DOCSLIB.ORG

Can Carsharing Meet the Mobility Needs for the Low-Income Neighborhoods? Lessons from Carsharing Usage Patterns in New York City

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 249–260 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra Can carsharing meet the mobility needs for the low-income neighborhoods? Lessons from carsharing usage patterns in New York City Kyeongsu Kim Geography in Earth and Environmental Sciences, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY), 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10016-4309 USA article info abstract Article history: For decades, carsharing has become an attentive dialogue among transportation planners Received 2 August 2013 and civic groups who have long supported and business owners and government officials Received in revised form 19 November 2014 who see carsharing as a means to realize their interests i.e., another market for revenue Accepted 28 April 2015 generation and replacement of government own vehicles with carshare units. It has partic- ularly drawn attention in New York City (NYC). As of today, NYC is the largest carsharing market in the United States, accounting for about one third of all North American carshar- Keywords: ing members. In addition to market-driven forces, the City government has pronounced Carsharing pro-carsharing policies. Yet carsharing is still considered as an exclusive program to Mobility Social inclusion middle-income, white, and young populations. The purpose of this study is to see if car- sharing can help meet the mobility demand for urban residents, especially in the marginal- ized neighborhoods. By investigating a leading carsharing program – Zipcar’s vehicle utilization pattern in NYC, I attempt to disentangle how neighborhoods with different socio-demographics are associated with carsharing usage. The study result revealed that there is high demand for midsize (standard) vehicles on weekdays and weeknights. In addi- tion, carsharing usage was highly correlated with the number of total vehicles, not the number of Zipcar parking lots, if the cars are accessible within walking distances. More importantly, carsharing in low-income neighborhoods did not differ from the typical carsharing locations. What matters is the affordability. Hence, there is no reason not to consider new services or expanding existing service boundaries to the outer boroughs in the future. Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. 1. Introduction For decades, carsharing has become an attentive dialogue among transportation planners and civic groups who have long supported and business owners and government officials who see carsharing as a means to realize their interests i.e., another market for revenue generation and replacement of government own vehicles with carshare units. Carsharing is a flexible on-demand car rental program that allows an hourly or daily rental unless vehicles are booked. It has particularly drawn attention in New York City (NYC). As of today, NYC is the largest carsharing market in the United States, accounting for about one third of all North American carsharing members (PlaNYC, 2011). Public awareness on carsharing escalated particularly during the summer of 2011 when two large commercial programs, Zipcar and Hertz On Demand (now Herz 24/7), competed E-mail address: [email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.020 0965-8564/Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. 250 K. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 249–260 for their market share in the City. Commercial ads for free driving credits were on billboards, subway and bus commercial boards, bus stop stands, and free daily newspapers throughout NYC. A similar marketing campaign took place during the summer of 2013, fueled by Enterprise CarShare’s entrance into NYC carshare market. In addition to market-driven forces, the City government has pronounced pro-carsharing policies. On September 19, 2010, NYC’s Department of City Planning (DCP) approved a zoning text amendment that allows carshare vehicles to use the greater of up to 20% of existing parking spaces in off-street parking facilities or five and up to 40% of parking spaces within public parking lots and garages (NYCDCP, 2010). On October 12, 2010, NYC Mayor Bloomberg announced the first start of NYC’s carsharing pilot program in Lower Manhattan. The program allowed NYC’s Department of Transportation (DOT) to use 25 Zipcar vehicles for work activities that are not accessible by public transportation (NYC Mayor Office’s press release, 2010). By 2013, the City had 350 vehicles in its fleet share program; the largest in the nation (PlaNYC progress report 2013). Moreover, NYC embraced carsharing as one of fourteen transportation plans presented in a revised PlaNYC, 2011, the strategic transportation plan for the City. Carsharing was officially considered as an efficient means to improve mobility throughout NYC in which occasional car users for shopping, family visits, or recreations remain high and the demand for carsharing will rise given increasing expense of car ownership. PlaNYC, 2011 even proposed developing a citywide carsharing program with the City’s own fleet of 26,000 vehicles that would otherwise