IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v119y2019icp122-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To be or not to be dockless: Empirical analysis of dockless bikeshare development in China

Author

Listed:
  • Gu, Tianqi
  • Kim, Inhi
  • Currie, Graham

Abstract

This paper discusses the development of shared bike programs in China, especially the innovative dockless bikeshare (DBS) system, using up-to-date empirical analysis. Bicycle sharing programs had existed in China since 2008 but overall bicycle mode share decreased until 2016 when DBS emerged. A comparison of classical city docked bikeshare (BS) programs found that government-oriented operators and a low financial threshold for users were the keys to the success of docked BS in China. In less than two years, a new, innovative, flexible, shared bicycling system – the DBS – has grown from nothing to a substantial 23 million fleets, covering over 200 cities and regions, making docked BS appear insignificant. It is a highly capital-driven, privately-operated business model, largely deployed in cities in conjunction with urban railway systems and has achieved high penetration in mega cites (e.g., 0.135 fleet/resident in Beijing). The development of DBS has experienced “free growth”, “regulated” and “limited” phases in a short time. While the central government initially held a “neutral-positive” policy towards this new system, the rapid expansion of dockless fleets soon exceeded cities’ limits and resulted in local government policies changing from “neutral-positive” to “neutral-negative”, and from August 2017, forceful limiting regulations have been implemented. DBS systems have advantages such as easy access using a smart phone, convenience of pickup and park and low cost. These merits attract its main users, who are found to be young, highly educated with almost equal numbers of males and females. DBS trips are mainly short, with high frequency and used for commuting purposes. DBS systems have burgeoned due to three factors: (1) those promoting user demands, (2) those winning partial support of government, and (3) those promoting operators’ supply. The results show that rapid growth of dockless bikeshare programs is mainly “supply-driven by operators” rather than by “user demand” or “triggered by government policy”. Financial sustainability, vandalism and threat to bicycle industry by DBS are the three main challenges that require investigation, especially, the fact that the booming DBS market may cause low profitability for local bicycle manufacturers and thus make the entire industry fragile. Feasibility of docked bikeshare and dockless bikeshare are compared and concluded in the end.

