IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt3j722968.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Evaluation Of Free- Floating Carsharing In Oakland, California

Author

Listed:
  • Martin, Elliot PhD
  • Pan, Alexandra
  • Shaheen, Susan

Abstract

GIG Car Share is a free-floating carsharing system that began operations in the East Bay in April 2017. Similar to other free-floating carsharing systems, such as car2go and ReachNow (which later combined as ShareNow), members of GIG have access to a fleet of vehicles which they can book and unlock via an app. Once booking the vehicle, members can drive anywhere, but must park back in the home zone in order to terminate their session. The price of driving a GIG vehicle is charged per hour, per mile, or per day, and is calculated based on the lowest cost to the user. This report uses the results from a pre- and post-survey of GIG members in Oakland to measure the changes in travel behavior, with special attention paid to changes in personal vehicle use that occurred as a result of joining GIG. The pre-survey (N = 362) was conducted in December 2017 and the postsurvey (N = 221) was conducted in January 2019. The demographics of GIG survey respondents in Oakland are similar to previous findings from evaluations of shared mobility in other cities. The sample of post-survey respondents was younger than the general Oakland population, with 50% of the sample under the age of 34 compared to 36% for the general population. The survey sample was also highly educated; 88% of respondents have at least a 4- year college degree, compared to only 40% in the general population. Income distribution was relatively similar, though GIG survey respondents had a slightly higher income than the rest of Oakland. However, the race/ethnicity distribution was more imbalanced, where 60% of survey respondents were White, while only 27% of the Oakland population is White. African Americans and Hispanic/Latinos were relatively underrepresented; 12% of survey respondents were African American compared to 23% of the Oakland population and 7% of survey respondents were Hispanic/Latino compared to 30% of the population. Table 1 presents a distribution of demographics for key attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin, Elliot PhD & Pan, Alexandra & Shaheen, Susan, 2020. "An Evaluation Of Free- Floating Carsharing In Oakland, California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3j722968, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt3j722968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/3j722968.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin, Elliot W & Shaheen, Susan A, 2011. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts of Carsharing in North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6wr90040, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    2. Yanbo Ge & Christopher R. Knittel & Don MacKenzie & Stephen Zoepf, 2016. "Racial and Gender Discrimination in Transportation Network Companies," NBER Working Papers 22776, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Harold, Brian MBA & Rodier, Caroline PhD & Zhang, Yunwan MS, 2022. "Retrospective User Survey for a Rural Electric Vehicle Carsharing Pilot in California’s Central Valley," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5ks6j0qk, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Marcin Jacek Kłos & Grzegorz Sierpiński, 2021. "Building a Model of Integration of Urban Sharing and Public Transport Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-26, March.

    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. Karla Münzel & Wouter Boon & Koen Frenken & Taneli Vaskelainen, 2018. "Carsharing business models in Germany: characteristics, success and future prospects," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 271-291, May.
    2. Xu, Zhengtian & Yin, Yafeng & Zha, Liteng, 2017. "Optimal parking provision for ride-sourcing services," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 559-578.
    3. Emmanuelle Reuter, 2022. "Hybrid business models in the sharing economy: The role of business model design for managing the environmental paradox," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 603-618, February.
    4. Valeria Andreoni, 2020. "The Trap of Success: A Paradox of Scale for Sharing Economy and Degrowth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Wagner, Sebastian & Brandt, Tobias & Neumann, Dirk, 2016. "In free float: Developing Business Analytics support for carsharing providers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PA), pages 4-14.
    6. Golalikhani, Masoud & Oliveira, Beatriz Brito & Carravilla, Maria Antónia & Oliveira, José Fernando & Antunes, António Pais, 2021. "Carsharing: A review of academic literature and business practices toward an integrated decision-support framework," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    7. Catherine E. Cherry & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2018. "Why Is Ownership an Issue? Exploring Factors That Determine Public Acceptance of Product-Service Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, July.
    8. Athey, Susan & Karlan, Dean & Palikot, Emil & Yuan, Yuan, 2022. "Smiles in Profiles: Improving Fairness and Efficiency Using Estimates of User Preferences in Online Marketplaces," Research Papers 4071, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    9. Ruomeng Cui & Jun Li & Dennis J. Zhang, 2020. "Reducing Discrimination with Reviews in the Sharing Economy: Evidence from Field Experiments on Airbnb," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1071-1094, March.
    10. Qian Duan & Xin Ye & Jian Li & Ke Wang, 2020. "Empirical Modeling Analysis of Potential Commute Demand for Carsharing in Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    11. Kas, Judith, 2022. "The effect of online reputation systems on intergroup inequality," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Zhi (Aaron) Cheng & Min-Seok Pang & Paul A. Pavlou, 2020. "Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of Intelligent Transportation Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 653-674, September.
    13. Susan Shaheen & Nelson Chan & Helen Micheaux, 2015. "One-way carsharing’s evolution and operator perspectives from the Americas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 519-536, May.
    14. Yu, Biying & Ma, Ye & Xue, Meimei & Tang, Baojun & Wang, Bin & Yan, Jinyue & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2017. "Environmental benefits from ridesharing: A case of Beijing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 141-152.
    15. Lee, Kyungwon & Hakstian, Anne-Marie & Williams, Jerome D., 2021. "Creating a world where anyone can belong anywhere: Consumer equality in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 221-231.
    16. Irfan Ullah & Kai Liu & Tran Vanduy, 2019. "Examining Travelers’ Acceptance towards Car Sharing Systems—Peshawar City, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Yongwook Paik & Christos A. Makridis, 2023. "The social value of a ridesharing platform: a hedonic pricing approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 64(5), pages 2125-2150, May.
    18. Cen Zhang & Jan-Dirk Schmöcker & Martin Trépanier, 2022. "Latent stage model for carsharing usage frequency estimation with Montréal case study," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 185-211, February.
    19. Yun Wang & Xuedong Yan & Yu Zhou & Qingwan Xue & Li Sun, 2017. "Individuals’ Acceptance to Free-Floating Electric Carsharing Mode: A Web-Based Survey in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, May.
    20. Brown, Anne, 2022. "Not all fees are created equal: Equity implications of ride-hail fee structures and revenues," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 1-10.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Engineering;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:itsrrp:qt3j722968. 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/itucbus.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.