DOCSLIB.ORG

The Rise of the Sharing Economy and Automated Transport - Annex a Deliverable No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Rise of the Sharing Economy and Automated Transport - Annex a Deliverable No Future trends in mobility: the rise of the sharing economy and automated transport - Annex A Deliverable no. 3.3 Date: 14/07/2016 Version: 1.1 Author(s): Laurent Franckx, VITO Contributor(s): Inge Mayeres, VITO Project: MIND-sets | www.mind-sets.eu Grant Agreement N°: 640401 Project duration: 01.12.14 – 30.11.17 Project Coordinator: Silvia Gaggi, ISIS T: 0039 063 212 655 F: 0039 063 213 049 E: [email protected] This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 640401. Contents Preface __________________________________________________________________________ 5 Chapter 2: The rise of the sharing economy: implications for transport _____________________ 6 1. Introduction ____________________________________________________________________ 7 2. Carsharing ____________________________________________________________________ 10 Definitions ______________________________________________________________ 10 Key advantages and drawbacks _____________________________________________ 11 A (very short) history of carsharing ___________________________________________ 12 Round trip carsharing _____________________________________________________ 14 One way carsharing _______________________________________________________ 15 Personal vehicle sharing ___________________________________________________ 17 Characteristics of the supply side ____________________________________________ 18 Characteristics of the demand side __________________________________________ 19 The B2B market __________________________________________________________ 20 Assessing the impacts ___________________________________________________ 21 Organisational and institutional issues _____________________________________ 28 3. Scooter sharing ________________________________________________________________ 31 4. Bicycle sharing _________________________________________________________________ 32 Definitions ______________________________________________________________ 32 History __________________________________________________________________ 32 Usage __________________________________________________________________ 33 User socio-demographic profiles _____________________________________________ 33 Barriers _________________________________________________________________ 34 Impacts _________________________________________________________________ 34 Logistics ________________________________________________________________ 35 Perspectives _____________________________________________________________ 36 5. On-•demand ride services ________________________________________________________ 37 5.1. The traditional taxi market _________________________________________________ 37 5.2. Ridesourcing/Transportation Network Company (TNC) Services ___________________ 38 5.3. Ridesplitting within TNC services ____________________________________________ 41 Document / version / etc. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation Page 2 Programme under grant agreement No 640401. 5.4. E-•Hail Services for regulated taxis ___________________________________________ 41 5.5. Impacts _________________________________________________________________ 42 6. Ridesharing ___________________________________________________________________ 49 6.1. Definitions ______________________________________________________________ 49 6.2. Benefits _________________________________________________________________ 49 6.3. Organisation and technology ________________________________________________ 50 6.4. Dynamic ridesharing ______________________________________________________ 51 6.5. Perspectives _____________________________________________________________ 51 7. Alternative transit services _______________________________________________________ 54 7.1. Demand Responsive Transit (DRT) ___________________________________________ 54 7.2. Jitneys __________________________________________________________________ 58 7.3. Shuttles _________________________________________________________________ 58 7.4. Microtransit _____________________________________________________________ 58 7.5. Impacts _________________________________________________________________ 59 8. Courier network services ________________________________________________________ 62 9. Trip planning apps ______________________________________________________________ 63 9.1. Definitions ______________________________________________________________ 63 9.2. Advantages ______________________________________________________________ 64 9.3. Challenges and emerging services ___________________________________________ 65 9.4. Mobility as a Service ______________________________________________________ 66 10. Automated mobility ____________________________________________________________ 70 10.1. Definitions, history and current status ______________________________________ 70 10.2. Potential impacts _______________________________________________________ 74 10.3. Long term outlook ______________________________________________________ 79 10.4. Synergies with shared mobility ____________________________________________ 81 10.5. Legal and regulatory hurdles ______________________________________________ 89 11. Implications for transport modelling ______________________________________________ 90 11.1. Growth potential ________________________________________________________ 90 11.2. Valuation of time _______________________________________________________ 90 11.3. Modelling of parking ____________________________________________________ 91 11.4. What is a “travel mode”? _________________________________________________ 91 11.5. Impacts on road capacity ________________________________________________ 91 11.6. Reactions from other economic actors______________________________________ 91 11.7. Impact on the built environment ___________________________________________ 92 11.8. Ownership versus sharing ________________________________________________ 92 Document / version / etc. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation Page 3 Programme under grant agreement No 640401. 11.9. The importance of stated preferences ______________________________________ 92 12. Implications for transportation demand management _______________________________ 93 12.1. Shared mobility as complement or substitute ________________________________ 93 12.2. The regulation of on-demand ride services __________________________________ 94 12.3. Alternative powertrains __________________________________________________ 94 12.4. Pricing policies _________________________________________________________ 95 12.5. Public transit___________________________________________________________ 95 12.6. Accessibility ___________________________________________________________ 96 References ______________________________________________________________________ 97 Policy documents _____________________________________________________________ 112 The sole responsibility for the content of this document lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. Neither the EACI nor the European Commission are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. Document / version / etc. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation Page 4 Programme under grant agreement No 640401. Preface This document is a technical annex to Deliverable 3.3 of the MIND-SETS project. This annex follows the same structure as the main document, but delves deeper into the arguments, tackles the technical issues in greater depth and contains a full reference list. Chapter 2: The rise of the sharing economy: implications for transport Authors: Laurent FRANCKX, VITO Document / version / etc. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation Page 6 Programme under grant agreement No 640401. 1. Introduction It was easy to predict mass car ownership but hard to predict Walmart Carl Sagan Previous Deliverables in the MIND SETS projects1 had already pointed to the rise of the “sharing economy” in Europe. For instance, between 2006 and 2014, the number of users of carsharing systems has increased from 0.36 million to 4.95 million. Bike ridership has also experienced a sharp growth over the last 10 years. In a few years’ time, these services have escaped from their niche status, and are arguably moving in the mainstream. Some urban transport planners are already wondering to what extent these new market models will undermine the assumptions of their current work. Moreover, several sectors are already affected by the phenomenon: taxi drivers argue that on-demand ride services are a form of unfair competition, traditional car rental and even car manufacturers are moving in the car sharing business, public transport operators wonder whether these new transport models are competitors or possible strategic allies… Moreover, there are indications that shared mobility may not only replace some forms of private travel, but may also facilitate other forms of private travel. Hence, the net environmental and transport impacts remain contentious. Moreover, whereas the idea of fully autonomous cars looked like pure science fiction just a decade ago, several major players claim that they have developed prototype models that can function in operational circumstances. Although there is a lot of controversy
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • List of Brands
    Global Consumer 2019 List of Brands Table of Contents 1. Digital music 2 2. Video-on-Demand 4 3. Video game stores 7 4. Digital video games shops 11 5. Video game streaming services 13 6. Book stores 15 7. eBook shops 19 8. Daily newspapers 22 9. Online newspapers 26 10. Magazines & weekly newspapers 30 11. Online magazines 34 12. Smartphones 38 13. Mobile carriers 39 14. Internet providers 42 15. Cable & satellite TV provider 46 16. Refrigerators 49 17. Washing machines 51 18. TVs 53 19. Speakers 55 20. Headphones 57 21. Laptops 59 22. Tablets 61 23. Desktop PC 63 24. Smart home 65 25. Smart speaker 67 26. Wearables 68 27. Fitness and health apps 70 28. Messenger services 73 29. Social networks 75 30. eCommerce 77 31. Search Engines 81 32. Online hotels & accommodation 82 33. Online flight portals 85 34. Airlines 88 35. Online package holiday portals 91 36. Online car rental provider 94 37. Online car sharing 96 38. Online ride sharing 98 39. Grocery stores 100 40. Banks 104 41. Online payment 108 42. Mobile payment 111 43. Liability insurance 114 44. Online dating services 117 45. Online event ticket provider 119 46. Food & restaurant delivery 122 47. Grocery delivery 125 48. Car Makes 129 Statista GmbH Johannes-Brahms-Platz 1 20355 Hamburg Tel. +49 40 2848 41 0 Fax +49 40 2848 41 999 [email protected] www.statista.com Steuernummer: 48/760/00518 Amtsgericht Köln: HRB 87129 Geschäftsführung: Dr. Friedrich Schwandt, Tim Kröger Commerzbank AG IBAN: DE60 2004 0000 0631 5915 00 BIC: COBADEFFXXX Umsatzsteuer-ID: DE 258551386 1.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Strategic Scenario Planning for the German Carsharing Industry – 2025