Suggested Citation

  • Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "To be or not to be dockless: Empirical analysis of dockless bikeshare development in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 122-147.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:119:y:2019:i:c:p:122-147
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2018.11.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856418309844
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2018.11.007?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. Elliot Fishman & Christopher Cherry, 2016. "E-bikes in the Mainstream: Reviewing a Decade of Research," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 72-91, January.
    2. Oecd, 2018. "National Legislative And Regulatory Activities," Nuclear Law Bulletin, OECD Publishing, vol. 2016(2), pages 65-84.
    3. Oecd, 2018. "National legislative and regulatory activities," Nuclear Law Bulletin, OECD Publishing, vol. 2017(1), pages 75-95.
    4. Ralph Buehler & John Pucher & Regine Gerike & Thomas Götschi, 2017. "Reducing car dependence in the heart of Europe: lessons from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 4-28, January.
    5. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille & Caruso, Geoffrey & Thomas, Isabelle, 2017. "Bicycle sharing system ‘success’ determinants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 202-214.
    6. ., 2018. "Regulating the post-crisis system," Chapters, in: All Fall Down, chapter 10, pages 71-81, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Zhang, Yongping & Mi, Zhifu, 2018. "Environmental benefits of bike sharing: A big data-based analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 296-301.
    8. Jiang, Zhijie & Yu, Jiayuan & Zhou, Qilou (Bill) & Shi, Fei & Tang, Wenyue, 2018. "Revisiting the Chinese calligraphic landscape," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-3.
    9. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Mazzei, Armando, 2014. "Barriers to bikesharing: an analysis from Melbourne and Brisbane," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 325-337.
    10. Viscusi, W. Kip & Harrington, Joseph E. , Jr. & Sappington, David E. M., 2018. "Economics of Regulation and Antitrust, fifth edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 0262038064, April.
    11. Fishman, Elliot & Washington, Simon & Haworth, Narelle & Watson, Angela, 2015. "Factors influencing bike share membership: An analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 17-30.
    12. Shaheen, Susan & Guzman, Stacey & Zhang, Hua, 2010. "Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present, and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt79v822k5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    13. Li, Sihai & Wu, Huiying & Jiang, Xinfeng, 2018. "Rent-seeking and firm value: Chinese evidence," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 239-272, June.
    14. Chen, Xiaodan & Hou, Yaoping & Lin, Fenggen, 2018. "Some new spectral bounds for graph irregularity," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 331-340.
    15. Elliot Fishman, 2016. "Bikeshare: A Review of Recent Literature," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 92-113, January.
    16. Yang, Xu-Hua & Cheng, Zhi & Chen, Guang & Wang, Lei & Ruan, Zhong-Yuan & Zheng, Yu-Jun, 2018. "The impact of a public bicycle-sharing system on urban public transport networks," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 246-256.
    17. Lars Böcker & Martin Dijst & Jan Prillwitz, 2013. "Impact of Everyday Weather on Individual Daily Travel Behaviours in Perspective: A Literature Review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 71-91, January.
    18. Kim, Kyoungok, 2018. "Investigation on the effects of weather and calendar events on bike-sharing according to the trip patterns of bike rentals of stations," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 309-320.
    19. Zhao, Chunli & Carstensen, Trine Agervig & Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick & Olafsson, Anton Stahl, 2018. "Bicycle-friendly infrastructure planning in Beijing and Copenhagen - between adapting design solutions and learning local planning cultures," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 149-159.
    20. Grace Xing Hu & Jun Pan & Jiang Wang, 2018. "Chinese Capital Market: An Empirical Overview," NBER Working Papers 24346, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. ., 2018. "The catch-up of the Chinese solar PV sector," Chapters, in: The Revolution in Energy Technology, chapter 4, pages 58-74, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Parkes, Stephen & Mardsen, Greg & Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cohen, Adam, 2013. "Understanding the Diffusion of Public Bikesharing Systems: Evidence from Europe and North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3qr9h2pr, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    23. Shaheen, Susan A & Guzman, Stacey & Zhang, Hua, 2010. "Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present and Future," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6qg8q6ft, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    24. Oecd, 2018. "National legislative and regulatory activities," Nuclear Law Bulletin, OECD Publishing, vol. 2018(1), pages 93-106.
    25. Sun, Xiaoqi & An, Haizhong & Liu, Xiaojia, 2018. "Network analysis of Chinese provincial economies," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 492(C), pages 1168-1180.
    26. Reyer Gerlagh & Roweno J.R.K. Heijmans, 2018. "Regulating Stock Externalities," CESifo Working Paper Series 7383, CESifo.
    27. Parkes, Stephen D. & Marsden, Greg & Shaheen, Susan A. & Cohen, Adam P., 2013. "Understanding the diffusion of public bikesharing systems: evidence from Europe and North America," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 94-103.
    28. Mingyang Du & Lin Cheng, 2018. "Better Understanding the Characteristics and Influential Factors of Different Travel Patterns in Free-Floating Bike Sharing: Evidence from Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    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. Ma, Xinwei & Ji, Yanjie & Yuan, Yufei & Van Oort, Niels & Jin, Yuchuan & Hoogendoorn, Serge, 2020. "A comparison in travel patterns and determinants of user demand between docked and dockless bike-sharing systems using multi-sourced data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 148-173.
    2. Link, Christoph & Strasser, Christoph & Hinterreiter, Michael, 2020. "Free-floating bikesharing in Vienna – A user behaviour analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 168-182.
    3. Kwiatkowski Michał Adam, 2018. "Urban Cycling as an Indicator of Socio-Economic Innovation and Sustainable Transport," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 37(4), pages 23-32, December.
    4. Sandra Bestakova, 2019. "The Influence Of Short-Term Rental On Rental Housing Prices In Prague," Proceedings of Business and Management Conferences 8512235, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    5. Alexandros Nikitas, 2019. "How to Save Bike-Sharing: An Evidence-Based Survival Toolkit for Policy-Makers and Mobility Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Tomasz Bieliński & Łukasz Dopierała & Maciej Tarkowski & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Lessons from Implementing a Metropolitan Electric Bike Sharing System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    7. Liao, Rose C. & Loureiro, Gilberto & Taboada, Alvaro G., 2022. "Gender quotas and bank risk," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    8. Cai Jia & Yanyan Chen & Tingzhao Chen & Yanan Li & Luzhou Lin, 2022. "Evolutionary Game Analysis on Sharing Bicycles and Metro Strategies: Impact of Phasing out Subsidies for Bicycle–Metro Integration Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    9. Elżbieta Macioszek & Paulina Świerk & Agata Kurek, 2020. "The Bike-Sharing System as an Element of Enhancing Sustainable Mobility—A Case Study based on a City in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-29, April.
    10. Ma, Xinwei & Zhang, Shuai & Wu, Tao & Yang, Yizhe & Yu, Jiajie, 2023. "Can dockless and docked bike-sharing substitute each other? Evidence from Nanjing, China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    11. Li, Shaoying & Zhuang, Caigang & Tan, Zhangzhi & Gao, Feng & Lai, Zhipeng & Wu, Zhifeng, 2021. "Inferring the trip purposes and uncovering spatio-temporal activity patterns from dockless shared bike dataset in Shenzhen, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    12. Suzanne Maas & Paraskevas Nikolaou & Maria Attard & Loukas Dimitriou, 2021. "Heat, Hills and the High Season: A Model-Based Comparative Analysis of Spatio-Temporal Factors Affecting Shared Bicycle Use in Three Southern European Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Qing Yu & Weifeng Li & Dongyuan Yang & Yingkun Xie, 2020. "Policy Zoning for Efficient Land Utilization Based on Spatio-Temporal Integration between the Bicycle-Sharing Service and the Metro Transit," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Cheng, Long & Yang, Junjian & Chen, Xuewu & Cao, Mengqiu & Zhou, Hang & Sun, Yu, 2020. "How could the station-based bike sharing system and the free-floating bike sharing system be coordinated?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    15. Morton, Craig, 2020. "The demand for cycle sharing: Examining the links between weather conditions, air quality levels, and cycling demand for regular and casual users," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    16. Yuanyuan Zhang & Yuming Zhang, 2018. "Associations between Public Transit Usage and Bikesharing Behaviors in The United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "Measuring immediate impacts of a new mass transit system on an existing bike-share system in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 20-39.
    18. Radzimski, Adam & Dzięcielski, Michał, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between bike-sharing and public transport in Poznań, Poland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 189-202.
    19. Liu, Yixiao & Tian, Zihao & Pan, Baoran & Zhang, Wenbin & Liu, Yunqi & Tian, Lixin, 2022. "A hybrid big-data-based and tolerance-based method to estimate environmental benefits of electric bike sharing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    20. Caulfield, Brian & O'Mahony, Margaret & Brazil, William & Weldon, Peter, 2017. "Examining usage patterns of a bike-sharing scheme in a medium sized city," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 152-161.

    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:transa:v:119:y:2019:i:c:p:122-147. 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/547/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.