Skip to main content

Ride-hailing, travel behaviour and sustainable mobility: an international review


A discussion of the sustainability and travel behaviour impacts of ride-hailing is provided, based on an extensive literature review of studies from both developed and developing countries. The effects of ride-hailing on vehicle-kilometres travelled (VKT) and traffic externalities such as congestion, pollution and crashes are analysed. Modal substitution, user characterisation and induced travel outputs are also examined. A summary of findings follows. On the one hand, ride-hailing improves the comfort and security of riders for several types of trips and increases mobility for car-free households and for people with physical and cognitive limitations. Ride-hailing has the potential to be more efficient for rider-driver matching than street-hailing. Ride-hailing is expected to reduce parking requirements, shifting attention towards curb management. On the other hand, results on the degree of complementarity and substitution between ride-hailing and public transport and on the impact of ride-hailing on VKT are mixed; however, there is a tendency from studies with updated data to show that the ride-hailing substitution effect of public transport is stronger than the complementarity effect in several cities and that ride-hailing has incremented motorised traffic and congestion. Early evidence on the impact of ride-hailing on the environment and energy consumption is also concerning. A longer-term assessment must estimate the ride-hailing effect on car ownership. A social welfare analysis that accounts for both the benefits and costs of ride-hailing remains unexplored. The relevance of shared rides in a scenario with mobility-as-a-service subscription packages and automated vehicles is also highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1.

    Mobility-on-demand is defined as a transport concept where ‘consumers can access mobility, goods, and services on demand by dispatching or using shared mobility, courier services, unmanned aerial vehicles and public transportation solutions’ (Shaheen et al. 2017b).

  2. 2.

    Although the very consideration of ride-hailing as part of the sharing economy is a topic of current debate, due mainly to the asymmetries in the relationship between commercial ride-hailing companies and drivers.

  3. 3., accessed August 14th, 2018.

  4. 4., accessed September 14th, 2018.

  5. 5., accessed August 20th, 2018.

  6. 6.

    US-based surveys show that Millennials (young adults born between 1981 and 1997) tend to be more multimodal and to rely more on mobile and digital services for transport-related decisions (TRB 2013), which helps to explain the greater adoption of ride-hailing among younger people.

  7. 7.

    Depending on the station, the closing time of the Santiago subway system is between 11:20 and 11:50 p.m.

  8. 8., accessed August 24th, 2018.

  9. 9.

    Ways to overcome barriers for ride-hailing use among senior citizens are analysed in Vivoda et al. (2018) and Shirgaokar (2018).

  10. 10.

    Between 2015 and 2018, 103 Uber drivers were accused of sexual assault or abuse in the United States, see, accessed July 9th, 2019.

  11. 11.

    Millennials: young adults born between 1981 and 1997.

  12. 12.

    Generation X: middle-aged adults born between 1965 and 1980.

  13. 13.

    Other subsidies include discounted ride-hailing trips for people with disabilities.

  14. 14.,, accessed July 9th, 2019.

  15. 15.

    Miami, Boston, Seattle, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, New York, Chicago and Washington.

  16. 16.

    For the studies with surveys from the US, the sampling method of each work is discussed in Rodier (2018).

  17. 17.

    Delay is defined as the difference between congested and free-flow travel time.

  18. 18., accessed August 25th, 2018.

  19. 19.

    In January 2017, the taxi app Easy launched the Easy Economy option, which charges taxi users 85% of the price of a normal taxi ride.

  20. 20., in Spanish, accessed August 26th, 2018.

  21. 21.

    Another source of efficiency of ride-hailing is the reduced need for parking compared with that associated with private car ownership by the travellers, as discussed in “Ride-hailing and public policy: the issue of regulation” section.

  22. 22.

    A fuller list of services and providers in the short history of ride-hailing has been assembled by Shaheen (2018).

  23. 23., accessed August 25th, 2018.

  24. 24.

    It has also been argued that to grow, ride-hailing companies are willing to subsidise prices and therefore depend on investment funding. A detailed discussion of ride-hailing business models is outside the scope of this paper.

  25. 25.

    See, e.g., TRB (2016), Shaheen et al. (2016) and Beer et al. (2017) for the United States, de Souza Silva et al. (2018) for Brazil, Ilavarasan et al. (2018) for India, and Goletz and Bahamonde-Birke (2019) for a comparison between Mexico City, San Francisco and Paris.


