TOURISTS Fact Sheet DELIVERABLE

TOURISTS Fact Sheet

DELIVERABLE 2.4

WP 2: Communication & Organisation Knowledge Centres

Published in August 2015 www.velo-citta.eu Bike sharing for tourists Target Group Charateristics and Best Practice Tourists in the VeloCittà cities Tourists who are visiting a city are a large potential market segment for bike sharing schemes. In addition to people who visit for multiple days, we also consider visitors for one day as tourists. Business travellers are also included in this segment. All VeloCittà cities have significant numbers of tourists visiting.

Burgos, with a population of around 180.000, receives annually about one million tourists of whom 30% stay overnight in the city. Burgos hosts several World Heritage sites and it brands itself as a whole-family destination as well as a nature destination. There are many sights and hotels in its city centre, close to the BSS docking stations. Research has shown that tourists are often unfamiliar with the bike sharing scheme, but they do have an interest in using the bike more often.

Krakow is Poland’s second largest city and welcomes around 9 million tourists per year, of which 77% were foreign tourists in 2012(1). This number is ever increasing. British, Germans, Italians, French and Russians top the list of foreign travellers. The majority of the current BSS docking stations are located in the historic old town.

London Lambeth and London Southwark are neighbouring boroughs. Lambeth hosts the London Eye, a popular tourist attraction, as well as many other key London attractions. The famous Tate Modern can be found in Southwark. Of the more than 15 million international tourists that London received in 2007, around 7 million visited the Borough of Lambeth (excluding business travellers). For Southwark the numbers are similar.

Padua is an important tourist destination in northern Italy, profiting from the massive numbers of tourists visiting its neighbouring city Venice. Padua has a population of 210.000 and hosts around 607.00 tourists per year. Many visitors arrive in Padua by train. The historical city centre is a car-free zone and most of the bicycle docking stations are situated in that area.

Located in the Southern part of Hungary, Szeged is the third largest city of Hungary with a population of around 163.000. It is known as the “City of Sunshine”, because it has the highest number of sunny days throughout the year. Szeged is the main city in Csongrád County and serves as a commercial and cultural centre of the region. Today’s Szeged is an important university town and a popular tourist attraction. It is famous for its Art Nouveau buildings in the city centre and a number of open-air events in summer. Ap- proximately 206.000 tourists visit every year.

What Tourists need Tourists form a significant target group in all VeloCittà cities. To accommodate their needs and achieve a lasting positive image of bike sharing, some basic requirements should be fulfilled.

High visibility: Many bike sharing schemes, except the one in London, lack visibility among tourists. Tourists need clearly visible BS stations along the main touristic sights, near the railway station and hotels. They may need to know the rent-a-bike price to compare. The city can increase visibility by including the BSS service in a city visitor’s card, making the service immediately available to tourists

Ease of use: The registration should be as simple and straightforward as possible and information about registration should be available in at least English and preferably additional languages based on the main tourist originations. Cooperation with the tourist sector: Cooperation should de sought with hotels and conference centres. Clear and concise information on the BSS should be delivered in information points for tourists or any other institutions that maintain any relations with tourists. Pre-registration by for example hotels or the Tourist Offices should be made available.

Safety: Tourists need to perceive the whole system – registration, the bicycles itself and the cycling lanes - as safe. Even though a BS system can be widely known, like in London, if the common perception is that cycling in the tourist destination is dangerous this can completely undermine its usage.

Integrated ticket: Unique card or ticket for public transport and shared bicycles offers to tourists a smooth and simple multimodal journey. With the possibility to connect bike sharing with other modes of transport new mobility options are being created.

How Bike Sharing Schemes benefit from Tourists The decision to actively involve tourists and to target them as users for the local bike sharing scheme generates a number of benefits for the scheme itself, for the tourist sector and for the municipality.

Visibility & perception: For many cities, tourists come in such large numbers that they are a great potential increase the overall scheme visibility. Their positive experiences with bike sharing can bring added value and be - nefits not only to bike sharing schemes but more in general to cycling mobility.

City branding: As cities are competing for tourists and guests, they invest a big effort in presenting their city as modern and innovative. In that context bike sharing can be seen as an environmentally friendly service to support the modernity and individuality of a city. Getting to know the city by bicycle can be promoted more actively as a unique experience. Bike sharing schemes and city marketing should go hand in hand and can open up new areas for visitors.

Scheme size & density: New or enlarged stations at main tourist destinations, close to big hotels or close to conference centres contribute directly to the overall scheme size.

Turnover: Tourists generally have a high individual willingness-to-pay and can thus contribute considerable additional turnovers to the scheme.

Diversification: The target group “tourists” reaches a differentiated public with regard to gender, age, income and cultural belonging. Challenges Tourists bring along Tourists bring not only benefits for the local bike sharing scheme but can also put the scheme to the test.

Scheme availability: Long and very frequent rentals at a few “hot-spots” reduce the overall availability of bikes for other users. Redistribution can be logistically complex in a crowded, possibly car-free, city centre.

Operating costs: Building BSS-infrastructure in the touristic centre or close to popular sights is often difficult due to monument protection or lack of space. Additionally the overall maintenance costs increase when bikes are heavily used.

Low customer loyalty: Tourists are by definition only visiting shortly and therefore do not form a reliable, fixed customer base.

Safety: Tourists are not always familiar with cycling, which can offer challenges regarding safety and related infrastructure.

First findings about Tourists in VeloCittà In the framework of a comprehensive market segmentation task, tourists and day visitors were surveyed in the VeloCittà sites. The survey provided some interesting findings about their mobility behaviour and revealed some possible strategies to market the local bike sharing scheme to tourists.

