IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v51y2024i5d10.1007_s11116-023-10382-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blind classification of e-scooter trips according to their relationship with public transport

Author

Listed:
  • Juan José Vinagre Díaz

    (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid)

  • Rubén Fernández Pozo

    (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid)

  • Ana Belén Rodríguez González

    (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid)

  • Mark Richard Wilby

    (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid)

  • Bani Anvari

    (University College London)

Abstract

E-scooter services have multiplied worldwide as a form of urban transport. Their use has grown so quickly that policymakers and researchers still need to understand their interrelation with other transport modes. At present, e-scooter services are primarily seen as a first-and-last-mile solution for public transport. However, we demonstrate that $$50\,\%$$ 50 % of e-scooter trips are either substituting it or covering areas with little public transportation infrastructure. To this end, we have developed a novel data-driven methodology that autonomously classifies e-scooter trips according to their relation to public transit. Instead of predefined design criteria, the blind nature of our approach extracts the city’s intrinsic parameters from real data. We applied this methodology to Rome (Italy), and our findings reveal that e-scooters provide specific mobility solutions in areas with particular needs. Thus, we believe that the proposed methodology will contribute to the understanding of e-scooter services as part of shared urban mobility.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan José Vinagre Díaz & Rubén Fernández Pozo & Ana Belén Rodríguez González & Mark Richard Wilby & Bani Anvari, 2024. "Blind classification of e-scooter trips according to their relationship with public transport," Transportation, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 1679-1700, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:51:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11116-023-10382-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-023-10382-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-023-10382-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-023-10382-4?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. Ze Zhang & Chen Qian & Yiyang Bian, 2019. "Bicycle–metro integration for the ‘last mile’: Visualizing cycling in Shanghai," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(7), pages 1420-1423, October.
    2. Faghih-Imani, Ahmadreza & Eluru, Naveen, 2015. "Analysing bicycle-sharing system user destination choice preferences: Chicago’s Divvy system," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 53-64.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Cipriani, Ernesto & Mannini, Livia & Montemarani, Barbara & Nigro, Marialisa & Petrelli, Marco, 2019. "Congestion pricing policies: Design and assessment for the city of Rome, Italy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 127-135.
    6. Zhao, Pengjun & Li, Shengxiao, 2017. "Bicycle-metro integration in a growing city: The determinants of cycling as a transfer mode in metro station areas in Beijing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 46-60.
    7. Huo, Jinghai & Yang, Hongtai & Li, Chaojing & Zheng, Rong & Yang, Linchuan & Wen, Yi, 2021. "Influence of the built environment on E-scooter sharing ridership: A tale of five cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    8. Martin, Elliot PhD & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2014. "Evaluating Public Transit Modal Shift Dynamics In Response to Bikesharing: A Tale of Two U.S. Cities," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6x29n876, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    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. Jin, Scarlett T. & Sui, Daniel Z., 2024. "A comparative analysis of the spatial determinants of e-bike and e-scooter sharing link flows," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    2. Krauss, Konstantin & Gnann, Till & Burgert, Tobias & Axhausen, Kay W., 2024. "Faster, greener, scooter? An assessment of shared e-scooter usage based on real-world driving data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Mehzabin Tuli, Farzana & Mitra, Suman & Crews, Mariah B., 2021. "Factors influencing the usage of shared E-scooters in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 164-185.
    5. 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.
    6. Ouassim Manout & Azise Oumar Diallo & Thibault Gloriot, 2023. "Implications of pricing and fleet size strategies on shared bikes and e-scooters: a case study from Lyon, France," Working Papers hal-04017908, HAL.
    7. 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.
    8. Kim, Minju & Puczkowskyj, Nicholas & MacArthur, John & Dill, Jennifer, 2023. "Perspectives on e-scooters use: A multi-year cross-sectional approach to understanding e-scooter travel behavior in Portland, Oregon," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    9. Yang, Hongtai & Zheng, Rong & Li, Xuan & Huo, Jinghai & Yang, Linchuan & Zhu, Tong, 2022. "Nonlinear and threshold effects of the built environment on e-scooter sharing ridership," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    10. Lazarus, Jessica & Pourquier, Jean Carpentier & Feng, Frank & Hammel, Henry & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "Micromobility evolution and expansion: Understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete – A case study of San Francisco," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Cheng, Long & Wang, Kailai & De Vos, Jonas & Huang, Jie & Witlox, Frank, 2022. "Exploring non-linear built environment effects on the integration of free-floating bike-share and urban rail transport: A quantile regression approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 175-187.
    12. Yang, Hongtai & Huo, Jinghai & Bao, Yongxing & Li, Xuan & Yang, Linchuan & Cherry, Christopher R., 2021. "Impact of e-scooter sharing on bike sharing in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 23-36.
    13. Zhou, Chang & Li, Xiang & Chen, Lujie, 2023. "Modelling the effects of metro and bike-sharing cooperation: Cost-sharing mode vs information-sharing mode," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    14. Xiaofeng Li & Yao-Jan Wu & Alireza Khani, 2022. "Investigating a small-sized bike-sharing system’s impact on transit usage: a synthetic control analysis in Tucson, Arizona," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 441-458, June.
    15. Yin, Zehui & Rybarczyk, Greg & Zheng, Anran & Su, Lin & Sun, Bingrong & Yan, Xiang, 2024. "Shared micromobility as a first- and last-mile transit solution? Spatiotemporal insights from a novel dataset," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    16. Zhan, Zilin & Guo, Yuanyuan & Noland, Robert B. & He, Sylvia Y. & Wang, Yacan, 2023. "Analysis of links between dockless bikeshare and metro trips in Beijing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    17. Jin, Scarlett T. & Wang, Lei & Sui, Daniel, 2023. "How the built environment affects E-scooter sharing link flows: A machine learning approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    18. Tyndall, Justin, 2022. "Complementarity of dockless mircomobility and rail transit," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    19. Nikiforiadis, Andreas & Paschalidis, Evangelos & Stamatiadis, Nikiforos & Paloka, Ntonata & Tsekoura, Eleni & Basbas, Socrates, 2023. "E-scooters and other mode trip chaining: Preferences and attitudes of university students," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    20. Lazarus, Jessica & Pourquier, Jean Carpentier & Feng, Frank & Hammel, Henry & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "Micromobility evolution and expansion: Understanding how docked and dockless bikesharing models complement and compete – A case study of San Francisco," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt96g9c9nd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.

    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:kap:transp:v:51:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11116-023-10382-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.