{"title":"移动为民:美国共享微型交通项目中的公平要求","authors":"Anne Brown , Amanda Howell","doi":"10.1016/j.jcmr.2024.100020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Shared micromobility services including bikeshare and shared e-scooters have proliferated in the U.S., but barriers continue to limit their use by some travelers. Cities and transportation agencies have attempted to overcome access disparities by establishing equity-oriented policy requirements for shared micromobility programs. Yet no clear picture exists of either their prevalence or specific components. To address this gap, we asked and answered two questions: 1) What equity requirements do shared micromobility programs include? and 2) to what extent are programs monitored and evaluated? We collected policy data for 239 shared micromobility programs across the U.S. We focused on equity requirements across three dimensions: process, implementation, and evaluation. We found that 62% of shared micromobility programs had at least one equity requirement, although fewer than half (46%) included more than one, suggesting potential challenges for travelers facing intersectional barriers. Less than one-third of programs (29%) included process-equity requirements for targeted outreach to marginalized or underserved communities. Implementation requirements included smartphone alternative (36% of programs), cash payment compatibility (33%), reduced rates (32%), multilingual services (26%), adaptive vehicles for users with disabilities (5%), and mandated geographic service areas (30%). Finally, while most programs (83%) required data reporting from private companies, far fewer published public-facing evaluation reports (27%) or specified compliance language related to equity (15%). The language and conditions of requirements varied dramatically across programs. Findings reveal implications for transportation policy, including a need for micromobility programs to focus on access and outcomes during program evaluation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100771,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research","volume":"2 ","pages":"Article 100020"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950105924000111/pdfft?md5=c9b575ec87898ab992ff99847c95934b&pid=1-s2.0-S2950105924000111-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobility for the people: Equity requirements in US shared micromobility programs\",\"authors\":\"Anne Brown , Amanda Howell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcmr.2024.100020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Shared micromobility services including bikeshare and shared e-scooters have proliferated in the U.S., but barriers continue to limit their use by some travelers. Cities and transportation agencies have attempted to overcome access disparities by establishing equity-oriented policy requirements for shared micromobility programs. Yet no clear picture exists of either their prevalence or specific components. To address this gap, we asked and answered two questions: 1) What equity requirements do shared micromobility programs include? and 2) to what extent are programs monitored and evaluated? We collected policy data for 239 shared micromobility programs across the U.S. We focused on equity requirements across three dimensions: process, implementation, and evaluation. We found that 62% of shared micromobility programs had at least one equity requirement, although fewer than half (46%) included more than one, suggesting potential challenges for travelers facing intersectional barriers. Less than one-third of programs (29%) included process-equity requirements for targeted outreach to marginalized or underserved communities. Implementation requirements included smartphone alternative (36% of programs), cash payment compatibility (33%), reduced rates (32%), multilingual services (26%), adaptive vehicles for users with disabilities (5%), and mandated geographic service areas (30%). Finally, while most programs (83%) required data reporting from private companies, far fewer published public-facing evaluation reports (27%) or specified compliance language related to equity (15%). The language and conditions of requirements varied dramatically across programs. Findings reveal implications for transportation policy, including a need for micromobility programs to focus on access and outcomes during program evaluation.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100020\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950105924000111/pdfft?md5=c9b575ec87898ab992ff99847c95934b&pid=1-s2.0-S2950105924000111-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950105924000111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950105924000111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Mobility for the people: Equity requirements in US shared micromobility programs
Shared micromobility services including bikeshare and shared e-scooters have proliferated in the U.S., but barriers continue to limit their use by some travelers. Cities and transportation agencies have attempted to overcome access disparities by establishing equity-oriented policy requirements for shared micromobility programs. Yet no clear picture exists of either their prevalence or specific components. To address this gap, we asked and answered two questions: 1) What equity requirements do shared micromobility programs include? and 2) to what extent are programs monitored and evaluated? We collected policy data for 239 shared micromobility programs across the U.S. We focused on equity requirements across three dimensions: process, implementation, and evaluation. We found that 62% of shared micromobility programs had at least one equity requirement, although fewer than half (46%) included more than one, suggesting potential challenges for travelers facing intersectional barriers. Less than one-third of programs (29%) included process-equity requirements for targeted outreach to marginalized or underserved communities. Implementation requirements included smartphone alternative (36% of programs), cash payment compatibility (33%), reduced rates (32%), multilingual services (26%), adaptive vehicles for users with disabilities (5%), and mandated geographic service areas (30%). Finally, while most programs (83%) required data reporting from private companies, far fewer published public-facing evaluation reports (27%) or specified compliance language related to equity (15%). The language and conditions of requirements varied dramatically across programs. Findings reveal implications for transportation policy, including a need for micromobility programs to focus on access and outcomes during program evaluation.