Krakow Lambeth Southwark Burgos Padova Szeged Sample 77 35 110 100 26 75

Safety In all of the surveyed cities, the large majority of respondents is capable of riding a bicycle. This obviously is an important prerequisite, but not something obvious, as tourists come from all over the world, some- times from countries without any cycling culture. In London Lambeth, Padova and Szeged, 45-60% of the interviewees considers cycling to be a dangerous activity (figure 1), which may considerably hinder the uptake of bike sharing. Targeted campaigns on this topic seem justified here. In Lambeth and Padova, the majority of respondents also think cycling is slow, whereas in the other cities cycling is more generally considered a fast way to move around town.

Figure 1: DistaImage of cycling – safe versus dangerous Familiarity with the scheme The London sites stand out with regard to the high knowledge tourists have of the system. On the opposi- te side, in Burgos only 10% of tourists know the system. None of the respondents used it, however, 90% of them are very interested in using the BSS. In Krakow, Padova and Szeged, knowledge of the system is also on the low side. Efforts need to be made to increase this in order to use the full potential that the tourist segment offers. In various cities, the website of the scheme is only in the local language which makes registration difficult for foreign tourists. This is a relatively fast and cheap thing to change.

Figure 2: Knowledge and usage of the bike sharing scheme Price Even though knowledge about the current pricing is quite low, the willingness to pay is high in most surveyed sites. This is especially the case in Burgos, Szeged and Krakow, where tourists are sometime willing to pay more than the actual price. In Burgos and Szeged, hotels were interviewed as well and they often agreed that costs of the system are fairly low and they could provide the bikes as a service to their customers. The interviewed hotels in Krakow already provide free bikes to their guests. In London it is an opportunity to talk to hotels about sponsoring and pre-registration, as the tourists are enthusiastic of cycling in London.

Figure 3: Willingness to pay

How to address Tourists in VeloCittà Operators of bike sharing schemes who want to target tourists must consider that two different groups have to be addressed: tourists themselves as users of the scheme and hotels or conference centres are as potential payers. The following actions are recommended:

• Make BSS as accessible as possible for tourists; simple language, many languages. Use websites in pre- paration of their visit; offer them info in their hotels, hostels and conference centres. Make clear what it costs, what liabilities are, which cycling routes there are. Simplify registration as much as possible, accept credit card payments and provide instant access.

• Give tourists a sense of safety by giving instructions what is expected from them in terms of behaviour, the rules and regulations on the streets, what they can expect on the street.

• Create simple cycling routes both inside and outside the city with information on the attractions and sights they can expect on the way. Make for example an Architecture route, Food Route, Parks route, Historic Route, Channels and rivers Route, etc.

• Combine public transport and BSS’s

• Set up marketing campaigns for specific target groups within the tourist segment, e.g. business visitors, families with children, elderly couples etc.

• Intensify cooperation with hotels, e.g. for sponsor deals, pre-registration for guests and promotion of the scheme. Read on Link Tourist friendly bike sharing schemes http://www.orbitz.com/blog/2015/08/7-tourist- (blog article) friendly-bike-sharing-systems-across-the-world/ Santander Bike Tours: online description of https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/cycling/santander-cy- different theme tours to be made by bike cles/leisure-routes Veturilo city bikes: scheme info on the Warsaw http://www.warsawtour.pl/en/warsaw-essentials/ tourist info website getting-around/veturilo-city-bikes-164476.html PubliBike: discount for tourists with LuganoCard http://luganotourism.ch/en/54/publibike-bike-sharing-lugano.aspx?idActivity=1105&idMod=41

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 EASME nor the European Commission are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. RESIDENTS Fact Sheet

DELIVERABLE 2.4

WP 2: Communication & Organisation Knowledge Centres

Published in August 2015 www.velo-citta.eu Bike sharing for residents Target Group Characteristics and Best Practice Residents in the VeloCittà cities In several countries in Europe the residents of the city own their own bicycles and the people are used to riding bicycles. This is especially the case for the countries in the North-Western part of the continent. More and more people from the other European countries are now introduced to the bicycle by bike sharing schemes that emerge more often in middle- and large sized cities.

• Involving residents in bike sharing schemes is not only important because of the volume and revenue potential, but also because of the required (long term) support for the local BSS. This especially applies when financial support - and therefore political support - for the BSS is required.

• The segment “residents” represents a large number of potential customers. These potential customers can be invited to start using the BSS by various occasions throughout the year. Occasions can be related to shopping, events, work, free time, weather conditions, congestion, stolen own bike, broken own bike, etc. The scheme should be able to convert these occasions into (first) rides and a first positive customer experience.

• The populations of the VeloCittà cities vary from around 160.000 in Szeged and 180.000 in Burgos, to just over 200.000 in Padua, around 300.000 in both London’s Borough of Lambeth as well as the Borough of Southwark to over 750.000 inhabitants in Krakow.

• In the majority of the VeloCittà cities, residents use bicycles mainly for leisure purposes, thereby putting an emphasis on weekends and after working hours. The exception is London, where in addition to leisure, cycle use to and from work is more common, turning the resident segment into commuters.

What Residents need Residents form a main, but diverse target group in all VeloCittà cities. To accommodate their needs and achieve a lasting acceptance of bike sharing, some basic requirements should be fulfilled. The main aspects to be considered and improved are:

Location of docking points: It is very important that bicycle docks are located near public transport hubs, near residential areas and destinations like main shopping centres or large leisure locations.

Price: The economical convenience of this mode of transport is one of the key factors to motivate inhabitants to change their daily way of travelling within the city. Other important measures are monthly or annual rates to make the service more convenient and the introduction of user loyalty schemes.

High availability High availability of bicycles and bicycle redistribution service well balanced. The peak usage for residents is usually during the weekends and after working hours, as the majority of this target group uses the bicycles for leisure purposes.

Safety: Residents need to perceive the whole system – registration, the bicycles itself and the cycling infrastructure - as safe. Even though a bike sharing scheme can be widely known, like in London, if the common perception is that cycling in the home town is dangerous this can completely undermine its usage. How Bike Sharing Schemes benefit from Residents The decision to actively involve residents and to targeting them as users for the local bike sharing scheme generates a number of benefits for the scheme itself and for the municipality.

