The Heterogeneous Effects of P2P Ride-Hailing on Traffic: Evidence from Uber's Entry in California

Suvrat S. Dhanorkar, Gordon Burtch
{"title":"The Heterogeneous Effects of P2P Ride-Hailing on Traffic: Evidence from Uber's Entry in California","authors":"Suvrat S. Dhanorkar, Gordon Burtch","doi":"10.1287/trsc.2021.1077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite their promise, popularity, and rapid growth, the transit implications of ride-hailing platforms (e.g., Uber, Lyft) are not altogether clear. On the one hand, ride-hailing services can provide pooling (i.e., traffic reductions) advantages by efficiently matching customer demand (i.e., trips) with resources (i.e., cars) or by facilitating car-sharing. On the other hand, ride-hailing may also induce extra travel because of increased convenience and travel mode substitution, which may create crowding (i.e., traffic increases). We seek to reconcile these divergent perspectives here, exploring the heterogeneous determinants of ride-hailing’s effects. Taking advantage of Uber’s staggered entry into various geographic markets in California, we execute a regression-based difference-in-differences analysis to estimate the impact of ride-hailing services on traffic volumes. Using monthly micro data from more than 9,000 vehicle detector station units deployed across California, we show that Uber’s effect (either pooling or crowding) on traffic depends on various contextual factors. We find some evidence of pooling effects on weekdays; however, Uber’s entry leads to significant crowding effects on weekends. Furthermore, the crowding effect is amplified on interior roads and in areas characterized by high population density. Although ride-hailing seems to have a substitution effect on public transportation, we find ride-hailing services may have a complementary effect for carpooling users. Finally, we show that premium ride-hailing services (e.g., Uber Black) almost exclusively lead to a crowding effect. We conduct a battery of robustness tests (e.g., propensity score matching, alternative treatment approaches, placebo tests) to ensure the consistency of our findings.","PeriodicalId":23247,"journal":{"name":"Transp. Sci.","volume":"22 1","pages":"750-774"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transp. Sci.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2021.1077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Despite their promise, popularity, and rapid growth, the transit implications of ride-hailing platforms (e.g., Uber, Lyft) are not altogether clear. On the one hand, ride-hailing services can provide pooling (i.e., traffic reductions) advantages by efficiently matching customer demand (i.e., trips) with resources (i.e., cars) or by facilitating car-sharing. On the other hand, ride-hailing may also induce extra travel because of increased convenience and travel mode substitution, which may create crowding (i.e., traffic increases). We seek to reconcile these divergent perspectives here, exploring the heterogeneous determinants of ride-hailing’s effects. Taking advantage of Uber’s staggered entry into various geographic markets in California, we execute a regression-based difference-in-differences analysis to estimate the impact of ride-hailing services on traffic volumes. Using monthly micro data from more than 9,000 vehicle detector station units deployed across California, we show that Uber’s effect (either pooling or crowding) on traffic depends on various contextual factors. We find some evidence of pooling effects on weekdays; however, Uber’s entry leads to significant crowding effects on weekends. Furthermore, the crowding effect is amplified on interior roads and in areas characterized by high population density. Although ride-hailing seems to have a substitution effect on public transportation, we find ride-hailing services may have a complementary effect for carpooling users. Finally, we show that premium ride-hailing services (e.g., Uber Black) almost exclusively lead to a crowding effect. We conduct a battery of robustness tests (e.g., propensity score matching, alternative treatment approaches, placebo tests) to ensure the consistency of our findings.
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
P2P网约车对交通的异质性影响:来自Uber进入加州的证据
尽管网约车平台(如Uber、Lyft)前景光明、受欢迎程度高、增长迅速,但它们对交通运输的影响并不完全清楚。一方面,网约车服务可以通过有效地将客户需求(即出行)与资源(即汽车)匹配,或通过促进汽车共享,提供拼车(即交通减少)的优势。另一方面,网约车也可能因为增加了便利性和出行方式的替代而导致额外的出行,这可能会造成拥挤(即交通量增加)。我们试图在这里调和这些不同的观点,探索网约车影响的异质决定因素。利用优步在加州不同地域市场的交错进入,我们执行了基于回归的差异中差异分析,以估计乘车服务对交通量的影响。利用部署在加州各地的9000多个车辆检测站的月度微观数据,我们发现优步对交通的影响(无论是拼车还是拥挤)取决于各种背景因素。我们在工作日发现了一些汇集效应的证据;然而,优步的进入在周末导致了严重的拥挤效应。此外,在内陆道路和人口密度高的地区,拥挤效应被放大。虽然网约车似乎对公共交通具有替代效应,但我们发现网约车服务对拼车用户可能具有互补效应。最后,我们表明,优质的叫车服务(例如Uber Black)几乎只会导致拥挤效应。我们进行了一系列稳健性测试(例如,倾向评分匹配,替代治疗方法,安慰剂测试),以确保我们的发现的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effects of Air Quality on Housing Location: A Predictive Dynamic Continuum User-Optimal Approach Transportation in the Sharing Economy Scheduling Vehicles with Spatial Conflicts Differentiated Pricing of Shared Mobility Systems Considering Network Effects Using COVID-19 Data on Vaccine Shipments and Wastage to Inform Modeling and Decision-Making
×
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