IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/retrec/v53y2015icp3-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bicycle parking demand at railway stations: Capturing price-walking trade offs

Author

Listed:
  • Molin, Eric
  • Maat, Kees

Abstract

Due to the increasing use of bicycles as an access and egress mode for train travel in the Netherlands, bicycle parking facilities at many inner city railway stations are having trouble accommodating parking demand while scare space near train platforms precludes the expansion of such facilities. A potential solution for this problem is to offer paid, high-quality parking facilities close to the train platforms and free but lower-quality parking further away. Since free parking is currently also offered close to the platforms, the question arises of how the proposed solution would affect cycling as an access and egress mode for train travel. To answer this question, the bicycle parking preferences of train travellers were examined in this paper by reporting the results of a stated choice experiment (n = 866) conducted in Delft. In this experiment, respondents chose between paid and free parking alternatives, that varied in costs, walking time to platform and the type of surveillance. To explore the effects of paid bicycle parking on the demand for bicycle parking, two base alternatives were added to each choice set, that is ‘other mode’ and ‘use another station’. Based on the observed choices in this experiment, a four-class Latent Class Model (LCM) was estimated that provides insight in the heterogeneity of the bicycle parking preferences of train travellers. The classes are labelled as ‘free facility lovers’, ‘cost sensitive cyclists’, ‘time sensitive cyclists’, and ‘paid facility lovers’. The estimated model was used to predict choice behaviour under various implementations of the new pricing policy. The results indicate that only a small proportion of the train travellers will stop cycling to and from the station. Of these, the vast majority would rather walk and a fair share would use public transport. Only a very small number would travel to the station by car. The results suggest that paid bicycle parking is a feasible solution by which to distribute scarce parking capacity at major railway stations.

Suggested Citation

  • Molin, Eric & Maat, Kees, 2015. "Bicycle parking demand at railway stations: Capturing price-walking trade offs," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 3-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:retrec:v:53:y:2015:i:c:p:3-12
    DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2015.10.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073988591500058X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.retrec.2015.10.014?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for parking," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 479-486, November.
    2. Kobus, Martijn B.W. & Gutiérrez-i-Puigarnau, Eva & Rietveld, Piet & Van Ommeren, Jos N., 2013. "The on-street parking premium and car drivers' choice between street and garage parking," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 395-403.
    3. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    4. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, October.
    5. Arnott, Richard & Rowse, John, 2009. "Downtown parking in auto city," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-14, January.
    6. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for Parking," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt55s7079f, University of California Transportation Center.
    7. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xinwei Ma & Yanjie Ji & Yuchuan Jin & Jianbiao Wang & Mingjia He, 2018. "Modeling the Factors Influencing the Activity Spaces of Bikeshare around Metro Stations: A Spatial Regression Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, October.
    2. Ma, Xinwei & Ji, Yanjie & Yang, Mingyuan & Jin, Yuchuan & Tan, Xu, 2018. "Understanding bikeshare mode as a feeder to metro by isolating metro-bikeshare transfers from smart card data," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 57-69.
    3. 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.
    4. Kim, Sung Hoo & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2023. "Finite mixture (or latent class) modeling in transportation: Trends, usage, potential, and future directions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 134-173.
    5. Liu, Yang & Feng, Tao & Shi, Zhuangbin & He, Mingwei, 2022. "Understanding the route choice behaviour of metro-bikeshare users," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 460-475.

    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. Ardeshiri, Ali & Safarighouzhdi, Farshid & Hossein Rashidi, Taha, 2021. "Measuring willingness to pay for shared parking," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 186-202.
    2. Inci, Eren & Lindsey, Robin, 2015. "Garage and curbside parking competition with search congestion," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 49-59.
    3. Wei Wang & Yuwei Zhou & Jianbin Liu & Baofeng Sun, 2022. "On-Street Cruising for Parking Model in Consideration with Gaming Elements and Its Impact Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-17, September.
    4. Inci, Eren, 2015. "A review of the economics of parking," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 50-63.
    5. Arnott, Richard & Rowse, John, 2013. "Curbside parking time limits," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 89-110.
    6. Arnott, Richard & Inci, Eren & Rowse, John, 2015. "Downtown curbside parking capacity," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 83-97.
    7. Arnott, Richard & Rowse, John, 2009. "Curbside Parking Time Limits," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt21p8f8b2, University of California Transportation Center.
    8. Sardaro, Ruggiero & La Sala, Piermichele & De Pascale, Gianluigi & Faccilongo, Nicola, 2021. "The conservation of cultural heritage in rural areas: Stakeholder preferences regarding historical rural buildings in Apulia, southern Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Francis Ostermeijer & Hans RA Koster & Leonardo Nunes & Jos van Ommeren, 2021. "Citywide parking policy and traffic: Evidence from Amsterdam," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-015/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    10. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo, 2011. "Incorrectly accounting for taste heterogeneity in choice experiments: Does it really matter for welfare measurement?," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2011/1, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    11. Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2016. "Farmers' willingness to contract switchgrass as a cellulosic bioenergy crop in Kansas," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 292-302.
    12. Ostermeijer, Francis & Koster, Hans & Nunes, Leonardo & van Ommeren, Jos, 2022. "Citywide parking policy and traffic: Evidence from Amsterdam," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    13. Groote, Jesper De & Ommeren, Jos Van & Koster, Hans R.A., 2016. "Car ownership and residential parking subsidies: Evidence from Amsterdam," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 25-37.
    14. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice study for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 89-111.
    15. Junui Shen & Kazuhito Ogawa & Hiromasa Takahashi, 2014. "Examining the Tradeoff Between Fixed Pay and Performance-Related Pay: A Choice Experiment Approach," Review of Economic Analysis, Digital Initiatives at the University of Waterloo Library, vol. 6(2), pages 119-131, December.
    16. Lehner, Stephan & Peer, Stefanie, 2019. "The price elasticity of parking: A meta-analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 177-191.
    17. Maples, Joshua G. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Peel, Derrell S., 2018. "Unintended consequences of the quest for increased efficiency in beef cattle: When bigger isn’t better," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 65-73.
    18. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    19. Wang, Pengfei & Guan, Hongzhi & Liu, Peng, 2020. "Modeling and solving the optimal allocation-pricing of public parking resources problem in urban-scale network," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 74-98.
    20. Contu, Davide & Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mourato, Susana, 2016. "Modeling individual preferences for energy sources: The case of IV generation nuclear energy in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 37-58.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bicycle parking demand; Willingness to pay; Access and egress mode choice; Multimodal transport; Stated choice experiments; Latent class model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • C54 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Quantitative Policy Modeling

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:retrec:v:53:y:2015:i:c:p:3-12. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620614/description#description .

    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.