Visibility & perception: Residents can boost volume, thereby adding to an increase in the overall visibility of the scheme. They can have a positive influence on other possible users by word of mouth. When satisfied customers, residents can be loyal to the scheme for a long time.

Scheme size & density: New or enlarged stations on large leisure destinations like stadiums, shopping centres, local beaches or lakes contribute directly to the overall scheme size.

Turnover: Even though residents do not have a high individual willingness-to-pay, they can contribute to the scheme collectively. The bike sharing scheme can for example be embedded in a welcome-package that new residents receive from the municipality. Also a consistent demand from people living within the city is good for the business case, since it provides a significant revenue stream.

Mobility behaviour: Mobility behaviour in a person’s early years can have a lasting impact on behaviour in adult life. Familiarising residents from a young age onwards with shared mobility and with cycling in general can cement a car-independent-lifestyle. Moreover, residents’ positive cycling experience can bring added value and benefits not only on bike sharing schemes but more in general to cycling mobility.

Challenges Residents bring along Residents bring not only benefits for the local bike sharing scheme but can also put the scheme to the test. Operating costs: building BSS infrastructure in a wide range of residential areas and ensuring appropriate redistribution is expensive. Cities often choose to start on a smaller scale and in the city centre.

Location of docking stations: Residents are obviously scattered all over the city, whereas the majority of the docking stations is in most cases in the city centre, near tourist sites or in main industrials / office areas. More remote neighborhoods often have a lower density of potential customers and therefore much fewer – if any - available bicycles. This might deter residents from trying the system and leads to a much smaller potential pool of customers. A municipality should rather focus marketing actions on a sub-segment of residents who live in the city centre or near other docking stations.

Local opposition: Residents can turn against bike sharing due to for example the place the bikes take on their side- walks, potential danger of having cyclists near playgrounds or areas frequented by seniors or losing parking spots for cars to docking stations. Residents are more prone than the other segments to organize opposition against the scheme by localizing neighbors and local interest groups and coordinating complaints to the municipality. First findings about Residents in VeloCittà In the framework of a comprehensive market segmentation task, residents were surveyed in the VeloCittà sites. The survey provided some interesting findings about the mobility behaviour of residents and revealed some possible strategies to market the local bike sharing scheme to residents

Krakow Lambeth Southwark Burgos Padova Szeged Sample 75 104 125 35 55 54

Bike culture A good starting point is the image of cycling that residents have in the VeloCittà partner cities. In each city, more than 80% of all respondents are positive about cycling. This provides a good basis for further cycling campaigns. When the participants were asked whether they own a bicycle, the majority in the partner cities does. However, bike ownership among the respondents from the London Boroughs is considerably lower than in the other sites.

Figure 1: Bike ownership Bike ownership Naturally a high share of students owns a bike, as can be seen from the figure below. This is also the case in Krakow, London Lambeth, Burgos and Padova. In these sites the local bike sharing scheme can be a supplement to the private bike. In London Southwark and Szeged only 49 % respectively 16 % own a private bike. In these sites a public bike can be an alternative to a private bike. Figure 2: Bike ownership rate Bike usage We have also requested the residents how many days a week they use the bicycle. Even though ownership rate is quite high, as seen in figure 1 above, the majority of the respondents use the bike not at all or only 1 day a week in all sites. Padova and Krakow are positive exceptions here.

Figure 3: Bike usage per week We have requested our respondents also what their main destinations are when they use a bicycle. In all demonstration sites the respondents tend to use the bicycle mainly for leisure purposes. The second most named purpose it that of either going to work or school. Therefore, the BSS should seek cooperation with (large) leisure destinations in and around the city, as a way to promote the system. Figure 4: Cycling purposes Familiarity with the local scheme We asked the residents in our demonstration sites whether or not they know the bike sharing scheme in their city. Most residents do, even though in Padova and Szeged improvements can be made. Targeted campaigns for residents with basic information about the scheme are important here. Usage of the scheme among residents is highest in London. Also here, Padova and Szeged are lagging behind. The numbers are not high in any of the sites and therefore all cities would benefit from implementing campaigns specifically aimed at residents.

Figure 5: Familiarity and usage of the local bike sharing scheme How to address Students in VeloCittà The following actions are recommended: • Include residents where possible in the planning process when implementing or expanding a BSS. Give them chance to address their wishes, fears or complaints and respond to these.

• Use a large variety of occasions in and around town to make residents aware of and comfortable with the bike sharing system. For example the opening of a new shopping mall or swimming pool, a large music festival, news about increased congestion, etc. The scheme should convert these occasions into (first) rides and a positive customer experience.

• Use a variety of departments within the municipality to promote and explain the bike sharing scheme, for example a discounted subscription can be part of a welcome-package that new residents receive, the education department can stimulate bike sharing via their own channels amongst secondary school pupils and university students and the police department can hand out information in BSS when a bicycle is reported stolen.

• Location of docking points: it is important that bicycle docks are located near public transport hubs, near residential areas and large leisure locations.

• Combine public transport and BSS’s and work together with the public transport operators to promote this cooperation.

• Use local communication channels like local radio, newspapers, door-to-door magazines to provide an informative campaigns on the system and opportunities, health aspects, convenience etc.

• Emphasise that increasing the availability of bicycle sharing systems will likely result in increasing property values, improved neighbourhood health, and a more vibrant urban environment, thereby improving the local urban environment while at the same time benefiting from economic gains.