sit dormant on evenings and weekends. Since the PlaNYC, 2011 went public, there has been little dialogue on how to develop the idea. Perhaps, dissimilar inter- ests among City agencies or the complexity of logistics and fleet management have deterred its start. Other political issues might have also played a role. The idea, originally developed under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg, was not included in the new PlaNYC 2014 that was developed under Mayor Bill de Blasio. If the idea becomes reality, one distinct benefit will be apparent: Mobility. NYC’s vehicle fleet is widely distributed throughout NYC’s five boroughs, making physical access to these vehicles easy for most NYC residents. It will provide significant benefits to residents in urban peripheries where low-income populations with limited transportation accessibility live. Not surprisingly, these transportation-excluded urban peripheries are little served by current commercial carsharing programs. The purpose of this study is to see if carsharing can help meet the mobility needs of urban residents in marginalized neighborhoods. The increase in both the number of carsharing programs and total membership hints a positive future for the expansion of the current carsharing service boundary. As current service areas become saturated, carsharing companies may expand their service areas to preserve or expand revenues and profits. Yet since the economy has barely been pre- dictable for years, it is uncertain whether the recent carsharing boom will become an alternative mobility option for those in need or it will, otherwise, continue to be used mostly by middle-income, white and young populations (Sioui et al., 2013; Cevero et al., 2007; City CarShare, 2005; TCRP, 2005). I attempted to determine the association of a neighborhood’s socio-demographic characteristics with carsharing usage by investigating Zipcar’s vehicle utilization pattern in NYC. This study has multiple benefits. First, it can help potential carsharing providers or members recognize how a leading program is being utilized in one of the world’s largest carsharing markets. Second, the result has various planning implications such as how to maximize the usage of carshare vehicles by vehicle types and neighborhoods, and in different time periods. More importantly, this study offers further discourse on the feasibility of a citywide carsharing program in NYC and other metropolitan areas, where the mobility benefit for marginalized neighborhoods may be superior to other large transporta- tion investments. This paper begin with a literature review, including a brief history of carsharing in North America; its economic, environ- mental and community impacts; and the needs of mobility improvement in NYC. I then describe data and research method- ology. The first half consists of the data sources and initial analysis of carsharing usage patterns while the latter half develops a multivariate regression model. Study results and subsequent interpretations follow. Finally, I discuss lessons learned from this study and the challenges of developing a sustainable carsharing program of which transportation planners and policy decision-makers should be aware. 2. Literature review 2.1. Past, present, and future of carsharing The two earliest examples of carsharing in the United States were the Short-Term Auto Rental (STAT) in San Francisco (Martin et al., 2010; Shaheen et al., 2009) and Mobility Enterprise at Purdue University, both tested in 1983 (Shaheen et al., 2009). These earlier attempts did not last long, mainly due to inadequate planning, marketing and financial manage- ment; small membership and service boundaries; and lack of the technology needed to support such ambitious projects (Harms and Truffer, 1998; Cousins, 1999; TCRP, 2005). It was during the late 1990s that a modern form of large-scale car- sharing program was implemented in Rutledge, Missouri and Portland, Oregon (TCRP, 2005). Since carsharing has grown rapidly after 1998 (Shaheen et al., 2004), various operational forms have been developed. Prevalent arrangement is a profit or a non-profit operation. The financial priorities, of course, differ between profit and non-profit operators, but there is little distinction from members’ perspective related to getting a membership and using the program operator’s vehicles. Zipcar is a leading for-profit program while PhillyShare (which became a for-profit program in 2011) and CityCarShare have been renowned non-profit models. K. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 249–260 251 This growing interest in carsharing has motivated conventional car rental companies such as Hertz, Enterprise, and Avis to start their own carsharing services. There services are either provided by a start-up like ‘Connect by Hertz’ (renamed to ‘Hertz on demand’ and now to ‘Hertz 24/7’) or through the acquisition of existing programs such as ‘PhillyShare’ and ‘Mint Cars on Demand’ (by Enterprise) and ‘Zipcar’ (by Avis). Carsharing has also attracted auto manufacturers into the carsharing market. Daimler AG launched a new carsharing program called ‘Car2go’ in Austin, Texas during 2010.
Recommended publications
  • Evolution of E-Mobility in Carsharing Business Models