  1. Agarwal, S., Mani, D., Telang, R.: The Impact of Ridesharing Services on Congestion: Evidence from Indian Cities. Working paper (2019). Available at SSRN Accessed 2 Sept 2019

  2. Alemi, F., Circella, G., Handy, S., Mokhtarian, P.: What influences travelers to use Uber? Exploring the factors affecting the adoption of on-demand ride services in California. Travel Behav. Soc. 13, 88–104 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alemi, F., Circella, G., Mokhtarian, P., Handy, S.: What drives the use of ridehailing in California? Ordered probit models of the usage frequency of Uber and Lyft. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 102, 233–248 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alonso-Mora, J., Samaranayake, S., Wallar, A., Frazzoli, E., Rus, D.: On-demand high-capacity ride-sharing via dynamic trip-vehicle assignment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114(3), 462–467 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Atkinson-Palombo, C., Varone, L., Garrick, N.W.: Understanding the surprising and oversized use of ridesourcing services in poor neighborhoods in New York City. Transp. Res. Rec. 1, 2 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Avital, M., Andersson, M., Nickerson, J., Sundararajan, A., Van Alstyne, M., Verhoeven, D.: The collaborative economy: a disruptive innovation or much ado about nothing? In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Information Systems; ICIS 2014, Association for Information Systems. AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), Atlanta, GA, pp. 1–7 (2014)

  7. Beer, R., Brakewood, C., Rahman, S., Viscardi, J.: Qualitative analysis of ride-hailing regulations in major American cities. Transp. Res. Rec. 2650, 84–91 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bennett, H., Zahler, A.: Comparación de los Factores Tecnología y Regulación en los Costos de los Choferes De Taxi y Plataformas Digitales Tipo Uber (2018)

  9. Bösch, P.M., Becker, F., Becker, H., Axhausen, K.W.: Cost-based analysis of autonomous mobility services. Transp. Policy 64, 76–91 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brazil, N., Kirk, D.S.: Uber and metropolitan traffic fatalities in the United States. Am. J. Epidemiol. 184(3), 192–198 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown, A.: Ridehail Revolution: Ridehail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles. Ph.D. thesis, University of California Los Angeles (2018)

  12. Brown, A.: Redefining car access. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 85(2), 83–95 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Castillo, J.C., Knoepfle, D., Weyl, E.G.: Surge pricing solves the wild goose chase. Working Paper (2018)

  14. Chen, X., Zahiri, M., Zhang, S.: Understanding ridesplitting behavior of on-demand ride services: an ensemble learning approach. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 76, 51–70 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. CIPPEC: Urban transport in the sharing economy era: collaborative cities. Report, Centro de Implementación de Políticas Públicas para la Equidad y el Crecimiento (CIPPEC), Argentina (2018)

  16. Circella, G., Alemi, F., Tiedeman, K., Handy, S., Mokhtarian, P.: The adoption of shared mobility in California and its relationship with other components of travel behavior report. National Center for Sustainable Transportation, Davis (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Clewlow, R.R., Mishra, G.S.: Disruptive transportation: the adoption, utilization, and impacts of ride-hailing in the United States. Research Report—UCD-ITS-RR-17-07, UC Davis Institute of Transportation (2017)

  18. CNP: Tecnologías disruptivas: regulación de plataformas digitales (in Spanish). Chapter 3: transport platforms. National Productivity Commission, Chile, April 2018 (2018)

  19. Contreras, S.D., Paz, A.: The effects of ride-hailing companies on the taxicab industry in Las Vegas, Nevada. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 115, 63–70 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Conway, W.M., Salon, D., King, A.D.: Trends in taxi use and the advent of ridehailing, 1995–2017: evidence from the US National Household Travel Survey. Urban Sci. (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cramer, J., Krueger, A.B.: Disruptive change in the taxi business: the case of Uber. NBER Working Paper 22083 (2016)

  22. Davis, D.E.: Governmental capacity and the smart mobility transition. In: Marsden, G., Reardon, L. (eds.) Governance of the Smart Mobility Transition, pp. 105–122. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley (2018)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Dawes, M.: Perspectives on the ridesourcing revolution: surveying individual attitudes toward Uber and Lyft to inform urban transportation policymaking. Master in City Planning Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2016)

