在移动包中共享使用电动汽车的偏好:大学背景下MaaS的实证分析

IF 2.6
Lea Decker, Christian P. Marx, Matthias Weiβ, Nicola Werbeck
{"title":"在移动包中共享使用电动汽车的偏好:大学背景下MaaS的实证分析","authors":"Lea Decker, Christian P. Marx, Matthias Weiβ, Nicola Werbeck","doi":"10.3389/frevc.2023.1220333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research on preferences of potential Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) users often included public transport (PT) in bundled mobility options. Due to the often reported enormous importance of PT availability, including PT in the bundles may have led to distortions in the identification of other vehicle preferences in MaaS offerings. Our analysis counteracts this distortion and investigates how other means of transport are evaluated in mobility packages when PT is not part of the bundle. We included electric-powered mobility alternatives, which have rarely been considered in previous research, to find out which alternatives to PT users would prefer that might increase their approval of MaaS. Furthermore, the results of the existing literature are inconsistent in emphasizing whether sustainability and environmental protection are actually relevant in the valuation of different mobility options. Our analysis thus aims at identifying which electric vehicles are preferred in a mobility package, when PT is not included. We further investigate whether sustainability components of a mobility package influence the preference, structure of individuals. We based the empirical evaluation on a rank-ordered conjoint analysis, in which mobility packages were evaluated according to individual user preferences, including emissions savings. We therefore conducted a study to identify vehicle preferences other than PT and the valuation of sustainability aspects in mobility patterns. We surveyed 995 students to identify preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for MaaS among this specific user group. Results of the empirical analysis show that preferences for an e-car and an e-scooter exist. Furthermore, we found that sustainability plays a role in the evaluation of mobility packages. Accordingly, we found, that a potential reduction in emissions leads to a higher approval of MaaS. Thus, the study extends the theoretical and empirical understanding of preference-ordering of MaaS packages and clarifies the importance of sustainability in transport choices.","PeriodicalId":241760,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Environmental Economics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences for the shared use of electric-powered vehicles in mobility packages: an empirical analysis of MaaS in a university context\",\"authors\":\"Lea Decker, Christian P. Marx, Matthias Weiβ, Nicola Werbeck\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frevc.2023.1220333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous research on preferences of potential Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) users often included public transport (PT) in bundled mobility options. Due to the often reported enormous importance of PT availability, including PT in the bundles may have led to distortions in the identification of other vehicle preferences in MaaS offerings. Our analysis counteracts this distortion and investigates how other means of transport are evaluated in mobility packages when PT is not part of the bundle. We included electric-powered mobility alternatives, which have rarely been considered in previous research, to find out which alternatives to PT users would prefer that might increase their approval of MaaS. Furthermore, the results of the existing literature are inconsistent in emphasizing whether sustainability and environmental protection are actually relevant in the valuation of different mobility options. Our analysis thus aims at identifying which electric vehicles are preferred in a mobility package, when PT is not included. We further investigate whether sustainability components of a mobility package influence the preference, structure of individuals. We based the empirical evaluation on a rank-ordered conjoint analysis, in which mobility packages were evaluated according to individual user preferences, including emissions savings. We therefore conducted a study to identify vehicle preferences other than PT and the valuation of sustainability aspects in mobility patterns. We surveyed 995 students to identify preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for MaaS among this specific user group. Results of the empirical analysis show that preferences for an e-car and an e-scooter exist. Furthermore, we found that sustainability plays a role in the evaluation of mobility packages. Accordingly, we found, that a potential reduction in emissions leads to a higher approval of MaaS. Thus, the study extends the theoretical and empirical understanding of preference-ordering of MaaS packages and clarifies the importance of sustainability in transport choices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":241760,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Environmental Economics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Environmental Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frevc.2023.1220333\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Environmental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frevc.2023.1220333","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

之前关于潜在出行即服务(MaaS)用户偏好的研究通常将公共交通(PT)纳入捆绑出行选项。由于经常报道PT可用性的巨大重要性,在捆绑包中包括PT可能会导致识别MaaS产品中其他车辆偏好的扭曲。我们的分析抵消了这种扭曲,并调查了当PT不是捆绑包的一部分时,如何在移动包中评估其他运输方式。我们纳入了电动移动替代方案,这在以前的研究中很少被考虑,以找出哪些替代PT用户更喜欢,可能会增加他们对MaaS的认可。此外,现有文献的结果在强调可持续性和环境保护是否在不同流动性选择的评估中实际相关方面并不一致。因此,我们的分析旨在确定在不包括PT的情况下,哪种电动汽车更受青睐。我们进一步研究了流动性组合的可持续性成分是否会影响个人的偏好和结构。我们基于秩序联合分析的经验评估,其中根据个人用户偏好评估移动包,包括排放节约。因此,我们进行了一项研究,以确定除PT之外的车辆偏好以及移动模式中可持续性方面的评估。我们调查了995名学生,以确定这一特定用户群体对MaaS的偏好和支付意愿(WTP)。实证分析结果表明,消费者对电动汽车和电动滑板车存在偏好。此外,我们发现可持续性在流动性包的评估中发挥了作用。因此,我们发现,潜在的排放量减少导致更高的MaaS批准。因此,该研究扩展了对MaaS包裹偏好排序的理论和实证理解,并阐明了可持续性在运输选择中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preferences for the shared use of electric-powered vehicles in mobility packages: an empirical analysis of MaaS in a university context
Previous research on preferences of potential Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) users often included public transport (PT) in bundled mobility options. Due to the often reported enormous importance of PT availability, including PT in the bundles may have led to distortions in the identification of other vehicle preferences in MaaS offerings. Our analysis counteracts this distortion and investigates how other means of transport are evaluated in mobility packages when PT is not part of the bundle. We included electric-powered mobility alternatives, which have rarely been considered in previous research, to find out which alternatives to PT users would prefer that might increase their approval of MaaS. Furthermore, the results of the existing literature are inconsistent in emphasizing whether sustainability and environmental protection are actually relevant in the valuation of different mobility options. Our analysis thus aims at identifying which electric vehicles are preferred in a mobility package, when PT is not included. We further investigate whether sustainability components of a mobility package influence the preference, structure of individuals. We based the empirical evaluation on a rank-ordered conjoint analysis, in which mobility packages were evaluated according to individual user preferences, including emissions savings. We therefore conducted a study to identify vehicle preferences other than PT and the valuation of sustainability aspects in mobility patterns. We surveyed 995 students to identify preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for MaaS among this specific user group. Results of the empirical analysis show that preferences for an e-car and an e-scooter exist. Furthermore, we found that sustainability plays a role in the evaluation of mobility packages. Accordingly, we found, that a potential reduction in emissions leads to a higher approval of MaaS. Thus, the study extends the theoretical and empirical understanding of preference-ordering of MaaS packages and clarifies the importance of sustainability in transport choices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书