    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.
  • Benchmarking of Existing Business / Operating Models & Best Practices

    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.
  • Carsharing and Partnership Management an International Perspective

    Carsharing and Partnership Management an International Perspective

    118 Paper No. 99-0826 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1666 Carsharing and Partnership Management An International Perspective SUSAN SHAHEEN, DANIEL SPERLING, AND CONRAD WAGNER Most cars carry one person and are used for less than 1 hour per day. A tied to actual vehicle usage. A carsharing system in effect transforms more economically rational approach would be to use vehicles more the fixed costs of vehicle ownership into variable costs. intensively. Carsharing, in which a group of people pays a subscription Carsharing is most effective and attractive when seen as a trans- plus a per-use fee, is one means of doing so. Carsharing may be orga- portation mode that fills the gap between transit and private cars and nized through affinity groups, large employers, transit operators, neigh- borhood groups, or large carsharing businesses. Relative to car owner- that can be linked to other modes and transportation services. For ship, carsharing has the disadvantage of less convenient vehicle access long distances, one may use a household vehicle, air transport, rail, but the advantages of a large range of vehicles, fewer ownership respon- bus, or a rental car; and for short distances, one might walk, bicycle, sibilities, and less cost (if vehicles are not used intensively). The uncou- or use a taxi. But for intermediate travel activities, even routine ones, pling of car ownership and use offers the potential for altering vehicle one might use a shared vehicle. The shared-car option provides other usage and directing individuals toward other mobility options. The per- customer attractions: it can serve as mobility insurance in emergen- ceived convenience (e.g., preferred parking) and cost savings of car- cies and as a means of satisfying occasional vehicle needs and sharing have promoted a new modal split for many carsharing partici- pants throughout the world.
  • Build a Carsharing Community 2

    Build a Carsharing Community 2

    Final Technical Report TNW2003-06 TransNow Budget No. 62-2513 Flexcar Program Evaluation Flexcar Seattle Carsharing Program Evaluation by G. Scott Rutherford Robert Vance Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 Report prepared for: Transportation Northwest (TransNow) Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 129 More Hall University of Washington, Box 352700 Seattle, WA 98195-2700 December 2003 TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE 1. REPORT NO. 2. GOVERNMENT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NO. TNW2003-06 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5.REPORT DATE FLEXCAR SEATTLE CARSHARING PROGRAM December 2003 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. G. Scott Rutherford, Robert Vance TNW2003-06 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO. Transportation Northwest Regional Center X (TransNow) Box 352700, 123 More Hall University of Washington 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. Seattle, WA 98195-2700 DTRS99-G-0010 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED United States Department of Transportation Final Report Office of the Secretary of Transportation 400 Seventh St. SW 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE Washington, DC 20590 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES This study was conducted in cooperation with the University of Washington. 16. ABSTRACT Flexcar is a public-private partnership based in Seattle that provides short-term automobile rentals, called “carsharing.” The program began in 2000 with an agreement between King
  • Uber - Uma Análise Do Perfil Do Usuário Na Cidade Do Rio De Janeiro

