Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bike lanes and ability to summon an autonomous scooter can increase willingness to use micromobility

  • Published:
Transportation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates factors affecting people’s preferences for shared micromobility when autonomous technology is available. Using combined stated and revealed preference data from an online choice experiment, focusing on vehicle availability, bike infrastructure, and first and last mile connection to transit, this study is one of the first explorations on the intersection of shared micromobility and autonomous technology. Results from a mixed logit mode choice model suggest that access and drop off walking time have higher disutility than micromobility riding time, and autonomous technology that allows riders to summon a micromobility vehicle has the potential to reduce that disutility. Model results also confirm that whether people choose to use micromobility modes depends strongly on bike lane coverage of the trip they are making. While there are still many uncertainties and concerns about autonomous technology, this study can serve as the foundation for analyzing autonomous shared micromobility demand and providing broader implications for service providers, transportation planners, and policy makers to define business models, design and implement infrastructure, and regulate system operations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Datasets used in this study can be accessed by contacting the corresponding author.

References

  • Belgiawan, P.F., Dubernet, I., Schmid, B., Axhausen, K.: Context-dependent models (CRRM, MuRRM, PRRM, RAM) versus a context-free model (MNL) in transportation studies: a comprehensive comparisons for Swiss and German SP and RP data sets. Transportmetrica A: Transp. Sci. 15(2), 1487–1521 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/23249935.2019.1612968

  • Gkartzonikas, C., Gkritza, K.: What have we learned? A review of stated preference and choice studies on autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 98, 323–337 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.12.003

  • Greenblatt, J.B., Shaheen, S.: Automated vehicles, on-demand mobility, and environmental impacts. Curr. Sustain. Renew. Energy Rep. 2(3), 74–81 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-015-0038-5

  • Hollingsworth, J., Copeland, B., Johnson, J.X.: Are e-scooters polluters? The environmental impacts of shared dockless electric scooters. Environ. Res. Lett. 14(8), (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab2da8

  • Howard, D., Dai, D.: Public perceptions of self-driving cars: the case of Berkeley, California. (2014). https://trid.trb.org/view/1289421 (Accessed: 11 July 2022)

  • Jabbari, P., Auld, J., MacKenzie, D.: How do perceptions of safety and car ownership importance affect autonomous vehicle adoption? Travel Behav. Soc. 28, 128–140 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2022.02.002

  • Kondor, D., Zhang, X., Meghjani, M., Santi,P., Zhao, J., Ratti, C: Estimating the potential for shared autonomous scooters. IEEE Transact. Intell. Transp. Syst. 23(5), 4651–4662 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2020.3047141

  • Krueger, R., Rashidi, T.H., Rose, J.M.: Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 69, 343–355 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2016.06.015

  • Lazarus, J., Pourquier, J.C., Feng, F., Hammel, H., Shaheen, S.: Micromobility evolution and expansion: understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete—a case study of San Francisco. J. Transp. Geogr. 84 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102620

  • Litman, T.: Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions: implications for transport planning. (2022). https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf

  • Luo, H., Kou, Z., Zhao, F., Cai, H.: Comparative life cycle assessment of station-based and dock-less bike sharing systems. Resour. Conser. Recycl. 146, 180–189 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.003

  • Marsden, G., Docherty, I., Dowling, R.: Parking futures: curbside management in the era of new mobility services in British and Australian cities. Land. Use Policy. 91, 104012 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.031 

  • McQueen, M., Abou-Zeid, G., MacArthur, J., Clifton, K. : Transportation transformation: is micromobility making a macro impact on sustainability? J. Plan. Lit. 36(1), 46–61 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412220972696 

  • NABS: 2nd Annual shared micromobility state of the industry report. (2022). https://nabsa.net/about/industry/

  • NACTO: Shared Micromobility in the U.S.: 2019. (2020). https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020bikesharesnapshot.pdf

  • Nazari, F., Noruzoliaee, M., Mohammadian, A.: Shared versus private mobility: modeling public interest in autonomous vehicles accounting for latent attitudes. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 97 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.11.005

  • Noland, R.B., Smart, M.J., Guo, Z.: Bikeshare trip generation in New York City. Transp. Res. Part A 94, 164–181 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.08.030

  • Peters, L., MacKenzie, D.: The death and rebirth of bikesharing in Seattle: implications for policy and system design. Transp. Res. Part. A Policy Pract. 130(C), 208–226 (2019)

  • Reck, D.J., Martin, H., Axhausen, K.W.: Mode choice, substitution patterns and environmental impacts of shared and personal micro-mobility. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 102 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.103134

  • Sanchez, N.C., Martinez, I., Pastor, L.A., Larson, K.: On the simulation of shared autonomous micro-mobility. Commun. Transp. Res. 2 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commtr.2022.100065

  • Schmid, B., Jokubauskaite, S., Aschauer, F., Peer, S., Hössinger, R., Gerike, R., Jara-Diaz, S.R., Axhausen, K.W.: A pooled RP/SP mode, route and destination choice model to investigate mode and user-type effects in the value of travel time savings. Transp. Res. Part. A Policy Pract. 124, 262–294 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.03.001

  • Schmid, B., Molloy, J., Peer, S., Jokubauskaite, S., Aschauer, F., Hössinger, R., Gerike, R., Jara-Diaz, S.R., Axhausen, K.W.: The value of travel time savings and the value of leisure in Zurich: Estimation, decomposition and policy implications. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 150, 186–215 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.06.015

  • Shen, Y., Zhang, X., Zhao, J.: Understanding the usage of dockless bike sharing in Singapore. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 12(9), 686–700 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2018.1429696

  • Walker, J. L., Wang, Y., Thorhauge, M., Ben-Akiva, M.: D-efficient or deficient? A robustness analysis of stated choice experimental designs. Theory Decis. 84, 215–238 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-017-9647-3

  • Wang, H., Noland, R.B.: Bikeshare and subway ridership changes during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York city. Transp. Policy. 106, 262–270 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRANPOL.2021.04.004

  • Yap, M., Homem de Almeida Correia, G., van Arem, B.: Preferences of travellers for using automated vehicles as last mile public transport of multimodal train trips. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 94, 1–16. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.09.003

  • Zhu, R., Zhang, X., Kondor, D., Santi, P., Ratti, C.: Understanding spatio-temporal heterogeneity of bike-sharing and scooter-sharing mobility. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 81 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2020.101483

  • Zou, T., Aemmer, Z., MacKenzie, D., Laberteaux, K.: A Framework for estimating commute accessibility and adoption of ridehailing services under functional improvements from vehicle automation. J. Transp. Geogr. 102 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103357

Download references

Funding

This paper was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy under Award # DE-EE0009234.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urban Design and Planning, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Tianqi Zou

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Don MacKenzie

Authors
  1. Tianqi Zou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Don MacKenzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study concept and design: T. Zou, D. MacKenzie; data collection: T. Zou; analysis and interpretation of results: T. Zou, D. MacKenzie; draft manuscript preparation: T. Zou. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tianqi Zou.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This study obtained approval from the University of Washington Institutional Review Boards (IRB).

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zou, T., MacKenzie, D. Bike lanes and ability to summon an autonomous scooter can increase willingness to use micromobility. Transportation (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10478-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10478-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation