifying the success and failure models of the analysed mobility services and finally a KPI-Analysis (business- driven) to give a structured economical evaluation as base for the benchmarking.
    [Show full text]