Read on Link Project: NYC Bike Share – http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/ Designed by New Yorkers bike-share-outreach-report.pdf Paper: Do people value bicycle sharing? A multile- http://tram.mcgill.ca/Research/Publications/Bicy- vel longitudinal analysis capturing the impact of cle_sharing_hedonics.pdf bicycle sharing on residential sales in Montreal, Canada (2015) Paper: Bike Share Implementation Strategies: http://www.onbikeshare.com/PDF/Bike%20 A Comparative Guide Share%20Implementation%20Strategies.pdf Handbook: Optimising Bike Sharing in European https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/pro- Cities - A Handbook jects/.../obis_handbook_en.pdf Example: Environmental Protection Agency talks http://www.lsureveille.com/daily/epa-talks- bike share program with local residents bike-share-program-with-local-residents/arti- cle_5a3154fc-365b-11e5-84b4-dbce74cb3d56.html Example: free training for New York’s CitiBike https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/pro- jects/.../obis_handbook_en.pdf

DELIVERABLE 2.4

WP 2: Communication & Organisation Knowledge Centres

Published in August 2015 www.velo-citta.eu Bike sharing for employees Target Group Characteristics and Best Practice Employees in the VeloCittà cities • Burgos is a medium-sized city in the north of Spain with 178,000 inhabitants. The industry is one of main pillars in the City, with in total 2,000 industry companies and more than 20,000 people working in industry in industrial areas generally far from the city centre. The service and building sectors holds more 65,000 inhabitants, working mainly in the city centre.

• The intellectual potential of Kraków includes 24 universities and the number of people employed at universities amounts to 22,125 (including about 1,800 professors). The city has over 750.000 inhabitants and it is one of Poland’s most important economic centres and the economic hub of the Małopolska region. There are about 50 large multinational companies in the city.

• London’s Borough of Lambeth’s employment base primarily consists of service sector employment. Looking over a longer time-frame, the total number of jobs in the Lambeth economy (including self- employed) increased by 15,000 or 10.6% between 2002 and 2012. There are 140,500 people employed in jobs in Lambeth.

• The London Borough of Southwark experienced rapid depopulation during the late 19th and early-20th centuries. It is now at an advanced stage of regeneration and is the location of the City Hall offices of the Greater London Authority. It is one of the least expensive commercial districts in London. In the area around Southwark station there are a number of offices which will be targeted within VeloCittà.

• The industrial area of Padova is one of the biggest industrial zones in Europe, having an area of 11 million sq. m. The main offices of 1,300 industries are based here, employing over 50,000 people. In the industrial zone, there are two railway stations, one fluvial port and three truck terminals. The city is home to around 210.000 inhabitants, of which 93.000 can be called employees.

• The University of Szeged is the main employer in the city. Szeged is one of the centres of the food industry in Hungary, especially known for its paprika and salami. The industry consists otherwise of chemical industry, oil, gas exploitation, production of machinery, textiles, clothes, shoes, the leather industry, china production, building industry.

What Employees need Employees – in terms of transport to and from work- only have one priority: it should be hassle free! This is for every individual worker different since the personal circumstances differ. In order for a BSS system to compete with the existing preferred mode of transport it should be better with regards to: Reliability: the worker should be able to rely on the technical functioning of the bike. The track record with regards to punctures, lights, smooth chain, derailleur and gears should be impeccable. It is highly relevant that the person can reach the work address on time, so the bike should never fail. Availability: there needs to be a station near the house as well as near the work place. There needs to be available bicycles at the required hour and can they need to be parked very close to work. Price: Most likely the BSS will be more economical than the preferred mode of transport, be it public transport or car. Employees need support from their employer. Employers could include shared bike subscription in a mobility package as part of their remuneration; this would help employees to use a bike from the BSS during work and in their private life. Safety: Traffic intensity, especially traffic congestion, has a big impact. The more mobility problems a city has regarding motorised vehicles, the better the opportunities for BSS’s and cycling in general. This is however entirely dependent on the safety the city has created for cyclists with a sound sustainable urban mobility plan. Convenience: If a BSS is a better or equal choice, workers might consider changing mode, but there will still be the seven stages of change they will have to go through: Awareness, accepting responsibility, per- ceiving options, evaluation of options, making a choice, experimental behaviour, habitual choice. How Bike Sharing Schemes benefit from Employees Employees may be the hardest group to target, based on their dependence on reliability. If they however make the choice, it will become a very reliable customer group: once a habit is established it will be complicated to change. However, trust comes on foot and leaves on horseback, meaning: it only has to go wrong once to lose the whole client group.

In case there are large companies that are willing to work with the city, or even the city itself that wants to develop this service, a dedicated plan for specific companies can be developed and provide a consistent stream of users. This could also benefit the BSS itself, since employees might take up the habit in their free time.

If employers offer a subscription to a bike share system in a mobility package employees would not only be able to use shared bikes for short business trips during the day (including trips to the public transport station) they could also be enthused to use it in their private time. This would increase the use of the shared bike system.

Visibility & perception: Employees use bikes frequently and in high numbers. The perception of bike sharing can be increased when business people.

Scheme size & density: New or enlarged stations in industrial zones or close to large office buildings contribute directly to the overall scheme size.

Turnover: Employees can provide a consistent and voluminous group of customers who use the bicycle every day or at least on a regular basis (during the week). Such a consistent demand is good for the business case, since it provides a consistent revenue stream. Moreover, if employers are persuaded to offer the scheme to their employees.

Challenges Employees bring along Employees bring not only benefits for the local bike sharing scheme but can also put the scheme to the test. They are a demanding group in terms of:

Availability: If employees miss finding a bicycle only once, they might already think the system is insecure for them and will not provide them with the necessary continuity

Reliability: Employees need to rely on well-functioning bicycles; if a bike breaks down this might cause them such big problems that they will choose an alternative mode

Location: the stations should be fairly wide spread throughout the city in order to allow employees to be close to one of them

Redistribution: If a big company would enthuse their staff to use the system, large portions of the bikes would remain all day in a location, probably outside the centre; redistribution would cause problems of availability in the evening.

If a city government wants to promote BSS-use it might consider to introduce traffic calming measures such as 30km zones, (increased) car parking fees near offices / shops, one way traffic streets, making the option for cycling in general and using a shared bike specifically more likely. The city government could also develop an incentive package will local employers, which requires a proactive approach by the local politicians. First findings about Employees in VeloCittà In the framework of a comprehensive market segmentation task, residents were surveyed in the VeloCittà sites. The survey provided some interesting findings about the mobility behaviour of employees and revealed some possible strategies to market the local bike sharing scheme to employees.

Krakow Lambeth Southwark Burgos Padova Szeged Sample 60 99 75 35 59 76

Distance to workplace In Burgos almost all surveyed employees live less than 10 km away from their work, but only 29% of all the surveyed employees uses their bikes to travel to work. There are no docking stations in the industry area, although this is an important area. Since the industry area is outside of the city centre (5 km) and employees are not used to travelling to work by bike, employers never thought of a BSS as an incentive for their employees. Also in Krakow and Szeged the large majority of respondents live less than 10km away from work. In these three sites, cycling to work is a viable option and would benefit from targeted campaigns. In the London Boroughs and Padova, people live further (the majority more than 10 miles away), providing opportunities for electric bikes at the bike sharing schemes.

Figure 1: Distance home-work

Familiarity with the local scheme Among employees, familiarity with the bike sharing scheme is high – over 60% in every site up to nearly 100% in Burgos and London Lambeth. Nevertheless, other than in the London Boroughs, very few employees have ever used it. This gap needs further attention. Possible questions to answer are:

• Do employees not feel addressed by the scheme and the communication/marketing connected with it? Is it better to target the employers instead of employees?

• Does the scheme cover the needs of the employees, e.g. with stations located close to their places of residence, the industrial zone and large companies? Are employees involved in the discussion about the location of docking stations?

• Is the tariff system of the scheme attractive? Do employees have access to other cheap transport modes, e.g. reduced PT fares or travel compensation from employer? Other VeloCittà research shows there is willingness to cycle more and this combined with the relative short distance to work in most sites offers many opportunities for bike sharing among this target group.

Figure 2: Familiarity with and usage of the scheme

Employer support Most employees in the surveyed sites, except in Szeged, currently receive no or very little compensation from their employer and thus would have to pay for the bike sharing bicycle themselves. To involve employers in the bike sharing scheme (selection of location of docking stations, discounted subscriptions for employees, sponsor opportunities, providing insurances and helmets etc.) and emphasis the benefits of cycling to them (healthier employees, decrease in sick leave, less car parking space needed etc.) could give an enormous boost to the scheme.

Figure 3: Do you receive financial compensation from your employer for your home-work journey? How to address Employees in VeloCittà Operators of bike sharing schemes who want to target employees must consider that two different groups have to be addressed: employees themselves as users of the scheme and employers as potential payers. The following actions are recommended:

• Contact companies in the industrial area or in areas with large office buildings and let them pay for or sponsor (additional) docking stations.

• Make a package deal for companies that could include a subscription in advance for employees, subscription in advance for customers, loyalty program or sponsored docking stations. An insurance and provision of helmets can also be included.

• Make more docking stations available in the industry area for employees to use the BSS in combination with public transport. When the distance from home to work is too high employees should opt for a multimodal solution and a specific campaign with the public transport and rail operators’ support.

• Cooperate with the municipality on promoting cycling for employees. Themes such safety and health need to be addressed, on one side to reassure employees, on the other to raise their awareness on benefits connected with cycling.

• Improve marketing by setting up marketing campaigns for specific target groups (especially for employers). Campaigns focusing on recreational aspects could successful in engaging hesitant employees. The European Cycling Challenge, for example, is a great opportunity to raise the interest in “bike to work” travels.

Read on Link Group membership Healthy Ride Pittsburgh https://healthyridepgh.com/group_membership/ Edmonton http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/news/ city-tests-employee-bike-share.aspx Corporate Bikeshare Toronto http://www.bikesharetoronto.com/pricing/corporate-memberships United Bank Washington DC https://www.capitalbikeshare.com/bankondc Corporate membership San Francisco Bike Share http://www.bayareabikeshare.com/pricing/corporate General Motors http://zagster.com/press/pedal-power-gm-shares- bikes-19000-tech-center-employees/ Bike Share America http://bikeshareamerica.com

DELIVERABLE 2.4

WP 2: Communication & Organisation Knowledge Centres

Published in August 2015 www.velo-citta.eu Bike sharing for commuters Target Group Characteristics and Best Practice Commuters in the VeloCittà cities The word commuter derives from early days of rail travel in US cities such as New York, Philadelphia, Boston and Chicago, where, in the 1840s, the railways engendered suburbs from which travellers paying a reduced or ‘commuted’ fare into the city1.

Before the 19th century, most workers lived less than an hour’s walk from their work. Today, many people travel daily to work a long way from their own towns, cities, and villages, especially in industrialised societies. Depending on factors such as the high cost of housing in city centres, lack of public transit, and traffic congestion, modes of travel may include automobiles, motorcycles, trains, buses, and bicycles2.

Bicycle commuting is the use of a bicycle to travel from home to a place of work or study - in contrast to the use of a bicycle for sport, recreation or touring.

Commuting especially lends itself to areas with relatively flat terrain and arrangements to keep riders relatively safe from the hazards of accidents with motorized traffic, e.g. separated bicycle lanes and a general acceptance of cyclists as traffic participants.

Mixed-mode commuting combines the use of a bicycle, or a BSS with public transportation for commuting.

The commuter community is one of the important actors of the urban mobility for its relevance and magnitude: Burgos: high number of commuter trips; 157.520 per day. Also potential commuters from University: 6,500

Krakow: high percentage of potential commuters; reasons of using BSS: university/school 35% (204,891 students), work 32% (204,897employees)

London Lambeth: more than 80% of workers work full-time (peak hours for the docking points). More than 26% of members use the service 5 or more days a week, and more than 24% use BS 3-4 days a week. Morn- ing and evening peaks during weekdays

London Southwark: almost half of the membership used BSS recently (in the last 3 days), with commuting and employer’s business being the main reasons for using it. In Southwark full-time students represent 10% of the population (27,044)

Padua: number of commuters in and out per day: 48,000 (estimated, 2013)

Szeged: number of commuters (in): about 11,328. Low percentage of potential commuters.

1 “Commuters,” a poetic rendition of the New Jersey-to-New York commuting life by Steve Peacock (2011) InDigestMag.com

2 US Commuting Averages (2002) What Commuters need Main aspects to be considered and improved:

• Price: the economical convenience of this mode of transport is one of the key factor to motivate people to change their daily way of travelling within the city. Other important measures are month or annual rates to make the service more convenient and the introduction of user loyalty schemes. A good example comes from the Toronto BSS with a distinction between membership fee and usage fee3

• Location of docking points: it is fundamental the location of bicycle docks near train and metro stations and working, studying places. Another strategic solution is park-and-ride lots with the localization of docking points in proximity of parking areas.

• In Burgos, for example, commuters (workers) need a smooth access to the north part (industrial area) that is a little bit farer than the rest (5 km) and at the moment not covered by BSS

• High availability of bicycles and bicycle redistribution service well balanced (Padua’s issue).

• Considering their travelling pattern, commuters users need to find during peak hours availability of bicycles in the origin point and empty docks in the destination one allowing them to reach in a smooth way the working (or studying) place or their residential area (See data from BSS Vélib’ in Paris4)

• To prevent these inconvenience it is important to study the amount of commuters flux and the potential need of bicycles in the BS stations.

• Mobile Apps to reach stations, to find empty docking points and reservation services (Krakow)

• Integrated ticket: unique card or ticket for PT, car sharing and BSS offers to commuters a smooth and multimodal journey without managing or buying multiple tickets (See La Rochelle PT system5)

3http://www.bikesharetoronto.com/pricing 4http://blog.velib.paris.fr/blog/2013/10/18/regulations-velib-et-migrations-pendulaires/ 5http://yelo.agglo-larochelle.fr/accueil

How Bike Sharing Schemes benefit from Commuters Commuters’ positive experience can bring added value and benefits not only on bike sharing schemes but more in general on cycling mobility. Commuters for their nature guarantee a base of affluent users with the following characteristics: • predictable slot time of usage • regular utilisation rate during weekdays (easy estimation of demand) Their way of travelling offers also reliable data on the most congested cycling stations that needed to be refilled or empty. Therefore the management of the redistribution process could be easily planned. Other benefits on the BSS are the high impact on visibility due to the elevated number of users and the positive influence on other possible users by word of mouth. Also such a consistent demand is good for the business case, since it provides a significant revenue stream. Commuters and other target groups: general benefits • Commuters target include both students and workers and their influence reach an important and differentiated public including various gender, age, income and cultural belonging. • Commuters have also an influence on political commitment and on social awareness.

This bottom-up movement can help to sensitise on the BSS importance and help in recruiting funding, ven- tures and advertisement. While some audiences perceive cycling in a positive light, other groups still hold more negative attitudes to cycling. These factors can be tackled through the involvement of daily users with a participatory approaches to planning enabling communities to be an active part of a modal transiti- on. For this segment also the recruitment of show customers can be relevant for the success of the BSS. The municipality and other governmental organisations for example (with large numbers of employees and a substantial amount of daily business trips) are the main actors for actions such this. Challenges Commuters bring along Bicycle availability: regarding commuters needs, demand can be high during the working week and during transport strikes. This users’ travel characteristic causes frequent disparities between the availability of rental bicycles and the number of rental slots.

In the morning can be difficult to find a bicycle in the docking points near train station and in the after- noon it can be difficult to find room for bicycle returning. Issues like these have a negative impact on the overall service quality perception and discourage users to use the BSS.

Connected with these peaks of usage also the redistribution process is needed and it should be very ef- fective and prompt.

These logistical issues produce the most complex and negative impact to cope with.

Safety: commuters target group offers also some challenges regarding safety and related infrastructure. Commuter often has to deal with heavy morning traffic and congestion, and they experience stress situation; these elements can compromise a proper way of driving.

Developing safe and secure road and infrastructure is strictly connected with the BSS success: taking account of intersections, installing a proper path marking system and securing roads help the users to feel safe during their daily journey.

Another issue is connected with the relation between cyclists and other road users, pedestrians and car drivers, and the need to share safely a common space.

First findings about Commuters in VeloCittà In the framework of a comprehensive market segmentation task, commuters were surveyed in the Velo- Città sites. The survey provided some interesting findings about the mobility behaviour of commuters and revealed some possible strategies to market the local bike sharing scheme to them.

Krakow Lambeth Southwark Burgos Padova Sample 25 57 29 35 66

Distance to work In Burgos and London Lambeth more than 50% of respondents travel less than 10 km to work. In these cases, bike sharing can be a useful means of transport for commuting. In cities with longer average commuting distances, like Krakow, the combination of PT and bike sharing bears considerable potential. Figure 2: Distance from place of residence to work Bike usage A high percentage of participants (more than 80% in Burgos and Padua) are interested in using bike more often. Understanding the reason they currently do not cycle is fundamental to convince them and push them to try the BSS.

Figure 3: Bike usage Intermodality The aptitude for using bike in combination with public transport is very high in Lambeth, Southwark and Padua, but also in Burgos and Krakow there are relevant percentage values connected with the interest of multimodality solutions.

Also in this case, analyse why commuters are discouraged to adopt multimodal options could help to improve acceptance and shift commuters from car to other sustainable modes. In Burgos the target group knows too little about the system and the opportunities of the system, especially the combination with public transport. The PT and mobility department are enthusiastic about promoting BSSs in a better way and are interested in looking into agreements with different entities. This can be a big opportunity for the bike sharing scheme.