  24. de Souza Silva, L.A., de Andrade, M.O., Alves Maia, M.L.: How does the ride-hailing systems demand affect individual transport regulation? Res. Transp. Econ. 69, 600–606 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dias, F.F., Lavieri, P.S., Garikapati, V.M., Astroza, S., Pendyala, R.M., Bhat, C.R.: A behavioral choice model of the use of car-sharing and ride-sourcing services. Transportation 44(6), 1307–1323 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dills, A.K., Mulholland, S.E.: Ride-sharing, fatal crashes, and crime. South. Econ. J. 84(4), 965–991 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Docherty, I., Marsden, G., Anable, J.: The governance of smart mobility. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 115, 114–125 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Erhardt, G.D., Roy, S., Cooper, D., Sana, B., Chen, M., Castiglione, J.: Do transportation network companies decrease or increase congestion? Sci. Adv. 5(5), eaau2670 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Feigon, S., Murphy, C.: Broadening understanding of the interplay among public transit, shared mobility, and personal automobiles. TCRP Research Report 195, Transit Cooperative Research Program, National Academy of Sciences (2018)

  30. Flores, O., Rayle, L.: How ridesourcing went from ‘Rogue’ to mainstream in San Francisco. Transforming Urban Transport—The Role of Political Leadership (TUT-POL), Harvard University Graduate School of Design (2016)

  31. Fysikopoulos, A., Anagnostakis, D., Salonitis, K., Chryssolouris, G.: An empirical study of the energy consumption in automotive assembly. Procedia CIRP 3, 477–482 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Gehrke, S.R., Felix, A., Reardon, T.: Fare choices, a survey of ride-hailing passengers in metro Boston. Report #1, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), Boston (2018)

  33. Gehrke, S.R., Felix, A., Reardon, T.G.: Substitution of ride-hailing services for more sustainable travel options in the Greater Boston region. Transp. Res. Rec. 2673(1), 438–446 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Goletz, M., Bahamonde-Birke, F.: The ride-sourcing industry: status-quo and outlook. In: World Conference on Transport Research—WCTR, Mumbai, India, 26–31 May 2019 (2019)

  35. Graehler, M., Mucci, R.A., Erhardt, G.D.: Understanding the recent transit ridership decline in major US cities: service cuts or emerging modes? In: 98th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board (TRB), Washington D.C. (2019)

  36. Grahn, R., Harper, C.D., Hendrickson, C., Qian, Z., Matthews, H.S.: Socioeconomic and usage characteristics of transportation network company (TNC) riders. Transportation 1, 2 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Greenwood, B., Wattal, S.: Show me the way to go home: an empirical investigation of ride sharing and alcohol related motor vehicle homicides. Fox School of Business Research Paper No. 15-054 (2015)

  38. Hall, J.D., Palsson, C., Price, J.: Is Uber a substitute or complement for public transit? J. Urban Econ. 108, 36–50 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Henao, A.: Impacts of ridesourcing—LYFT and UBER—on transportation including VMT, Mode replacement, parking and Travel Behavior. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Colorado (2017)

  40. Henao, A., Marshall, W.: A framework for understanding the impacts of ridesourcing on transportation. In: Meyer, G., Shaheen, S. (eds.) Disrupting Mobility. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Henao, A., Marshall, W.E.: The impact of ride-hailing on vehicle miles traveled. Transportation 1, 2 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Henao, A., Marshall, W.E.: The impact of ride-hailing on parking (and viceversa). J. Transp. Land Use 12(1), 127–147 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Iacobucci, J., Hovenkotter, K., Anbinder, J.: Transit systems and the impacts of shared mobility. In: Meyer, G., Shaheen, S. (eds.) Disrupting Mobility: Impacts of Sharing Economy and Innovative Transportation on Cities, pp. 65–76. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Ilavarasan, P.V., Verma, R.K., Kar, A.K.: Sharing economy platforms as enablers of urban transport in the global south: case of digital taxi aggregators in New Delhi, India. In: CIPPEC (ed.) Urban Transport in the Sharing Economy Era: Collaborative Cities. CIPPEC, Buenos Aires (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Krueger, R., Rashidi, T.H., Rose, J.M.: Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 69, 343–355 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lagos, V., Muñoz, A., Zulehner, C.: Entry of Uber, alcohol-related traffic accidents and differences by gender: empirical evidence from Chile. Télécom ParisTech, Mimeo (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Lewis, E.O.C., MacKenzie, D.: UberHOP in seattle. Transp. Res. Rec. 2650, 101–111 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Li, Z., Hong, Y., Zhang, Z.: An empirical analysis of on-demand ride sharing and traffic congestion. In: Thirty Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Dublin (2016)

