Carshare Supply & Service
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Business Platforms for Autonomous Vehicles Within Urban Mobility
Urban Transport XXV 175 BUSINESS PLATFORMS FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES WITHIN URBAN MOBILITY FABIO ANTONIALLI1,2,3, RODRIGO MARÇAL GANDIA1,2,3, JOEL YUTAKA SUGANO2,3, ISABELLE NICOLAÏ1 & ARTHUR DE MIRANDA NETO3 1Laboratorie Génie Industriel (LGI), CentraleSupélec, France 2Post-Graduate Program in Administration (PPGA), Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brazil 3Terrestrial Mobility Laboratory (LMT), Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brazil ABSTRACT With mobility becoming a key factor affecting citizens’ well-being and quality of life, innovative schemes such as peer-to-peer (P2P) ride-hailing and Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) could have significant impacts on the urban commute. Furthermore, the insertion of autonomous vehicles (AVs) promises a positive impact on cities’ transit worldwide. Ergo, companies are now combining bundles of products and services emphasizing their “sales of use” rather than of products: such integration may be realized by having multi-sided business platforms. The purpose of this study is to create future scenarios for AV business platforms within urban mobility contexts. Based on an exploratory descriptive qualitative research design, we collected data on academic and grey literature. Four scenarios were plotted with real-world examples currently present in urban mobility cases, extrapolated to a future reality where AVs are considered a transport mode: (A) business-to-consumer (B2C) autonomous ridesharing; (B) P2P autonomous ridesharing; (C) B2C multimodal mobility; (D) B2C + P2P multimodal mobility. Scenarios A and B entail unimodal mobility via autonomous ridesharing, whereupon in the former, a single firm owns a fleet and subsidizes the consumer segment, while in the latter, ordinary peers own the AVs, which are offered to other peers via Uber-like applications. -
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 -
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. -
Performing Ambiguity?: Following Multiplicity in Shared Mobility Markets
PERFORMING AMBIGUITY? How do markets change and develop over time? The present PhD project fo- Gianluca Chimenti cuses on the dynamic effects of market change in the context of the sharing economy. This phenomenon is of particular interest since it concerns how alter- native market forms – such as gifting, collaborating, accessing – are challeng- ing established market conceptions. Empirically, the project addresses emerg- ing shared mobility platforms (ride sharing, car sharing, etc.) and follows their PERFORMING AMBIGUITY? attempts to reconfigure extant market orders within the Swedish transportation sector. By turning the infamous conceptual confusion that surrounds the sharing FOLLOWING MULTIPLICITY IN SHARED MOBILITY MARKETS economy into a topic in its own right, the individual studies address a number of issues related to the formation and change of markets in ambiguous environ- ments. This includes, but is not limited to, the examination of conceptual contro- versies concerning what “the sharing economy” is, the changing roles of public actors, and issue of overlapping spaces during processes of marketisation. Using an Actor Network Theory approach across a number of empirical sites in Sweden and Ireland, this dissertation highlights the productive role of ambi- guity in processes of market formation and change. The four articles compris- ing this thesis explore how ambiguity can be seized by a multitude of actors all wishing to shape markets in their own interests, potentially creating multiple economic consequences and material realities as a result. In addition, it il- Chimenti Gianluca lustrates how individual shared mobility markets exhibit clear systemic proper- ties within and beyond the larger mobility realm; they depend significantly on enacted interrelations to other markets (e.g., for digital locks, batteries, tele- communication) and rely on broader, popular socio-economic trends, such as Sharing Cities and Smart Cities. -
Brighton & Hove
Brighton & Hove R54.1 – Car Clubs Research in Brighton & Hove Brighton & Hove August 2009 (revised version March 2010) Cleaner and better transport in cities Project no. TREN/FP7TR/218940 ARCHIMEDES Project Name ARCHIMEDES (Achieving Real Change with Innovative Transport Measure Demonstrating Energy Savings) Start date of the 15/09/2008 Project Duration: 48 months Measure: No. 54: Car-Sharing Scheme Improvements in Brighton & Hove Task: 11.6.1: Car Clubs Deliverable: R54.1: Car Clubs Research in Brighton & Hove th Due date of 15 March 2009 Deliverable: Actual 16th September 2009 submission date: Revised for March 2010 Dissemination Public Level Organisation Brighton & Hove Responsible Author Luke Ede Quality Control Alan Lewis Version 0.6 Date last updated 3rd March 2010 2 / 31 Cleaner and better transport in cities Contents 1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................4 1.1 BACKGROUND CIVITAS.......................................................................................................................4 1.2 BACKGROUND ARCHIMEDES.............................................................................................................5 1.3 PARTICIPANT CITIES ..............................................................................................................................5 1.3.1 Leading City Innovation Areas......................................................................................................5 2. BRIGHTON -
Aktueller Stand Des Car-Sharing in Europa
more options for energy efficient mobility through Car-Sharing Aktueller Stand des Car-Sharing in Europa Endbericht D 2.4 Arbeitspaket 2 Juni 2010 Bundesverband CarSharing e. V. Willi Loose momo Car-Sharing More options for energy efficient mobility through Car-Sharing Grant agreement No.: IEE/07/696/SI2.499387 Aktueller Stand des Car-Sharing in Europa Endbericht D 2.4 Arbeitspaket 2 Aktueller Stand des Car-Sharing in Europa Endbericht D 2.4 Arbeitspaket 2 I Inhaltsverzeichnis 0. Zusammenfassung 1 1. Einleitung und Übersicht 7 1.1 Das Projekt momo Car-Sharing 7 1.2 Inhalt des Berichts 9 2. Stand des Car-Sharing in Europa 11 2.1 Überblick 11 2.2 Stand des Car-Sharing in europäischen Ländern 13 2.2.1 Belgien 13 2.2.2 Dänemark 14 2.2.3 Deutschland 14 2.2.4 Finnland 15 2.2.5 Frankreich 16 2.2.6 Großbritannien 16 2.2.7 Irland 17 2.2.8 Italien 18 2.2.9 Niederlande 19 2.2.10 Österreich 19 2.2.11 Portugal 19 2.2.12 Schweden 20 2.2.13 Schweiz 20 2.2.14 Spanien 21 2.3 Vergleichende Einschätzung des Car-Sharing-Wachstums 21 3. Befragung der europäischen Car-Sharing-Anbieter 24 3.1 Methodik der Befragung 24 3.2 Rücklauf der Fragebögen 25 3.3 Ausgewählte Befragungsergebnisse 27 3.3.1 Erhebungsergebnisse zur Car-Sharing-Nutzung 27 3.3.2 Erhebungsergebnisse zu Kooperationen der Car-Sharing-Anbieter 39 3.3.3 Erhebungsergebnisse zur politischen Unterstützung 50 Aktueller Stand des Car-Sharing in Europa Endbericht D 2.4 Arbeitspaket 2 II 4. -
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. -
Growth in Worldwide Carsharing: an International Comparison Transportation Research Record Volume 1992, Issue 1, Pages 81-89 January 1, 2007
Growth in Worldwide Carsharing: An International Comparison Transportation Research Record Volume 1992, Issue 1, Pages 81-89 January 1, 2007 Susan A. Shaheen Adam P. Cohen Growth in Worldwide Carsharing: An International Comparison Susan A. Shaheen and Adam P. Cohen Abstract Carsharing (or short-term auto use) provides a flexible alternative that meets diverse transportation needs across the globe while reducing the negative impacts of private vehicle ownership. Although carsharing appeared in Europe between the 1940s and 1980s, the concept did not become popularized until the early 1990s. For nearly 20 years, worldwide participation in carsharing has been growing. Today, carsharing operates in approximately 600 cities around the world, in 18 nations and on 4 continents. Approximately 348,000 individuals share nearly 11,700 vehicles as part of organized carsharing services (>60% in Europe). Malaysia is operating a carsharing pilot, with a planned launch in 2007. Another eight countries are exploring carsharing. Thirty-three carsharing expert surveys were identified on an international basis. Cost savings, convenient locations, and guaranteed parking were identified as the most common motivations for carsharing use worldwide. An international comparison of carsharing operations, including similarities and differences, is provided. Continued growth is forecast, particularly among new and emerging market segments, such as businesses and universities. Growth-oriented operators will continue to account for the largest number of members and fleets deployed worldwide. In addition, high energy costs; limited and expensive parking; ongoing diffusion of operational knowledge, benefits, and supportive technologies; and increased demand for personal vehicle access in developing nations will affect carsharing’s growth and expansion. -
