IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p14319-d960930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shared Autonomous Vehicles Competing with Shared Electric Bicycles: A Stated-Preference Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sungwon Lee

    (Transportation ICT Convergence Research Center, Korea National University of Transportation, Chungju 27469, Korea)

  • Devon Farmer

    (Transportation ICT Convergence Research Center, Korea National University of Transportation, Chungju 27469, Korea)

  • Jooyoung Kim

    (Department of Transportation Planning & Management, Korea National University of Transportation, Uiwang 16106, Korea)

  • Hyun Kim

    (Transportation ICT Convergence Research Center, Korea National University of Transportation, Chungju 27469, Korea)

Abstract

Understanding the factors that affect the uptake of emerging transport modes is critical for understanding if and how they will be used once they are implemented. In this study, we undertook a stated-preference analysis to understand the factors that affect the use of shared autonomous vehicles and shared personal mobility (micromobility) as competing modes on a university campus in Korea. We applied a binary logit model, which included time and cost variables as well as the perceptions of convenience (in-car congestion and availability) and safety. For autonomous vehicles, the cost- and time-related demand elasticities were estimated to be −0.45 and −0.25, respectively, while the cost elasticity for shared electric bicycles was −0.42. The elasticities of perceived convenience (availability) and safety for the shared electric bicycle system were estimated to be 0.72 and 0.29, respectively. Finally, the elasticity for perceived convenience (in-car congestion) of the shared autonomous vehicle was 0.42. Our results show that there is an innate preference for shared autonomous vehicles when these are compared to shared personal mobility, and that the effect of subjective variables (convenience and safety) on the use of emerging transport modes is as important as traditional cost and time variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Sungwon Lee & Devon Farmer & Jooyoung Kim & Hyun Kim, 2022. "Shared Autonomous Vehicles Competing with Shared Electric Bicycles: A Stated-Preference Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14319-:d:960930
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14319/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14319/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yap, Menno D. & Correia, Gonçalo & van Arem, Bart, 2016. "Preferences of travellers for using automated vehicles as last mile public transport of multimodal train trips," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-16.
    2. Calin Iclodean & Nicolae Cordos & Bogdan Ovidiu Varga, 2020. "Autonomous Shuttle Bus for Public Transportation: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-45, June.
    3. Xiaoxia Dong & Matthew DiScenna & Erick Guerra, 2019. "Transit user perceptions of driverless buses," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 35-50, February.
    4. Jun Li & Jiachao Shen & Bicen Jia, 2021. "Exploring Intention to Use Shared Electric Bicycles by the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, April.
    5. Tilahun, Nebiyou Y. & Levinson, David M. & Krizek, Kevin J., 2007. "Trails, lanes, or traffic: Valuing bicycle facilities with an adaptive stated preference survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 287-301, May.
    6. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Chan, Nelson, 2016. "Mobility and the Sharing Economy: Potential to Overcome First- and Last-Mile Public Transit Connections," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt8042k3d7, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    7. Bansal, Prateek & Kockelman, Kara M., 2017. "Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 49-63.
    8. Wang, Shenhao & Zhao, Jinhua, 2019. "Risk preference and adoption of autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 215-229.
    9. Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & Looff, Erwin & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Snelder, Maaike & van Arem, Bart, 2019. "On the impact of vehicle automation on the value of travel time while performing work and leisure activities in a car: Theoretical insights and results from a stated preference survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 359-382.
    10. Liang, Xiao & Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & van Arem, Bart, 2016. "Optimizing the service area and trip selection of an electric automated taxi system used for the last mile of train trips," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 115-129.
    11. Geoffrey Rose, 2012. "E-bikes and urban transportation: emerging issues and unresolved questions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 81-96, January.
    12. Peng Jing & Gang Xu & Yuexia Chen & Yuji Shi & Fengping Zhan, 2020. "The Determinants behind the Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, February.
    13. Neeraj Saxena & Taha Rashidi & David Rey, 2020. "Determining the Market Uptake of Demand Responsive Transport Enabled Public Transport Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    14. Shen, Yu & Zhang, Hongmou & Zhao, Jinhua, 2018. "Integrating shared autonomous vehicle in public transportation system: A supply-side simulation of the first-mile service in Singapore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 125-136.