  49. Li, W., Pu, Z., Li, Y., Ban, X.: Characterization of ridesplitting based on observed data: a case study of Chengdu, China. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 100, 330–353 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Matyas, M., Kamargianni, M.: The potential of mobility as a service bundles as a mobility management tool. Transportation (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Moody, J., Middleton, S., Zhao, J.: Rider-to-rider discriminatory attitudes and ridesharing behavior. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 62, 258–273 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ngo, V.: Transportation network companies and the ridesourcing industry: a review of impacts and emerging regulatory frameworks for Uber. Report prepared for the City of Vancouver (2015)

  53. Nie, Y.: How can the taxi industry survive the tide of ridesourcing? Evidence from Shenzhen, China. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 79, 242–256 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. OECD/ITF: Urban Mobility System Upgrade: How Shared Self-driving Cars Could Change City Traffic. International Transport Forum, Paris (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  55. OECD/ITF: App-Based Ride and Taxi Services: Principles for Regulation. Corporate Partnership Board Report, International Transport Forum (2016)

  56. OECD/ITF: Transition to Shared Mobility: How Large Cities Can Deliver Inclusive Transport Services. Corporate Partnership Board Report, International Transport Forum (2017)

  57. Parrott, J.A., Reich, M.: An earnings standard for New York City’s app-based drivers: economic analysis and policy assessment. Report for the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, July 2018 (2018)

  58. Rayle, L., Dai, D., Chan, N., Cervero, R., Shaheen, S.: Just a better taxi? A survey-based comparison of taxis, transit, and ridesourcing services in San Francisco. Transp. Policy 45, 168–178 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Rizk, N., Salem, N., Weheba, N.: A gendered analysis of ridesharing: perspectives from Cairo, Egypt. In: CIPPEC (ed.) Urban Transport in the Sharing Economy Era: Collaborative Cities. CIPPEC, Buenos Aires (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Rodier, C.: The effects of ride hailing services on travel and associated greenhouse gas emissions. White Paper, National Center for Sustainable Transportation, United States (2018)

  61. Sarriera, J.M., Álvarez, G.E., Blynn, K., Alesbury, A., Scully, T., Zhao, J.: To share or not to share: investigating the social aspects of dynamic ridesharing. Transp. Res. Rec. 2605(1), 109–117 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Schaller, B.: Empty Seats, Full Streets: Fixing Manhattan’s Traffic Problem. Report, Schaller Consulting (2017a)

  63. Schaller, B.: Unsustainable? The Growth of App-Based Ride Services and Traffic, Travel and the Future of New York City. Report, Schaller Consulting (2017b)

  64. Schaller, B.: The New Automobility: Lyft, Uber and the Future of American Cities. Report, Schaller Consulting (2018)

  65. Schwieterman, J., Smith, C.S.: Sharing the ride: a paired-trip analysis of UberPool and Chicago transit authority services in Chicago, Illinois. Res. Transp. Econ. 71, 9–16 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. SFCTA: TNCs Today: A Profile of San Francisco Transportation Network Company Activity. Final Report, San Francisco County Transportation Authority, June 2017 (2017)

  67. Shaheen, S.: Shared Mobility: The Potential of Ridehailing and Pooling. Three Revolutions, pp. 55–76. Island Press, Washington, DC (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Shaheen, S., Cohen, A.: Shared ride services in North America: definitions, impacts, and the future of pooling. Transp. Rev. 39(4), 427–442 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Shaheen, S., Cohen, A., Zohdy, I.: Shared Mobility: Current Practices and Guiding Principles. Report FHWA-HOP-16-022, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (2016)

  70. Shaheen, S., Bell, C., Cohen, A., Yelchuru, B.: Travel Behavior: Shared Mobility and Transportation Equity. Report PL-18-007, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (2017a)