Figure 4: Combination of bike and PT Familiarity with the local scheme Even if in almost all cases the majority of respondents declare to know how the bike sharing scheme works the percentage of commuters that used it decrease considerably.

Also the percentage of those who used it more than 2 times in the last two months increases to 40% in Padua and to 70-80% in Krakow, Lambeth and Southwark.

In London Southwark commuters see themselves as the second dominant target group that tend to use the BSS (41% after tourists with 52%). Figure 5: Familiarity and usage of the local bike sharing scheme Financial compensation The percentage of commuters that receive financial compensation for travelling from home to work in all the cities is low and thus most surveyed commuters would have to pay for the BSS themselves if they decided to use it.

In Krakow none of the surveyed commuters think their employer would like to subscribe to or compensate for the BSS, whilst the interviews reveal that the employers are willing to subscribe and pay for their employees. This is a chance for the BSS and needs further attention.

Also in London Lambeth and Southwark the results show that the commuters do not think that their employer would like to subscribe to or compensate for a bike sharing subscription (81% and 69%). More commuters might be interested in using a bike (or a bike in combination with public transport) if they’d receive financial support from their employer.

Figure 6: Financial compensation for commuting How to address Commuters in VeloCittà Recommendations: • Informative campaigns on system and opportunities: Several groups of users are not aware about the service, its convenience and its offer and they don’t even consider bicycle or bike sharing as an opti on. It is important to not take for granted such basic level of information.

• Work together with companies: Employers and Mobility Managers can be collaborative actors and can contribute to encourage employees to experiment the BSS (Ex.: discount tickets campaigns, target communication within the companies’ buildings...)

• Campaigns on intermodal solutions: When the distance from home to work is too high commuters should opt for a multimodal solution and a specific campaign with the public transport and rail operators’ support and cooperation needs to be considered.

• Safety and health campaigns: Themes such safety and health need to be addressed, on one side to reassure commuters, on the other to raise their awareness on benefits connected with cycling.

• Competitions and games (ECC): Campaigns focused on recreational aspects could be a successful tool to engage hesitant commuters. The European Cycling Challenge, for example, is a great opportunity to raise the interest in “bike to work” travels.

Read on Link Benefits with tax discount http://bikeleague.org/content/bicycle-commuter-benefit Bike to Work campaign http://www.copenhagenize.com/2010/02/hungarian-bike-to-work-campaign.html Bicycles redistribution http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/bom/ Commuter workspaces to encourage cycling http://lcc.org.uk/articles/levis-r-commuter-works- pace-arrives-in-london Marrying Cycling and Public Transport http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/Facts- heet-ITF2012-PT.pdf Project: MOBI: promoting smart mobility t http://www.mobi-project.eu/ employees Project: BIKE2WORK – smart choice for http://www.bike2work-project.eu/en/ commuters

DELIVERABLE 2.4

WP 2: Communication & Organisation Knowledge Centres

Published in August 2015 www.velo-citta.eu Bike sharing for students Target Group Characteristics and Best Practice Students in the VeloCittà cities Students which are enrolled at a local university or college are a possible market segment for bike sharing schemes. Additionally to students as end-user of such a scheme, educational institutions and student organisations can be interesting for the bike sharing operator as co-operation partner.

The starting-points and framework conditions for addressing students are versatile in the VeloCittà cities.

• Krakow is home to almost 205,000 students, learning in one of the 10 public institutions of higher education and 13 non-public colleges. The Jagiellonian University educates almost 52,000 of them on several campuses all over the city.

• London Lambeth and London Southwark being neighbouring boroughs have 12 different institutions of higher education, amongst them the King’s College with about 26,500 students on 5 campuses (3 in Lambeth/Southwark) and the London South Bank University with about 18,000 students on two campuses (1 in Southwark).

• The University of Burgos with two campuses, one in the very centre of the city, one outside the centre in the western part, has about 6,000 students.

• The University of Padova educates almost 58,000 students. Almost all faculties of the university are located in the city centre.

• The University of Szeged is one of the largest Hungarian universities with more than 30,000 students. The main campus is located in the very centre of the city

What Students need Students form a considerable target group in all VeloCittà cities. To accommodate their needs and to achieve a lasting acceptance of bike sharing, some basic requirements should be fulfilled.

Location: bike sharing stations should be located on campuses and close to student’s housing areas. An in-depth-analysis of student’s moving patterns is necessary to cover their mobility needs over the day (campus-to-campus, campus -to-home, and campus-to-library).

Availability: a large number of bikes should be available at the stations on campuses and at other location where a high number of students has the same mobility need at the same time. Stations in front of main buildings should provide at least 20-50 bikes/racks. This is often easily possible as campus grounds are often subject to fewer regulations than roads and adjacent areas. One should have in mind that this number of bikes is used less or not at all during weekends and semester-breaks.

Price: students, often having the “luxury” of PT discounts and often using own bikes, are not willing to pay high charges per use or per year.

Access media: most students own smartphones or other devices; they are familiar with RFID-cards and thus do not need sophisticated terminals or other rental infrastructure. Unlocking their student-cards (RFID student Ids or PT cards) gives all of them access to the scheme at low costs. How Bike Sharing Schemes benefit from Students The decision to actively involve students and to targeting them as users for the local bike sharing scheme generates a number of benefits for the scheme itself, for the university and for the municipality.

Visibility & perception: students use bikes frequently and in high numbers. The overall scheme visibility can be increased.

Scheme size & density: new or enlarged stations on university premises, close to campuses or close to student’s housing areas contribute directly to the overall scheme size.

Turnover: even though students do not have a high individual willingness-to-pay, they can contribute to the scheme collectively. The bike sharing scheme can for example be embedded in the semester-fee-structure to receive a small contribution from a large number of individuals.

