How to Save Bike-Sharing: An Evidence-Based Survival Toolkit for Policy-Makers and Mobility Providers

Alexandros Nikitas

100 citations0/0 files storedSustainability

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Urban Transport and Accessibility Transportation Planning and Optimization Transportation and Mobility Innovations

Abstract

A new mobility ethos is needed for cities looking to overcome the problems that have been accumulated for decades by a transport paradigm that prioritises automobiles over people. Bike-sharing, a measure promoting voluntary travel behaviour change, could be part of a refined toolbox that will help in forging this new ethos. Despite a rapid emergence during the last handful of years, as evidenced by 1956 operational local schemes and approximately 15,254,400 self-service public use bicycles across the world, bike-sharing has been attracting negative attention lately. Tens of schemes have closed down, deemed as financial or operational failures, stigmatising bike-sharing’s brand and putting the future of the concept itself in jeopardy. However, discounting bike-sharing as flawed may not be fair or accurate. This paper identifies a formula of success for bike-sharing operations based on a state-of-the-art case study analysis, which is supported by primary data evidence from two survey-based studies in Sweden and Greece. This paper suggests that residents in cities hosting or looking to host bike-sharing schemes are usually very supportive of them but not always likely to use them. More importantly, this paper delivers some key policy and business lessons that form a survival guide for effectively introducing and running public bicycle schemes. These lessons include, among others, the need for: tailoring the system design and expansion strategy according to the host city needs, city-operator and commercial partner synergies, more bike-friendly infrastructure and legislation, pro-active cultural engagement, anti-abuse measures, enhanced fleet management and realistic profit expectations.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 100 citations exist upstream.

References

2007The sustainable mobility paradigm 2010Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia 2009Bike-sharing: History, Impacts, Models of Provision, and Future 2015Bikeshare: A Review of Recent Literature 2015Health impact assessment of active transportation: A systematic review 2011The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study 2018Environmental benefits of bike sharing: A big data-based analysis 2014How land-use and urban form impact bicycle flows: evidence from the bicycle-sharing system (BIXI) in Montreal

Cited by

2020Influence of service quality in sharing economy: Understanding customers’ continuance intention of bicycle sharing 2021Exploring the relationship between bike-sharing and public transport in Poznań, Poland 2019Monitoring the first dockless bike sharing system in Greece: Understanding user perceptions, usage patterns and adoption barriers 2022Evaluating the public acceptance of sustainable mobility interventions responding to Covid-19: The case of the Great Walk of Athens and the importance of citizen engagement

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.