    Strategic Scenario Planning for the German Carsharing Industry – 2025 Carolin von Sethe Working Paper Version 1 March 18th, 2016 I Abstract II I Abstract What happens when the Internet of Things1, traditional mobility and the modern consumer coalesce? Nobody knows yet. The increasing uncertainty and complexity that result from the pace of technological progress, blurring boundaries between industry ecosystems and the volatile macroeconomic environment affect future mobility severely. Carsharing is at the forefront of an evolution that points towards a secular shift from individually owned-and-operated automobiles to mobility-on-demand. The purpose of this study is to develop four plausible scenarios for the future of the German carsharing industry in the year 2025 by applying the HHL- Roland Berger scenario development approach and to establish adequate core and optional strategies to aid strategic decision making of managers from companies in the carsharing ecosystem. Key Words: Scenario-based Strategic Planning ∙ Carsharing ∙ Shared Mobility ∙ Strategic Decision Making 1 The Internet of Things (short: IoT) is a term coined for the network of and communication between all devices with enabled Internet connection (Morgan, 2014). II Table of Contents III II Table of Contents I Abstract ............................................................................................................... II II Table of Contents .............................................................................................. III III Table of Figures
    [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]
  • Regulation of Transportation Network Companies Policy Guide
    POLICY GUIDE Regulation of Transportation Network Companies January 2019 “Helping Communities and Organizations Create Their Best Futures” Founded in 1988, we are an interdisciplinary strategy and analysis firm 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1000 providing integrated, creative and analytically rigorous approaches to Seattle, Washington 98121 complex policy and planning decisions. Our team of strategic planners, policy P (206) 324-8760 and financial analysts, economists, cartographers, information designers and www.berkconsulting.com facilitators work together to bring new ideas, clarity, and robust frameworks to the development of analytically-based and action-oriented plans. BERK Consulting Subconsultants Allegra Calder Robert Feldstein Kristin Maidt April Rinne Sherrie Hsu Emily Walton Percival Ben Silver Regulation of Transportation Network Companies: Policy Guide Washington State Joint Transportation Committee |January 2019 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 State TNC Laws ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Regulatory Authority ................................................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • How Uber Won the Rideshare Wars and What Comes Next
    2/18/2020 How Uber Won The Rideshare Wars and What Comes Next CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE | HOW UBER WON THE RIDESHARE WARS AND WHAT COMES NEXT How Uber Won The Rideshare Wars and What Comes Next How Uber won the first phase of the rideshare war and how cabs, competitors, and car companies are battling back. BY ELYSE DUPRE — AUGUST 29, 2016 VIEW GALLERY https://www.dmnews.com/customer-experience/article/13035536/how-uber-won-the-rideshare-wars-and-what-comes-next 1/18 2/18/2020 How Uber Won The Rideshare Wars and What Comes Next View Gallery In 2011, two University of Michigan alums Adrian Fortino and Jahan Khanna partnered with venture capitalist Sunil Paul to revolutionize how people got from point A to point B quickly without having to do much. The company was Sidecar, and the idea was simple: “We're going to replace your car with your iPhone,” Fortino explains. Sidecar did not lack competition. Around this time, the taxi industry was experimenting with new ways to make it easier for individuals to summon cars. And entrepreneurs, frustrated with wait times, imagined new ways to hire someone to drive them around. Multiple companies formed to solve this need, including one that is now considered a global powerhouse: Uber. By the time Sidecar went into beta testing in February 2012, Uber, or UberCab as it was originally known when it was founded in 2009, had raised at least $37.5 million at a $330 million post-money valuation, according to VentureBeat. Lyft followed shortly after when it went into beta in mid 2012, boasting more than $7 million in funding, according to TechCrunch's figures.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]