IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jotrge/v89y2020ics0966692320309510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride

Author

Listed:
  • Laa, Barbara
  • Leth, Ulrich

Abstract

In many cities around the world, electric (e-)scooters have emerged as a new means of transportation. They are often advertised as supporting modal shift towards more sustainable transportation and as a tool for enabling more equity in mobility. However, the environmental impact depends on how they are used and what kinds of trips they replace. Integration of e-scooters into urban transport systems also implicates discussions on fair road space allocation. In our study, we assess the socio-economic profiles and usage patterns of e-scooter users in Vienna, Austria. We differentiate between two basic groups of e-scooter users (renters and owners) and apply two different methods. Firstly, based on an online survey, we examine the age, gender and education of e-scooter users and we look into which kinds of trips (commuting, shopping or leisure) and which other means of transportation are replaced by e-scooter trips. Secondly, we analyse data from field observations at cycle paths in Vienna in order to determine the share of e-scooter riders and their gender distribution. We find that e-scooter users are more likely to be young, male, highly educated and residents of Vienna. According to the survey, there are considerable differences in usage between owners of private scooters and users of sharing schemes. Whereas in both groups, e-scooter trips mostly replace walking and public transport as a mode, e-scooter owners also show a considerable mode-shift from private car trips. These results implicate that e-scooter riders are additional users of cycling infrastructure. This puts further pressure on the current allocation of road space, which provides little space for active modes of transport. We conclude that city policies should address this competitive relationship adequately by allocating more space to safe and convenient cycling infrastructure and traffic-calmed zones. This could not only help ease the current challenges due to e-scooters but also provide better conditions for walking and cycling and thereby at the same time contribute to a more sustainable and equitable urban transport system.

Suggested Citation

  • Laa, Barbara & Leth, Ulrich, 2020. "Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:89:y:2020:i:c:s0966692320309510
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692320309510
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102874?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simma, A. & Axhausen, K. W., 2001. "Structures of commitment in mode use: a comparison of Switzerland, Germany and Great Britain," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 279-288, October.
    2. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam, 2019. "Shared Micromoblity Policy Toolkit: Docked and Dockless Bike and Scooter Sharing," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt00k897b5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    3. Owain James & J I Swiderski & John Hicks & Denis Teoman & Ralph Buehler, 2019. "Pedestrians and E-Scooters: An Initial Look at E-Scooter Parking and Perceptions by Riders and Non-Riders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Rachel Aldred & Bridget Elliott & James Woodcock & Anna Goodman, 2017. "Cycling provision separated from motor traffic: a systematic review exploring whether stated preferences vary by gender and age," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 29-55, January.
    5. Jurgis Zagorskas & Marija Burinskienė, 2019. "Challenges Caused by Increased Use of E-Powered Personal Mobility Vehicles in European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Docherty, Iain & Marsden, Greg & Anable, Jillian, 2018. "The governance of smart mobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 114-125.
    7. Geoffrey Rose, 2012. "E-bikes and urban transportation: emerging issues and unresolved questions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 81-96, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jurgis Zagorskas & Marija Burinskienė, 2019. "Challenges Caused by Increased Use of E-Powered Personal Mobility Vehicles in European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Gabriel Dias & Elisabete Arsenio & Paulo Ribeiro, 2021. "The Role of Shared E-Scooter Systems in Urban Sustainability and Resilience during the Covid-19 Mobility Restrictions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Cloud, Cannon & Heß, Simon & Kasinger, Johannes, 2023. "Shared e-scooter services and road safety: Evidence from six European countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    4. Samadzad, Mahdi & Nosratzadeh, Hossein & Karami, Hossein & Karami, Ali, 2023. "What are the factors affecting the adoption and use of electric scooter sharing systems from the end user's perspective?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 70-82.
    5. Fei-Hui Huang, 2021. "User Behavioral Intentions toward a Scooter-Sharing Service: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    6. Alberica Domitilla Bozzi & Anne Aguilera, 2021. "Shared E-Scooters: A Review of Uses, Health and Environmental Impacts, and Policy Implications of a New Micro-Mobility Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Maximilian Heumann & Tobias Kraschewski & Tim Brauner & Lukas Tilch & Michael H. Breitner, 2021. "A Spatiotemporal Study and Location-Specific Trip Pattern Categorization of Shared E-Scooter Usage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-24, November.
    8. Ziwen Ling & Christopher R. Cherry & John H. MacArthur & Jonathan X. Weinert, 2017. "Differences of Cycling Experiences and Perceptions between E-Bike and Bicycle Users in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, September.
    9. Ruhrort, Lisa, 2020. "Reassessing the Role of Shared Mobility Services in a Transport Transition: Can They Contribute the Rise of an Alternative Socio-Technical Regime of Mobility?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(19), pages 1-1.
    10. Synek, Stefan & Koenigstorfer, Joerg, 2018. "Exploring adoption determinants of tax-subsidized company-leasing bicycles from the perspective of German employers and employees," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 238-260.
    11. Cao, Zhejing & Zhang, Xiaohu & Chua, Kelman & Yu, Honghai & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "E-scooter sharing to serve short-distance transit trips: A Singapore case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 177-196.
    12. Scheiner, Joachim & Holz-Rau, Christian, 2013. "A comprehensive study of life course, cohort, and period effects on changes in travel mode use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 167-181.
    13. Benjamin Maas, 2022. "Literature Review of Mobility as a Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-28, July.
    14. Alexandra König & Laura Gebhardt & Kerstin Stark & Julia Schuppan, 2022. "A Multi-Perspective Assessment of the Introduction of E-Scooter Sharing in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Lee, Junmin & Kim, Keungoui & Kim, Jiyong & Hwang, Junseok, 2022. "The relationship between shared mobility and regulation in South Korea: A system dynamics approach from the socio-technical transitions perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Rupi, Federico & Freo, Marzia & Poliziani, Cristian & Postorino, Maria Nadia & Schweizer, Joerg, 2023. "Analysis of gender-specific bicycle route choices using revealed preference surveys based on GPS traces," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Fuller, Sam & Fitch, Dillon & D'Agostino, Mollie C., 2021. "Local Policies for Better Micromobility," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8mw5j82x, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    18. Virginie Boutueil & Luc Nemett & Thomas Quillerier, 2021. "Trends in Competition among Digital Platforms for Shared Mobility: Insights from a Worldwide Census and Prospects for Research," Post-Print hal-03388213, HAL.
    19. Draženko Glavić & Ana Trpković & Marina Milenković & Sreten Jevremović, 2021. "The E-Scooter Potential to Change Urban Mobility—Belgrade Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-29, May.
    20. Ying Ni & Jiaqi Chen, 2020. "Exploring the Effects of the Built Environment on Two Transfer Modes for Metros: Dockless Bike Sharing and Taxis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:89:y:2020:i:c:s0966692320309510. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-transport-geography .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.