澳大利亚墨尔本共享单车计划的定性视角

IF 3.2 3区 工程技术 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Robyn Gerhard
{"title":"澳大利亚墨尔本共享单车计划的定性视角","authors":"Robyn Gerhard","doi":"10.1016/j.jth.2024.101840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Bike share schemes are operational in many countries and aim to encourage modal shift from sedentary to active modes of transport. Understanding user experiences of bike share schemes can contribute to knowledge of motivations to use the schemes and barriers to use. Qualitative research into user experiences of bike share schemes in Australia has been conducted in Brisbane but not Melbourne, and most bike share scheme research is non-peer reviewed literature. This study describes experiences of bike share schemes in Melbourne.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 bike riders in Melbourne, Australia some of whom used bike share schemes and some who did not. Interviewees were asked about their experiences using bike share schemes in Melbourne.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Bike share schemes provide a way for non-users to try bike riding without needing to purchase a bicycle. E-bike schemes are beneficial to people with health issues. User experiences of bike share schemes are not only related to the service itself, but also interactions with other road users and the overall bike riding environment. Mandatory helmet legislation was a barrier to using bike share schemes due to hygiene and convenience concerns.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Bike share schemes act as an entry to bike riding for people who do not own a bicycle. E-bike fleets are more accessible to people with health or mobility issues. Mandatory helmet legislation could be limiting bike riding's mode share in Melbourne. These findings are relevant to policy makers aiming to increase bike riding's mode share, introduce or expand bike share schemes or mandatory helmet legislation, or a combination of the two.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47838,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transport & Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Qualitative perspectives of bike share schemes in melbourne, Australia\",\"authors\":\"Robyn Gerhard\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jth.2024.101840\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Bike share schemes are operational in many countries and aim to encourage modal shift from sedentary to active modes of transport. Understanding user experiences of bike share schemes can contribute to knowledge of motivations to use the schemes and barriers to use. Qualitative research into user experiences of bike share schemes in Australia has been conducted in Brisbane but not Melbourne, and most bike share scheme research is non-peer reviewed literature. This study describes experiences of bike share schemes in Melbourne.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 bike riders in Melbourne, Australia some of whom used bike share schemes and some who did not. Interviewees were asked about their experiences using bike share schemes in Melbourne.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Bike share schemes provide a way for non-users to try bike riding without needing to purchase a bicycle. E-bike schemes are beneficial to people with health issues. User experiences of bike share schemes are not only related to the service itself, but also interactions with other road users and the overall bike riding environment. Mandatory helmet legislation was a barrier to using bike share schemes due to hygiene and convenience concerns.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Bike share schemes act as an entry to bike riding for people who do not own a bicycle. E-bike fleets are more accessible to people with health or mobility issues. Mandatory helmet legislation could be limiting bike riding's mode share in Melbourne. These findings are relevant to policy makers aiming to increase bike riding's mode share, introduce or expand bike share schemes or mandatory helmet legislation, or a combination of the two.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47838,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Transport & Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Transport & Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140524000860\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transport & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140524000860","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景自行车共享计划已在许多国家投入使用,旨在鼓励人们从久坐不动的交通方式向积极的交通方式转变。了解共享单车的用户体验有助于了解用户使用共享单车的动机和障碍。在澳大利亚,对共享单车用户体验的定性研究只在布里斯班进行过,墨尔本没有,而且大多数共享单车研究都是非同行评议的文献。本研究描述了墨尔本共享单车计划的使用体验。方法对澳大利亚墨尔本的 21 名自行车骑行者进行了半结构式访谈,其中一些人使用了共享单车计划,另一些人则没有使用。受访者被问及他们在墨尔本使用共享单车计划的经历。结果共享单车计划为非用户提供了一种无需购买自行车即可尝试骑车的方式。电动自行车计划对有健康问题的人有益。用户对共享单车计划的体验不仅与服务本身有关,还与其他道路使用者的互动以及整个自行车骑行环境有关。出于卫生和便利性的考虑,强制性头盔立法是使用共享单车计划的一个障碍。电动自行车车队更便于有健康或行动问题的人使用。强制性头盔立法可能会限制墨尔本的自行车骑行模式。这些研究结果对旨在提高自行车骑行模式份额、引入或扩大自行车共享计划或强制性头盔立法或两者结合的政策制定者很有意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Qualitative perspectives of bike share schemes in melbourne, Australia

Background

Bike share schemes are operational in many countries and aim to encourage modal shift from sedentary to active modes of transport. Understanding user experiences of bike share schemes can contribute to knowledge of motivations to use the schemes and barriers to use. Qualitative research into user experiences of bike share schemes in Australia has been conducted in Brisbane but not Melbourne, and most bike share scheme research is non-peer reviewed literature. This study describes experiences of bike share schemes in Melbourne.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 bike riders in Melbourne, Australia some of whom used bike share schemes and some who did not. Interviewees were asked about their experiences using bike share schemes in Melbourne.

Results

Bike share schemes provide a way for non-users to try bike riding without needing to purchase a bicycle. E-bike schemes are beneficial to people with health issues. User experiences of bike share schemes are not only related to the service itself, but also interactions with other road users and the overall bike riding environment. Mandatory helmet legislation was a barrier to using bike share schemes due to hygiene and convenience concerns.

Conclusions

Bike share schemes act as an entry to bike riding for people who do not own a bicycle. E-bike fleets are more accessible to people with health or mobility issues. Mandatory helmet legislation could be limiting bike riding's mode share in Melbourne. These findings are relevant to policy makers aiming to increase bike riding's mode share, introduce or expand bike share schemes or mandatory helmet legislation, or a combination of the two.

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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
196
审稿时长
69 days
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信