    15. Frauke Behrendt & Sally Cairns & David Raffo & Ian Philips, 2021. "Impact of E-Bikes on Cycling in Hilly Areas: Participants’ Experience of Electrically-Assisted Cycling in a UK Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Mulley, Corinne & Ho, Chinh & Ho, Loan & Hensher, David & Rose, John, 2018. "Will bus travellers walk further for a more frequent service? An international study using a stated preference approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 88-97.
    17. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille, 2019. "The contradictions of bike-share benefits, purposes and outcomes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 401-419.
    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. Wang, Senlei & Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & Lin, Hai Xiang, 2022. "Modeling the competition between multiple Automated Mobility on-Demand operators: An agent-based approach," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 605(C).
    2. Abe, Ryosuke, 2019. "Introducing autonomous buses and taxis: Quantifying the potential benefits in Japanese transportation systems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 94-113.
    3. Limin Tan & Changxi Ma & Xuecai Xu & Jin Xu, 2019. "Choice Behavior of Autonomous Vehicles Based on Logistic Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Ryosuke Abe & Yusuke Kita & Daisuke Fukuda, 2020. "An Experimental Approach to Understanding the Impacts of Monitoring Methods on Use Intentions for Autonomous Vehicle Services: Survey Evidence from Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    5. Neil Quarles & Kara M. Kockelman & Moataz Mohamed, 2020. "Costs and Benefits of Electrifying and Automating Bus Transit Fleets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Manivasakan, Hesavar & Kalra, Riddhi & O'Hern, Steve & Fang, Yihai & Xi, Yinfei & Zheng, Nan, 2021. "Infrastructure requirement for autonomous vehicle integration for future urban and suburban roads – Current practice and a case study of Melbourne, Australia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 36-53.
    7. Peng Jing & Hao Huang & Bin Ran & Fengping Zhan & Yuji Shi, 2019. "Exploring the Factors Affecting Mode Choice Intention of Autonomous Vehicle Based on an Extended Theory of Planned Behavior—A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-20, February.
    8. Peng Jing & Gang Xu & Yuexia Chen & Yuji Shi & Fengping Zhan, 2020. "The Determinants behind the Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Boddupalli, Sreekar-Shashank & Garrow, Laurie A. & German, Brian J. & Newman, Jeffrey P., 2024. "Mode choice modeling for an electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) air taxi commuting service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    10. Gu, Yewen & Goez, Julio C. & Mario, Guajardo & Wallace, Stein W., 2019. "Autonomous vessels: State of the art and potential opportunities in logistics," Discussion Papers 2019/6, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    11. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    12. Oke, Jimi B. & Akkinepally, Arun Prakash & Chen, Siyu & Xie, Yifei & Aboutaleb, Youssef M. & Azevedo, Carlos Lima & Zegras, P. Christopher & Ferreira, Joseph & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2020. "Evaluating the systemic effects of automated mobility-on-demand services via large-scale agent-based simulation of auto-dependent prototype cities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 98-126.
    13. Wang, Shenhao & Zhao, Jinhua, 2019. "Risk preference and adoption of autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 215-229.
    14. Baichuan Mo & Zhejing Cao & Hongmou Zhang & Yu Shen & Jinhua Zhao, 2020. "Competition between shared autonomous vehicles and public transit: A case study in Singapore," Papers 2001.03197, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    15. Kolarova, Viktoriya & Steck, Felix & Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J., 2019. "Assessing the effect of autonomous driving on value of travel time savings: A comparison between current and future preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 155-169.
    16. 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.
    17. Zgheib, Najib & Abou-Zeid, Maya & Kaysi, Isam, 2020. "Modeling demand for ridesourcing as feeder for high capacity mass transit systems with an application to the planned Beirut BRT," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 70-91.
    18. Dubey, Subodh & Sharma, Ishant & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Cats, Oded & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A General Framework to Forecast the Adoption of Novel Products: A Case of Autonomous Vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 63-95.
    19. Lee, Jaehyung & Lee, Euntak & Yun, Jaewoong & Chung, Jin-Hyuk & Kim, Jinhee, 2021. "Latent heterogeneity in autonomous driving preferences and in-vehicle activities by travel distance," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    20. Mao, Wei & Shepherd, Simon & Harrison, Gillian & Xu, Meng, 2024. "Autonomous vehicle market development in Beijing: A system dynamics approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14319-:d:960930. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.