Traveler preference analysis between dockless bike-sharing and electric bike-sharing in last-mile metro context: Insights from Nanjing’s urban and suburban areas

IF 5.1 2区 工程技术 Q1 TRANSPORTATION Travel Behaviour and Society Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1016/j.tbs.2025.100999
Jiang Ning , Jingxu Chen , Xuewu Chen , Xinlian Yu
{"title":"Traveler preference analysis between dockless bike-sharing and electric bike-sharing in last-mile metro context: Insights from Nanjing’s urban and suburban areas","authors":"Jiang Ning ,&nbsp;Jingxu Chen ,&nbsp;Xuewu Chen ,&nbsp;Xinlian Yu","doi":"10.1016/j.tbs.2025.100999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Dockless electric bike-sharing (DEBS), an emerging type of shared micromobility, has the potential to reshape the feeder mobility landscape that dockless bike-sharing (DBS) established in the last-mile metro context. Understanding traveler preferences between DEBS and DBS is crucial for the sustainable development of the bike-sharing feeder markets. This study sets up a context-dependent stated choice experiment to explore the critical factors that influence travelers’ choice between two bike-sharing feeder modes. It also examines whether these factors have different effects on traveler preferences in urban and suburban areas. Based on data from 402 urban respondents and 408 suburban respondents in Nanjing, China, we estimate random parameters logit models for urban and suburban areas, respectively, and find all main attributes are significant but exhibit variations across two geographical areas. Results indicate that riding distance is a critical factor in the choice between the two bike-sharing feeder modes: travelers prefer to use DBS at 800–1,500 m, while DEBS is favored at 2,500–4,000 m, especially in suburban areas. Although cost and access time also impact the probability of choosing DBS and DEBS, this influence is weaker than riding distance, as these factors do not significantly alter the “dominant riding distance” for either of the two bike-sharing feeder modes. Additionally, suburban travelers traveling for commuting purposes or with private electric bike experience are more likely to choose DEBS than DBS. The findings from this study can assist policymakers in devising targeted policy measures to promote the sustainable development of the two bike-sharing feeder modes in distinct geographical areas.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51534,"journal":{"name":"Travel Behaviour and Society","volume":"40 ","pages":"Article 100999"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Travel Behaviour and Society","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214367X25000171","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dockless electric bike-sharing (DEBS), an emerging type of shared micromobility, has the potential to reshape the feeder mobility landscape that dockless bike-sharing (DBS) established in the last-mile metro context. Understanding traveler preferences between DEBS and DBS is crucial for the sustainable development of the bike-sharing feeder markets. This study sets up a context-dependent stated choice experiment to explore the critical factors that influence travelers’ choice between two bike-sharing feeder modes. It also examines whether these factors have different effects on traveler preferences in urban and suburban areas. Based on data from 402 urban respondents and 408 suburban respondents in Nanjing, China, we estimate random parameters logit models for urban and suburban areas, respectively, and find all main attributes are significant but exhibit variations across two geographical areas. Results indicate that riding distance is a critical factor in the choice between the two bike-sharing feeder modes: travelers prefer to use DBS at 800–1,500 m, while DEBS is favored at 2,500–4,000 m, especially in suburban areas. Although cost and access time also impact the probability of choosing DBS and DEBS, this influence is weaker than riding distance, as these factors do not significantly alter the “dominant riding distance” for either of the two bike-sharing feeder modes. Additionally, suburban travelers traveling for commuting purposes or with private electric bike experience are more likely to choose DEBS than DBS. The findings from this study can assist policymakers in devising targeted policy measures to promote the sustainable development of the two bike-sharing feeder modes in distinct geographical areas.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Travel Behaviour and Society is an interdisciplinary journal publishing high-quality original papers which report leading edge research in theories, methodologies and applications concerning transportation issues and challenges which involve the social and spatial dimensions. In particular, it provides a discussion forum for major research in travel behaviour, transportation infrastructure, transportation and environmental issues, mobility and social sustainability, transportation geographic information systems (TGIS), transportation and quality of life, transportation data collection and analysis, etc.
期刊最新文献
Car ownership through the parenting journey and beyond Built environment effects on dockless bikesharing–metro integration: A spatial nonlinear analysis Traffic crash risk among on-demand food delivery riders in Danang city, Vietnam: Key contributing factors Changes in the predictors of transit ridership in post-COVID-19 US metropolitan areas Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1