    Uber - Uma Análise Do Perfil Do Usuário Na Cidade Do Rio De Janeiro

    UBER - UMA ANÁLISE DO PERFIL DO USUÁRIO NA CIDADE DO RIO DE JANEIRO Marcelo Dantas da Silva Júnior Dissertação de Mestrado apresentada ao Programa de Pós-graduação em Engenharia de Transportes, COPPE, da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, como parte dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do título de Mestre em Engenharia de Transportes. Orientador: Ronaldo Balassiano Rio de Janeiro Agosto de 2018 UBER - UMA ANÁLISE DO PERFIL DO USUÁRIO NA CIDADE DO RIO DE JANEIRO Marcelo Dantas da Silva Júnior DISSERTAÇÃO SUBMETIDA AO CORPO DOCENTE DO INSTITUTO ALBERTO LUIZ COIMBRA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO E PESQUISA DE ENGENHARIA (COPPE) DA UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO DE JANEIRO COMO PARTE DOS REQUISITOS NECESSÁRIOS PARA A OBTENÇÃO DO GRAU DE MESTRE EM CIÊNCIAS EM ENGENHARIA DE TRANSPORTES. Examinada por: Prof. Ronaldo Balassiano, Ph.D. Profª. Suzana Kahn Ribeiro, D.Sc. Drª. Carla Conceição Lana Fraga, D.Sc. Drª. Ercilia de Stefano, D.Sc. RIO DE JANEIRO, RJ - BRASIL AGOSTO DE 2018 Silva Júnior, Marcelo Dantas da Uber - Uma Análise do Perfil do Usuário na Cidade do Rio de Janeiro/ Marcelo Dantas da Silva Júnior. – Rio de Janeiro: UFRJ/COPPE, 2018. XII, 108 p.: il.; 29,7 cm. Orientador: Ronaldo Balassiano Dissertação (mestrado) – UFRJ/ COPPE/ Programa de Engenharia de Transportes, 2018. Referências Bibliográficas: p.95-103. 1. Gerenciamento da Mobilidade. 2. Novos Conceitos de Mobilidade Urbana. 3. Mobilidade Compartilhada. I. Balassiano, Ronaldo. II. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, COPPE, Programa de Engenharia de Transportes. III.Título. iii AGRADECIMENTOS Primeiramente, agradeço a Deus pelo privilégio da vida e aos familiares que sempre me apoiaram.
  • Boulder Access Management and Parking Strategies On-Street Car

    Boulder Access Management and Parking Strategies On-Street Car

    Boulder Access Management and Parking Strategies On-Street Car Share Policy DRAFT September 2015 On-Street Car Share Policy Review and Recommendations Draft Report September 2015 Executive Summary Introduction Carsharing represents a new approach in transportation policy that is influenced by a larger philosophy that has come to be known as the “sharing economy”. Carsharing taps into a new mindset (generally attributed to the Millennial generation) that deprioritizes vehicle ownership, embraces concerns about rising congestion in cities, promotes more environmentally sensitive policies and the embraces the desire to have a greater range of transportation options. As traffic congestion and parking concerns increase in Boulder, carsharing will become an important component of the overall Access Management and Parking Strategies (AMPS) program. Carsharing has proven effective as a tool to reduce the number of personal cars on the street, increase travel flexibility for people who do not have personal vehicles and reduces both traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. Studies have shown that carsharing decreases personal car miles traveled per year, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, increases perceived mobility of a city, reduces traffic and cuts down on parking congestion. Carsharing also allows increased mobility for low-income populations without owning a vehicle and puts more fuel efficient vehicles on the roads with most carsharing services requiring a certain fuel efficiency for each car in their fleet. Carsharing also has a documented impact on vehicle ownership rates and greenhouse gas emissions: Research shows carsharing members reduce average vehicle ownership from 0.47 to 0.24 vehicles per household. (Smart Mobility, page 21) According to Zipcar, 13% of car share users in Washington, DC and Boston have sold a car since joining and more than 40% have avoided buying a car.
  • One-Way Carsharing As a First and Last Mile Solution For

    One-Way Carsharing As a First and Last Mile Solution For

    ONE-WAY CARSHARING AS A FIRST AND LAST MILE SOLUTION FOR TRANSIT Lessons from BCAA Evo Carshare in Vancouver Prepared by: Neha Sharma | UBC Sustainability Scholar | 2019 Prepared for: Mirtha Gamiz | Planner, New Mobility | TransLink Lindsay Wyant | Business Insights Analyst | BCAA Evo June 2020 This report was produced as part of the UBC Sustainability Scholars Program, a partnership between the University of British Columbia and various local governments and organisations in support of providing graduate students with opportunities to do applied research on projects that advance sustainability across the region. This project was conducted under the mentorship of TransLink and BCAA Evo staff. The opinions and recommendations in this report and any errors are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of TransLink, BCAA Evo or the University of British Columbia. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the following individuals for their feedback and support throughout this project: Lindsay Wyant | Business Insights Analyst | BCAA Evo Mirtha Gamiz | Planner, New Mobility, Strategic Planning and Policy | TransLink Eve Hou | Manager, Policy Development, Strategic Planning and Policy | TransLink ii T ABLE OF C ONTENTS List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. v Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................
  • Carsharing's Impact and Future

    Carsharing's Impact and Future

    Carsharing's Impact and Future Advances in Transport Policy and Planning Volume 4, 2019, Pages 87-120 October 23, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.atpp.2019.09.002 Susan Shaheen, PhD Adam Cohen Emily Farrar 1 Carsharing's Impact and Future Authors: Susan Shaheen, PhDa [email protected] Adam Cohenb [email protected] Emily Farrarb [email protected] Affiliations: aCivil and Environmental Engineering and Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley 408 McLaughlin Hall Berkeley, CA 94704 bTransportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley 2150 Allston Way #280 Berkeley, CA 94704 Corresponding Author: Susan Shaheen, PhD [email protected] 2 Carsharing’s Impact and Future ABSTRACT Carsharing provides members access to a fleet of autos for short-term use throughout the day, reducing the need for one or more personal vehicles. This chapter reviews key terms and definitions for carsharing, common carsharing business models, and existing impact studies. Next, the chapter discusses the commodification and aggregation of mobility services and the role of Mobility on Demand (MOD) and Mobility as a Service (MaaS) on carsharing. Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion of how the convergence of electrification and automation is changing carsharing, leading to shared automated and electric vehicle (SAEV) fleets. Keywords: Carsharing, Shared mobility, Mobility on Demand (MOD), Mobility as a Service (MaaS), Shared automated electric vehicles (SAEVs) 1 INTRODUCTION Across the globe, innovative and emerging mobility services are offering residents, businesses, travelers, and other users more options for on-demand mobility. In recent years, carsharing has grown rapidly due to changing perspectives toward transportation, car ownership, business and institutional fleet ownership, and urban lifestyles.
  • Shared Mobility Programs Guidebook for Agencies

    Shared Mobility Programs Guidebook for Agencies

    SHARED MOBILITY PROGRAMS GUIDEBOOK FOR AGENCIES Disclaimer This research was performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of FHWA or TxDOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Acknowledgments This project was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and FHWA. The authors thank the members of the project monitoring committee: Darrin Jensen, Teri Kaplan, Bonnie Lister, Pete Krause, and Jane Lundquist. The authors also thank members of the project team for their contributions: Andrea Chacon, Casey Claude, Greg Griffin, Joan Hudson, Matt Miller, Gavin Pritchard, Gretchen Stoeltje, Shawn Turner, and Gabriel A. Valdez. Authors Stacey Bricka Todd Carlson Tina Geiselbrecht Kristi Miller Maarit Moran December 2015 Product 0-6818-P1 Project 0-6818 Project Title: Dynamic Ride-Sharing, Car-Sharing, Bike-Sharing, and State-Level Mobility Texas A&M Transportation Institute College Station, Texas iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ...........................................................................................................................
  • Ola Consolidating to Dominate the Cab Hiring Market

