IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsrrp/qt4106z3tc.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Carsharing in Shanghai, China: Analysis of Behavioural Response to Local Survey and Potential Competition

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Mingquan
  • Martin, Elliot W
  • Shaheen, Susan A

Abstract

The rapid motorization of China raises questions about the potential of alternative mobility solutions, such as carsharing (short-term auto use), in developing mega cities like Shanghai. While motor vehicle demand is increasing rapidly, there are many aspects of urban transportation in Shanghai (and China more broadly) that separate it from the urban environments in which carsharing has traditionally thrived. For example, the taxi plays a much more prominent role in the transportation systems of Shanghai and Beijing than it does in most North American and European cities. Carsharing has also normally thrived in environments in which the broader population has experience with both driving and automobile ownership. This is currently lacking in Shanghai. To evaluate carsharing’s potential in Shanghai, the authors comparatively analyze the size and competitiveness of the taxi systems of key carsharing cities in Europe, North America, and Asia and highlight some core distinctions between Shanghai and other major cities where carsharing has thrived. To further explore the potential response of citizens to carsharing, the authors conducted a survey (N=271) of a subpopulation in Shanghai from November 2010 to February 2011. The survey analysis shows that those interested in carsharing are younger, more likely to be educated, have longer commutes, and own fewer cars than those not interested in carsharing. Following the survey analysis, the authors conclude with a discussion of the implications of these results for the development of a carsharing industry in Shanghai.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Mingquan & Martin, Elliot W & Shaheen, Susan A, 2012. "Carsharing in Shanghai, China: Analysis of Behavioural Response to Local Survey and Potential Competition," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt4106z3tc, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt4106z3tc
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4106z3tc.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    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. Jin, Fanglei & Yao, Enjian & An, Kun, 2020. "Analysis of the potential demand for battery electric vehicle sharing: Mode share and spatiotemporal distribution," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    2. Ying Hui & Mengtao Ding & Kun Zheng & Dong Lou, 2017. "Observing Trip Chain Characteristics of Round-Trip Carsharing Users in China: A Case Study Based on GPS Data in Hangzhou City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Qi Te & Chen Lianghua, 2020. "Carsharing: mitigation strategy for transport-related carbon footprint," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 791-818, May.
    4. Francesco Ciari & Milos Balac & Michael Balmer, 2015. "Modelling the effect of different pricing schemes on free-floating carsharing travel demand: a test case for Zurich, Switzerland," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 413-433, May.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Hu, Jia-Wei & Javaid, Aneeque & Creutzig, Felix, 2021. "Leverage points for accelerating adoption of shared electric cars: Perceived benefits and environmental impact of NEVs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Leiming Li & Yu Zhang, 2023. "An extended theory of planned behavior to explain the intention to use carsharing: a multi-group analysis of different sociodemographic characteristics," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 143-181, February.
    9. Coll, Marie-Hélène & Vandersmissen, Marie-Hélène & Thériault, Marius, 2014. "Modeling spatio-temporal diffusion of carsharing membership in Québec City," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 22-37.
    10. Yixi Xue & Yi Zhang & Yi Chen, 2019. "An Evaluation Framework for the Planning of Electric Car-Sharing Systems: A Combination Model of AHP-CBA-VD," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.
    11. Qi Te & Chen Lianghua, 0. "Carsharing: mitigation strategy for transport-related carbon footprint," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 791-818.

    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. Carlos M. Vallez & Mario Castro & David Contreras, 2021. "Challenges and Opportunities in Dock-Based Bike-Sharing Rebalancing: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Shahram Heydari & Garyfallos Konstantinoudis & Abdul Wahid Behsoodi, 2021. "Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on bike-sharing demand and hire time: Evidence from Santander Cycles in London," Papers 2107.11589, arXiv.org.
    3. 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.
    4. Pucher, John & Buehler, Ralph & Seinen, Mark, 2011. "Bicycling renaissance in North America? An update and re-appraisal of cycling trends and policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 451-475, July.
    5. Lu-Yi Qiu & Ling-Yun He, 2018. "Bike Sharing and the Economy, the Environment, and Health-Related Externalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-10, April.
    6. Maas, Suzanne & Nikolaou, Paraskevas & Attard, Maria & Dimitriou, Loukas, 2021. "Examining spatio-temporal trip patterns of bicycle sharing systems in Southern European island cities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    7. Cichosz Marzenna, 2013. "IT solutions in logistics of smart bike-sharing systems in urban transport," Management, Sciendo, vol. 17(2), pages 272-283, December.
    8. Caggiani, Leonardo & Camporeale, Rosalia & Marinelli, Mario & Ottomanelli, Michele, 2019. "User satisfaction based model for resource allocation in bike-sharing systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 117-126.
    9. Yu Du & Xian Ji & Chenxi Dou & Rui Wang, 2024. "Boosting Winter Green Travel: Prioritizing Built Environment Enhancements for Shared Bike Users Accessing Public Transit in the First/Last Mile Using Machine Learning and Grounded Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-25, November.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Imen Haj Salah & Vasu Dev Mukku & Malte Kania & Tom Assmann & Hartmut Zadek, 2022. "Implications of the Relocation Type and Frequency for Shared Autonomous Bike Service: Comparison between the Inner and Complete City Scenarios for Magdeburg as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    13. Levy, Nadav & Golani, Chen & Ben-Elia, Eran, 2019. "An exploratory study of spatial patterns of cycling in Tel Aviv using passively generated bike-sharing data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 325-334.
    14. Namkung, Ok Stella & Park, Jonghan & Ko, Joonho, 2023. "Public bike users’ annual travel distance: Findings from combined data of user survey and annual rental records," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Çelebi, Dilay & Yörüsün, Aslı & Işık, Hanife, 2018. "Bicycle sharing system design with capacity allocations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 86-98.
    18. Geoffrey Rose, 2012. "E-bikes and urban transportation: emerging issues and unresolved questions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 81-96, January.
    19. Faghih-Imani, Ahmadreza & Eluru, Naveen & El-Geneidy, Ahmed M. & Rabbat, Michael & Haq, Usama, 2014. "How land-use and urban form impact bicycle flows: evidence from the bicycle-sharing system (BIXI) in Montreal," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 306-314.
    20. Hamidi, Zahra & Camporeale, Rosalia & Caggiani, Leonardo, 2019. "Inequalities in access to bike-and-ride opportunities: Findings for the city of Malmö," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 673-688.

    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:qt4106z3tc. 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.