IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt5h495450.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Providing Equitable Access to Sacramento’s Bike Share System

Author

Listed:
  • Goodman, Brianna
  • Handy, Susan L

Abstract

Bike share systems are a unique opportunity to encourage active transportation within a public transportation framework. Bike share has the potential to deliver an array of benefits to communities, including reduced emissions, vehicle miles traveled, and parking needs, as well as increasing residents’ participation in healthful exercise. However, the benefits of bike share are often not equitably distributed among the diverse populations of the cities in which they have been implemented: statistics indicate a possibility of a lack of equitable system access for low-income and/or minority (LIM) populations in North America, as these populations are overwhelmingly underrepresented among bike share users. The current system enables users to check out a bike using a credit or debit card, which is restrictive to LIM individuals who may not have such accounts. Today many system operators attempt to rectify this rift by working with local financial institutions to help potential users obtain debit or credit cards. However, less attention has been directed towards many other issues inherent in the system, which when combined create a product that fails many LIM users. These users face other financial constraints such as additional fees that increase exponentially after the first 30 minutes, and the lack of a fare structure competitive with transit. One of the most fundamental problems is that docking stations are placed in attractive, multi-use neighborhoods and commercial corridors with vibrant economies and public spaces; areas where decades of social and financial pressure have minimized the presence of LIM residents. Contemporary ridership forecasting models for bike share are based on current patterns of bicycle use, and generally assume a negative correlation between ridership and prevalence of non-white population. Concerns regarding security while bicycling can also act as a barrier for bike share use by the LIM community, as these communities can have much poorer bicycle infrastructure and higher incidences of crime. Educational barriers such as language differences and lack of cycling knowledge or skills combine to make it difficult for LIM community members to understand the system, enroll in the system, or use the system easily. Hours of operation are also typically not supportive of non-traditional shift hours, and hardware prevents users from bringing along children or cargo. Barriers to equitable access to bike share must be met with thoughtful analysis and policy adjustments to ensure that, as this new opportunity for public active transportation spreads in the United States, all citizens may benefit. This report responds to a study by Fehr & Peers in 2014 that was the first iteration of planning for the new Sacramento Area bike share system. Using this study as a starting point, this report aims to explore how system equity barriers could be removed so that all residents of Sacramento, regardless of ethnicity or income status, could enjoy the benefits of bike share.

Suggested Citation

  • Goodman, Brianna & Handy, Susan L, 2015. "Providing Equitable Access to Sacramento’s Bike Share System," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5h495450, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt5h495450
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/5h495450.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raja Jurdak, 2013. "The Impact of Cost and Network Topology on Urban Mobility: A Study of Public Bicycle Usage in 2 U.S. Cities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-6, November.
    2. Goodman, Anna & Cheshire, James, 2014. "Inequalities in the London bicycle sharing system revisited: impacts of extending the scheme to poorer areas but then doubling prices," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 272-279.
    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. Shruthi Kaviti & Mohan M. Venigalla & Shanjiang Zhu & Kimberly Lucas & Stefanie Brodie, 2020. "Impact of pricing and transit disruptions on bikeshare ridership and revenue," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 641-662, April.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Hyungkyoo Kim, 2020. "Seasonal Impacts of Particulate Matter Levels on Bike Sharing in Seoul, South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Yi Yao & Yifang Zhang & Lixin Tian & Nianxing Zhou & Zhilin Li & Minggang Wang, 2019. "Analysis of Network Structure of Urban Bike-Sharing System: A Case Study Based on Real-Time Data of a Public Bicycle System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Nessa Winston, 2021. "Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities," Working Papers 202106, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    8. 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.
    9. Wang, Jueyu & Lindsey, Greg, 2019. "Do new bike share stations increase member use: A quasi-experimental study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-11.
    10. Nixon, Denver V. & Schwanen, Tim, 2019. "Bike sharing beyond the norm," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Beairsto, Jeneva & Tian, Yufan & Zheng, Linyu & Zhao, Qunshan & Hong, Jinhyun, 2020. "Identifying locations for new bike-sharing stations in Glasgow: an analysis of spatial equity and demand factors," OSF Preprints apyfn, Center for Open Science.
    13. Prati, Gabriele, 2018. "Gender equality and women's participation in transport cycling," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 369-375.
    14. Zhao, Chunkai & Wang, Yuhang & Ge, Zhenyu, 2023. "Is digital finance environmentally friendly in China? Evidence from shared-bike trips," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 129-143.
    15. Todd, James & O'Brien, Oliver & Cheshire, James, 2021. "A global comparison of bicycle sharing systems," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    16. Zheng, Zhiguo & Chen, Yunfeng & Zhu, Debao & Sun, Huijun & Wu, Jianjun & Pan, Xing & Li, Daqing, 2021. "Extreme unbalanced mobility network in bike sharing system," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 563(C).
    17. Raux, Charles & Zoubir, Ayman & Geyik, Mirkan, 2017. "Who are bike sharing schemes members and do they travel differently? The case of Lyon’s “Velo’v” scheme," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 350-363.
    18. Chen, Zhiwei & Guo, Yujie & Stuart, Amy L. & Zhang, Yu & Li, Xiaopeng, 2019. "Exploring the equity performance of bike-sharing systems with disaggregated data: A story of southern Tampa," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 529-545.
    19. Mateo-Babiano, Iderlina & Bean, Richard & Corcoran, Jonathan & Pojani, Dorina, 2016. "How does our natural and built environment affect the use of bicycle sharing?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 295-307.
    20. Böcker, Lars & Anderson, Ellinor & Uteng, Tanu Priya & Throndsen, Torstein, 2020. "Bike sharing use in conjunction to public transport: Exploring spatiotemporal, age and gender dimensions in Oslo, Norway," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 389-401.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Engineering;

    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:cdl:itsdav:qt5h495450. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    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.