    Ola Consolidating to Dominate the Cab Hiring Market

    Journal of Case Research Volume VIII Issue 01 Ola Consolidating to Dominate the Cab Hiring Market Amit Tripathy (Corresponding Author) N.M. Leepsa Doctoral Student, School of Management Assistant Professor (Accounting & Finance) National Institute of Technology Rourkela School of Management Rourkela-769008, Odisha, India National Institute of Technology Rourkela Email: amittripathy08[at]gmail[dot]com Rourkela-769008, Odisha, India Email: n.m.leepsa[at]gmail[dot]com Introduction realised? Is Ola ready to face the market Ola had been acquiring companies over crunch of rival Uber? diversified fields to strengthen its position in the taxi rental market. Ola acquired Taxi For The carpooling/rental market had been Sure (TFS), one of its biggest competitors, on experiencing unprecedented growth globally. March 1st 2015 for an amount of $200 The industry generated total revenue of 1 million, the biggest ever acquisition in the car $74,149.3m globally in 2016 which indicates rental industry. Following suit, in November a CAGR (Cumulative Average Growth Rate) 2015, Ola acquired Geotagg, a trip planning jump of 5.7% from 2012 to 2016. The growth company, for an undisclosed amount. Again, is due to the rapid development of worldwide on March 21st2016, Ola acquired Qarth a travel and tourism industry with parallel mobile payment start-up company. innovations and impetus from the telecommunication industry, IT industry and Despite the acquisitions made by Ola, a new technology driven market. Though the investor planning to buy stocks of Ola or a industry worldwide is blooming, the markets current investor thinking of expansion of of the USA alone contribute 46.5% share of investment might face the dilemma of the the revenue of the industry, while Europe situation.
  • Strategic Research PROGRAM

    Strategic Research PROGRAM

    165610-2 Strategic Research PROGRAM ASSESSMENT OF ZIPCAR AND CAR SHARING SERVICES ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES March 2017 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. TTI/SRP/17/165610-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date ASSESSMENT OF ZIPCAR AND CAR SHARING SERVICES ON March 2017 UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Maarit M. Moran and Kristi Miller Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas A&M Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 10727 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Texas A&M Transportation Institute Covered The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes Supported by the State of Texas Project Title: Transit AV/CV and ZipCar in Campus Environments 16. Abstract This project focuses on the application of transit automated and connected vehicle technology and car sharing services, such as Zipcar, in a university campus setting. Researchers from the Texas A&M Transportation Institute examined the use of Zipcar and other car sharing services on university campuses in the United States. Zipcar is currently in operation on the Texas A&M University (TAMU) campus in College Station, Texas, but use of the service has been somewhat limited. This research project examined the use of Zipcar and other car sharing services on university campuses throughout the country to identify methods to promote and expand the use of Zipcar on the TAMU campus.
  • Car Sharing and Carpooling Initiatives UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION for EUROPE TECHNICAL COOPERATION PROJECT

    Car Sharing and Carpooling Initiatives UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION for EUROPE TECHNICAL COOPERATION PROJECT

    UNECE Strengthening the capacity of Central Asian countries to develop sustainable urban mobility policy on car sharing and carpooling initiatives UNITED NATIONS UNITED ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE TECHNICAL COOPERATION PROJECT Strengthening the capacity of Central Asian countries to develop sustainable urban mobility policy on car sharing and carpooling initiatives United Nations Geneva, 2020 II STRENGTHENING THE CAPACITY OF CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES TO DEVELOP SUSTAINABLE URBAN MOBILITY POLICY ON CAR SHARING AND CARPOOLING INITIATIVES © 2020 United Nations All rights reserved worldwide Requests to reproduce excerpts or to photocopy, for sales purposes, should be addressed to the Copyright Clearance Center at copyright.com. All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to: United Nations Publications, 405 East 42nd Street, S–09FW001, New York, NY 10017, United States of America. Email: [email protected]; website: https://shop.un.org. The designations employed and the presentation of material on any map in this work do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. United Nations publication issued by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. ECE/TRANS/302 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No.: E.20.II.E.35 ISBN: 978-92-1-117249-2 eISBN: 978-92-1-005147-7 STRENGTHENING THE CAPACITY OF CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES TO DEVELOP SUSTAINABLE III URBAN MOBILITY POLICY ON CAR SHARING AND CARPOOLING INITIATIVES UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) is one of the five United Nations regional commissions, administered by the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).