  71. Shaheen, S., Cohen, A., Yelchuru, B., Sarkhili, S.: Mobility on Demand Operational Concept Report. Final Report—FHWA-JPO-18-611, U.S. Department of Transportation, September 2017 (2017b)

  72. Shirgaokar, M.: Expanding seniors’ mobility through phone apps: potential responses from the private and public sectors. J. Plan. Educ. Res. (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Sikder, S.: Who uses ride-hailing services in the United States? Transp. Res. Rec. (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Steg, L.: Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 39(2), 147–162 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Stocker, A., Shaheen, S.: Shared Automated Vehicles: Review of Business Models. Discussion Paper No. 2017-09, International Transport Forum (ITF) (2017)

  76. Sullivan, J.L., Burnham, A., Wang, M.: Energy-Consumption and Carbon-Emission Analysis of Vehicle and Component Manufacturing. ANL/ESD/10-6 Report, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory (2010)

  77. Sun, Y., Zhang, L.: Potential of taxi-pooling in reducing vehicle miles traveled in Washington, D.C. In: 97th Annual Meeting Transportation Research Board (TRB), Washington, DC (2018)

  78. Tang, B.-J., Li, X.-Y., Yu, B., Wei, Y.-M.: How app-based ride-hailing services influence travel behavior: an empirical study from China. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Tarabay, R., Abou-Zeid, M.: Modeling the choice to switch from traditional modes to ridesourcing services for social/recreational trips in Lebanon. Transportation (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Tirachini, A.: Plataformas Ridesourcing (tipo Uber y Cabify) en Chile: Impactos en Movilidad y Recomendaciones para su regulación. ISCI Seminar (in Spanish) (2017). Accessed 2 Sept 2019

  81. Tirachini, A., del Río, M.: Ride-hailing in Santiago de Chile: users’ characterisation and effects on travel behaviour. Transp. Policy 82, 46–57 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Tirachini, A., Gomez-Lobo, A.: Does ride-hailing increase or decrease vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT)? A simulation approach for Santiago de Chile. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. TRB: Millennials and mobility: understanding the millennial mindset and new opportunities for transit providers. Transp. Res. Board Rep. (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. TRB: Between Public and Private Mobility: Examining the Rise of Technology-Enabled Transportation Services. Transportation Research Board Special Report 319 (2016)

  85. Truong, L.T., De Gruyter, C., Currie, G., Delbosc, A.: Estimating the trip generation impacts of autonomous vehicles on car travel in Victoria, Australia. Transportation (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Vanderschuren, M., Baufeldt, J.: Ride-sharing: a potential means to increase the quality and availability of motorised trips while discouraging private motor ownership in developing cities? Res. Transp. Econ. (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Vivoda, J.M., Harmon, A.C., Babulal, G.M., Zikmund-Fisher, B.J.: E-hail (rideshare) knowledge, use, reliance, and future expectations among older adults. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 55, 426–434 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Wadud, Z., MacKenzie, D., Leiby, P.: Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 86, 1–18 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Wells, K.J., Attoh, K., Cullen, D.: The Uber Workplace in Washington, D.C. Report, Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor, Georgetown University (2018)

  90. Wenzel, T., Rames, C., Kontou, E., Henao, A.: Travel and energy implications of ridesourcing service in Austin, Texas. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 70, 18–34 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Young, M., Farber, S.: The who, why, and when of Uber and other ride-hailing trips: an examination of a large sample household travel survey. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 119, 383–392 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


Part of this paper was written while the author was August-Wilhelm Scheer Visiting Professor at the Technical University of Munich. Support from CONICYT PIA/BASAL AFB180003 is also acknowledged. The comments from three anonymous reviewers have improved the content and presentation of this paper.

Author information




AT Content planning, Literature Search and Review, Manuscript Writing and Editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro Tirachini.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.



See Table 5.

Table 5 Empirical ride-hailing studies

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tirachini, A. Ride-hailing, travel behaviour and sustainable mobility: an international review. Transportation 47, 2011–2047 (2020).

Download citation


  • Ride-hailing
  • Ridesourcing
  • Transportation network companies (TNC)
  • Shared mobility
  • Sharing economy