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. -
SHARED MOBILITY Removing Regulatory Barriers in Canadian Cities
SHARED MOBILITY Removing Regulatory Barriers In Canadian Cities Prepared for ÉQUITERRE MAY 2017 1 SHARED MOBILITY Removing regulatory barriers in canadian cities Submitted to : Prepared by : www.equiterre.org www.dunsky.com Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank representatives of the following organizations for their contributions and insights to this report : Équiterre (Annie Berube and Sidney Ribaux); Coop Carbone (Vincent Dussault); the cities of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver; and solution providers Car2Go, Communauto, Téo Taxi, Uber and Zipcar. About Dunsky Energy Consulting Headquartered in Montreal, Dunsky Energy Consulting supports an array of organizations in building a sustainable energy future. Dunsky’s clients include leading governments, energy utilities, private firms and non-profit orga- nizations throughout North America. EXPERTISE SERVICES CLIENTELE • Energy Efciency • Assess clean energy • Governments & Demand Management opportunities • Utilities • Renewable Energy • Design policies, plans, & Distributed Resources programs and strategies • Private firms • Sustainable Mobility • Evaluate performance • Non-profits SELECT CLIENTS 2 ABOUT ÉQUITERRE Équiterre is Quebec’s largest and most influential environmental organization, with 20,000 members, 200 volunteers, and a staff of 40 people. Mission Équiterre offers concrete solutions to accelerate the transition towards a society in which individuals, organizations and governments make ecological choices that are both healthy and equitable. Vision By 2030, Équiterre, in partnership with local communities, will have contributed to the development of public policies as well as civic and business practices that lead to a low-carbon economy and an environment free of toxic substances. Areas of Intervention Since its creation in 1993, Équiterre developed projects on key issues such as food, agriculture, transportation, buildings, consumption and climate change. -
Strategic Analysis of Carsharing Market in Europe
Sustainable and Innovative Personal Transport Solutions - Strategic Analysis of Carsharing Market in Europe M4FA-18 January 2010 Disclaimer Frost & Sullivan takes no responsibility for any incorrect information supplied to us by manufacturers or users. Quantitative market information is based primarily on interviews and therefore is subject to fluctuation. Frost & Sullivan research services are limited publications containing valuable market information provided to a select group of customers in response to orders. Our customers acknowledge when ordering that Frost & Sullivan research services are for our customers’ internal use and not for general publication or disclosure to third parties. No part of this research service may be given, lent, resold or disclosed to non-customers without written permission. Furthermore, no part may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the permission of the publisher. For information regarding permission, write to: Frost & Sullivan 4 Grosvenor Gardens Sullivan House London SW1W 0DH United Kingdom © 2010 Frost & Sullivan. All rights reserved. This document contains highly confidential information and is the sole property of Frost & Sullivan. No part of it may be circulated, quoted, copied or otherwise reproduced without the written approval of Frost & Sullivan. M4FA-18 2 Certification We hereby certify that the views expressed in this research service accurately reflect our views based on primary and secondary research with industry participants, industry experts, end users, regulatory organisations, financial and investment community and other related sources. In addition to the above, our robust in-house forecast and benchmarking models along with the Frost & Sullivan Decision Support Databases have been instrumental in the completion and publishing of this research service. -
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.