Bicycles as public-individual transport – European developments

Sebastian Bührmann Rupprecht Consult – Forschung & Beratung GmbH Cologne,

MEETBIKE – European Conference on Bicycle Transport and Networking 3rd – 4th April 2008, Content

The boom of public bicycles Characteristics and examples European developments Success factors & challenges Integration with Future developments The NICHES project

 Promoting the most promising new urban transport concepts, initiatives and projects to help moving them from their current “niche” position to a “mainstream” urban transport policy application.  Public bicycles examined as one of 12 innovative concepts The “boom” of public bicycle schemes

Amsterdam Copenhagen Helsinki Rennes Drammen Córdoba Cuneo Oslo GÖTEBORG Trondheim Viena Alba Barí Parma Lyon Pistoia Burgos Novara Leipzig Pamplona Gijón Brussels Orleans Sevilla Montreal Bejing Aix-en-Provence Buenos Aires Portland? San Francisco Washington DC Brasil? Tel Aviv Krakow A new transport mode

“Very quickly, we've moved from being a curiosity to a new urban transport mode. We invented the public-individual transport.“

Gilles Vesco, Vice-président du Grand Lyon, France, on the vélo’v scheme Characteristics

 Innovative schemes of rental or free bicycles in urban areas

 Can be used for daily mobility as one-way- use is possible

 Part of the public transport system

 Differ from traditional, mostly leisure-oriented bicycle rental services as they provide fast and easy access

 Have diversified in organisational layout, the business models and the applied technology towards “smart bikes” (automated rental process via smart card or mobile phone) MakingMaking aa realreal change?change? LyonLyon -- ““VVéélolo’’vv”” (since 2005)

3,100 bicycles in use 340 stations > 100,000 users 16,700 rentals per day 80% increase in public and private bicycle use Reduction of bicycle related accidents BarcelonaBarcelona –– BicingBicing (since March 2007)  Spring 2008: 6,000 bicycles, 400 stations  118,000 registered users  13-15 rentals per bike/day  Motivation for use: travel time, sport, comfort, ecology, practical, cheap ParisParis –– VVééliblib’’ (since July 2007) 20,600 bicycles 1,451 stations The “Vélorution” 75,000 trips/day (nice weather up to 140,000) A mature concept spreading over Europe City Name Operator started # bicycles # stations Rennes Vélo à la Clear 1998 200 25 Carte Channel Munich Call a DB Rent 2000 2.000 flexible Bike 135 places OV-fiets Nederlandse 2002 flexible - for all over Spoorwegen the (NS) Viena City Bike Gevista 2003 900 53 (JCD) Lyon Vélo’v JCDecaux 2005 4.000 340 Burgos Bicibur ITCL 2006 200 8 Brussels Cyclocity JCDecaux 2006 250 23 Clear 2006 500 40 Channel Barcelona Clear 2007 6.000 400 Channel spring 2008 spring 2008 Paris Vélib’ JCDecaux 2007 20.600 1.451 spring 2008 spring 2008

Diversity of system approaches

The “hippie” approach Fully controlled (deposit and personal info) (free white bikes) (e.g. , Bicing)

Manual (e.g. Vélostation Automatic (e.g. Bicing) Chambéry)

Flexible without station Fixed stations (e.g. Vélib’) (e.g. call a bike)

Mobile phone access Smartcard access (e.g. Call a Bike) (e.g. Vélib’, Bicing) European developments

“The forerunners” Places with pronounced “bicycle culture” (e.g. Copenhagen 1995) Places that recognised early potential to promote and to provide additional service to citizens (e.g. Rennes 1998) “Mobility providers” (e.g. DB Rent’s call a bike, OV fiets) “The dynamic followers” “Door opener” to promote urban cycling (e.g. Lyon, Barcelona) Particularly dynamic markets France and Spain (large scale schemes, but also many medium sized cities) “Awakening interest” New member states (e.g. Krakow) Æ “white spots” on the map of public bicycles become smaller European developments

 Service operators Only few “big players” Increasingly competitive market Many mature schemes Since last year many smaller providers (especially Spain)  European network of cities planned upon initiative of City of Barcelona (could include Paris, Lyon, Stockholm, Sevilla and others) Selected success factors

 Well thought layout and scale of scheme and (nearly) free use (e.g. Lyon)  Integrated approaches to cycling and overall transport strategy (e.g. Paris)  Stakeholder cooperation, example Barcelona: Commisió de la Bicicleta de Barcelona Æ Strategic plan Intergrup de la Bicicleta de Catalunya Æ delegates of regional parliament  “Local champions”  Promotion and communication Spanish example of national promotion

 Funding and promotion of idea through IDAE Action plan to promote the public bicycle (2005-2006) Funding for 44 cities to prepare public bicycle schemes (focus on medium size 50.000-300.000 inhabitants)  National conference on public bicycles (fall 2007) & Guidance document on implementation for cities (www.bicicletapublica.org)  + local investments in bicycle infrastructure (e.g. Sevilla) Challenges

 Get it started: not as easy as it seems (integrated approach, infrastructure, scale of scheme and layout, traffic safety etc.)  Financing  PPP: outdoor advertisement contract (e.g. Rennes, Lyon)  Service paid through parking revenues or other incomes (e.g. Barcelona, 10 years - 22,3 Mio. €)  Advertisements on bicycles (e.g. OYbike, )  Other models (e.g. backed-up by operator, public funding)  Suitability of automatic systems for small and medium cities  Achieving real long term impact needs continuous development of overall urban transport strategies Æ towards multi-modal travel behaviour Integration with Public Transport

Intermodality in most cases not very pronounced (exceptions)  Example Barcelona: 71,63% exclusively (mono-modal) Bicing 28,37% combined with other transport modes (especially Metro and train)

Rather an element of multimodality  Public bicycle users to big share also public transport users  Example: Lyon 94% are PT users 57% take daily or at least once a week the bus or train Integration with Public Transport

 Ticketing integration (e.g. Lyon, Carte Técély; Paris, Navigo pass), but not common everywhere yet  Maps and info systems  Only few integrated “mobility providers” (e.g. DB, Geman rail)  Some schemes with specific intermodal layout at rail stations (e.g. OV fiets, Bikey) Future developments

 Further boom of public bicycles (worldwide)  Strong position of smartcard based systems with fixed stations  Optimising schemes and disposition  Further integration with public transport  Diversity of providers and financing models  Expansion of systems outside the urban core  Pedelecs and E-Bikes?  Developing “bicycle culture” in integrated packages (e.g. London starting off) Conclusions

 “Fashionable” but needs careful planning and implementation  Little direct impact on reducing motorised

traffic in cities and CO2 emissions, but high potential as “part of the bigger puzzle”  Can facilitate change Æ door opener  Becoming a real element of public transport  Not for free, but high added value in the long run if properly done Æ towards multi-modal travel behaviour Æ introducing and strengthening bicycle culture

Further information

NICHES website: www.niches-transport.org

The World City Bike Collaborative www.worldcitybike.org Thank you!

Sebastian Bührmann [email protected]