{"title":"Understanding multimodal mobility patterns of micromobility users in urban environments: insights from Barcelona","authors":"Oriol Roig-Costa, Oriol Marquet, Aldo Arranz-López, Carme Miralles-Guasch, Veronique Van Acker","doi":"10.1007/s11116-024-10531-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Micromobility, which includes bicycle-sharing systems, e-scooters, and shared moped-style scooters, has emerged as a popular alternative to traditional transport modes in urban environments, thus expanding the number of transportation options available to urban travellers. Previous research has primarily relied on trip-based data to explore the multimodal character of micromobility. However, existing evidence has failed to understand the ways in which urban travellers have reshaped their mobility patterns as a consequence of the introduction of micromobility. Using a travel survey (N = 902) set in Barcelona, Spain, cluster techniques are used to group micromobility users according to their frequency of use of three different micromobility modes (bicycle-sharing systems, private e-scooter, and moped-style scooter-sharing services). Then, a multinomial logistic regression was used, in order to explore each cluster’s usage of traditional modes of transport, along with all potential weekly combinations between modes. Results show that most micromobility users rely on a single type of micromobility mode on a weekly basis. The model further indicates that private e-scooter, shared bicycle, and shared moped-style scooter users develop different weekly mobility combination patterns. While personal micromobility options (private e-scooter) are associated with monomodal tendencies, sharing services (bicycle sharing and moped-style scooter sharing) encourage multimodal behaviours. These findings contribute to the limited knowledge concerning the role of some micromobility alternatives in creating more rational and less habit-dependent travel behaviour choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":49419,"journal":{"name":"Transportation","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10531-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Micromobility, which includes bicycle-sharing systems, e-scooters, and shared moped-style scooters, has emerged as a popular alternative to traditional transport modes in urban environments, thus expanding the number of transportation options available to urban travellers. Previous research has primarily relied on trip-based data to explore the multimodal character of micromobility. However, existing evidence has failed to understand the ways in which urban travellers have reshaped their mobility patterns as a consequence of the introduction of micromobility. Using a travel survey (N = 902) set in Barcelona, Spain, cluster techniques are used to group micromobility users according to their frequency of use of three different micromobility modes (bicycle-sharing systems, private e-scooter, and moped-style scooter-sharing services). Then, a multinomial logistic regression was used, in order to explore each cluster’s usage of traditional modes of transport, along with all potential weekly combinations between modes. Results show that most micromobility users rely on a single type of micromobility mode on a weekly basis. The model further indicates that private e-scooter, shared bicycle, and shared moped-style scooter users develop different weekly mobility combination patterns. While personal micromobility options (private e-scooter) are associated with monomodal tendencies, sharing services (bicycle sharing and moped-style scooter sharing) encourage multimodal behaviours. These findings contribute to the limited knowledge concerning the role of some micromobility alternatives in creating more rational and less habit-dependent travel behaviour choices.
期刊介绍:
In our first issue, published in 1972, we explained that this Journal is intended to promote the free and vigorous exchange of ideas and experience among the worldwide community actively concerned with transportation policy, planning and practice. That continues to be our mission, with a clear focus on topics concerned with research and practice in transportation policy and planning, around the world.
These four words, policy and planning, research and practice are our key words. While we have a particular focus on transportation policy analysis and travel behaviour in the context of ground transportation, we willingly consider all good quality papers that are highly relevant to transportation policy, planning and practice with a clear focus on innovation, on extending the international pool of knowledge and understanding. Our interest is not only with transportation policies - and systems and services – but also with their social, economic and environmental impacts, However, papers about the application of established procedures to, or the development of plans or policies for, specific locations are unlikely to prove acceptable unless they report experience which will be of real benefit those working elsewhere. Papers concerned with the engineering, safety and operational management of transportation systems are outside our scope.