Market opening: universities are an ideal showcase in cities were bike sharing schemes do not (yet) exist. Operators can erect a university-wide-scheme to convince the municipality that bike sharing complements the city’s mobility landscape.

Product development: students are creative and willing to dedicate a lot of time and passion into developing future concepts and products. Operators can use this potential to improve their services with fresh ideas.

More good reasons Mobility strategy: universities are faced with environmental regulations, space scarcity and the challenges of following their guiding principles as innovators. Bike sharing can contribute to reaching the university’s targets concerning sustainability, land use and behavioural change.

Mobility behaviour: mobility behaviour in the early twenties can have a lasting impact on student’s behaviour in their adult life. Familiarising students with shared mobility offers can cement a car-independent-lifestyle. However, students often move away once their professional life starts. Thus the impact might be limited.

Challenges Students bring along Students bring not only benefits for the local bike sharing scheme but can also put the scheme to the test.

Scheme availability: when offered at low individual charges, the scheme is heavily used by students. Long and very frequent rentals at a few “hot-spots” reduce the overall availability of bikes for other users.

Operating costs: student’s collective moving patterns challenge the operator’s redistribution system. Man bikes have to be moved from central spots to the surrounding stations, e.g. when all bikes around the campus are ridden to the canteen at the same time. Additionally the overall maintenance costs increase when bikes are heavily used.

Temporary customer loyalty: once students graduate, they tend to move away from their city of education. Thus customer loyalty often ends. First findings about Students in VeloCittà In the framework of a comprehensive market segmentation task, students were surveyed in the VeloCittà sites. The survey provided some interesting findings about the mobility behaviour of students and revealed some possible strategies to market the local bike sharing scheme to students

Krakow Lambeth Southwark Burgos Padova Szeged Sample 75 78 116 100 745 76

Distance to University In the smaller cities Burgos and Szeged students live close to their university which makes cycling an attractive option of daily mobility. Even in the larger cities Krakow and London, students often live closer than 10 km from their university (79 % in Krakow, 50 % in Lambeth respectively 53 % in Southwark living not farther away than 5 miles). Padova is an exception with 66 % of the responding students living farther away from university than 10 km. Their place of residence lies often outside the city due to limited capa- cities within the city itself. Thus a combination of bike and public transport seems promising here

Figure 1: Distance from place of residence to University Bike ownership Naturally a high share of students owns a bike, as can be seen from the figure below. This is also the case in Krakow, London Lambeth, Burgos and Padova. In these sites the local bike sharing scheme can be a supplement to the private bike. In London Southwark and Szeged only 49 % respectively 16 % own a private bike. In these sites a public bike can be an alternative to a private bike. Figure 2: Bike ownership Cycling among students Less than half of the responding students cycle regularly in Krakow, the London boroughs and Burgos. Contrary to that students in Padova and Szeged cycle quite regularly.

Figure 3: Bike usage per week Familiarity with the local scheme In all sites the majority of responding students know the local bike sharing scheme. In Krakow, Burgos and Szeged less than 20 % have ever used the scheme. This gap needs further attention. Possible questions to answer are:

• Do students not feel addressed by the scheme and the communication/marketing connected with it?

• Does the scheme cover the needs of the students, e.g. with stations located close to their places of residence, the university and leisure spots?

• Is the tariff system of the scheme attractive? Do students have access to other cheap transport modes, e.g. reduced PT fares?

In London Southwark and London Lambeth 41 % respectively 36 % of respondents have used the scheme. On the one hand there are no reduced PT fares available for students in London and on the other hand bike ownership is relatively low. Additionally the local bike sharing scheme has a very dense network. These factors might explain why bike sharing is more widely used than here than in many other sites. In Padova even 46 % of the respondents used a bike of the local scheme.

Figure 4: Familiarity and usage of the local bike sharing scheme How to address Students in VeloCittà Operators of bike sharing schemes who want to target students must consider that two different groups have to be addressed: students themselves as users of the scheme and universities or students organisations as payers.

• Operators should define the exact targets that they want to reach by involving students (e.g. increase the number of bikes and stations, gain additional turnover, increase visibility, strengthen the local network) and monitor the results.

• When possible, operators should incorporate the visual identity of the respective institution, e.g. by using the university colours and logo for the stations on their premises, a dedicated app or access media.

• When addressing students, communication should be kept simple, underlining aspects of flexibility, sustainability, fun, convenience, modernity and identification with the city and the university.

• When addressing universities and students organisations, operators should illustrate sustainability aspects, image gains, mobility strategies and local stakeholder-networks.

• Marketing and communication by several stakeholder groups is well developed at universities and similar institutions. Operators should use the existing communication infrastructure: magazines, semester information, apps or newsgroups. They should furthermore be present at events and use the chance to contribute to academic work with lectures or seminars.

Read on Link Study: A NEW COURSE How Innovative University http://uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/US_A_ Programs Are Reducing Driving on Campus and New_Course_scrn_0.pdf Creating New Models for Transportation Project: Innovative Bike-Sharing Design as a Rese- http://www.copenhagenize.com/2010/02/hungari- arch and Educational Platform for Promoting More an-bike-to-work-campaign.html Liveable Urban Futures Project: Improving NYC’s Citi Bike through http://svainteractiondesign.tumblr.com/ Practical Design Fictions post/80066571909/improving-nycs-citi-bike-through-practical-design Project: Projektbericht TUM Bikesharing (German) https://www.jungeakademie.tum.de/fileadmin/ w00big/www/Projektabschlussberichte/2013_Pro- jektbuch_TUMBikesharing.pdf Product: Zagster – off-the-shelf bike sharing http://zagster.com/college-campus-bike-sharing/ Examples: List of university/college schemes in http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/pdf/Programs_Promo- the USA te_BikeSharePrograms_041213.pdf