{"title":"骑车人的不同停车偏好及其对自行车停车设施的影响","authors":"David Kohlrautz, Tobias Kuhnimhof","doi":"10.1016/j.tra.2024.104298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Understanding bicycle parking behavior is essential when planning bicycle parking facilities. This is necessary in order to meet the needs of cyclists, to effectively promote cycling, and to prevent fly parking of bicycles. Therefore, this paper analyzes cyclists’ parking preferences regarding the type and placement of bicycle parking facilities. The study is based on a stated preference experiment (n = 2,960) on the bicycle parking choice behavior of university students and employees of RWTH Aachen University, one of the largest universities in Germany. The analysis employs a mixed logit model to estimate the influence of facility type and user-specific factors, the willingness to pay for parking facilities, and the relevance of cycling detours and walking distances. The results indicate that cyclists are more than twice as sensitive to walking distances than to cycling detours. Furthermore, they have a general preference for bicycle parking stations and covered versus uncovered parking racks, as well as a reluctance to use informal parking facilities. While previous research has shown that groups of cyclists have different preferences and parking behaviors, it has been unclear what factors influence group membership. This paper shows that student and employment status and the resale value of the bicycle are important user-specific factors influencing the choice between parking facilities. Furthermore, there is a notable willingness to pay for bicycle parking, especially among those with expensive bicycles. The considerable variation in preferences among cyclists underscores the importance of considering the heterogeneity of cyclists when planning parking facilities to optimize their utility.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49421,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice","volume":"191 ","pages":"Article 104298"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cyclists’ heterogeneous parking preferences and their implications for bicycle parking facilities\",\"authors\":\"David Kohlrautz, Tobias Kuhnimhof\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tra.2024.104298\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Understanding bicycle parking behavior is essential when planning bicycle parking facilities. This is necessary in order to meet the needs of cyclists, to effectively promote cycling, and to prevent fly parking of bicycles. Therefore, this paper analyzes cyclists’ parking preferences regarding the type and placement of bicycle parking facilities. The study is based on a stated preference experiment (n = 2,960) on the bicycle parking choice behavior of university students and employees of RWTH Aachen University, one of the largest universities in Germany. The analysis employs a mixed logit model to estimate the influence of facility type and user-specific factors, the willingness to pay for parking facilities, and the relevance of cycling detours and walking distances. The results indicate that cyclists are more than twice as sensitive to walking distances than to cycling detours. Furthermore, they have a general preference for bicycle parking stations and covered versus uncovered parking racks, as well as a reluctance to use informal parking facilities. While previous research has shown that groups of cyclists have different preferences and parking behaviors, it has been unclear what factors influence group membership. This paper shows that student and employment status and the resale value of the bicycle are important user-specific factors influencing the choice between parking facilities. Furthermore, there is a notable willingness to pay for bicycle parking, especially among those with expensive bicycles. The considerable variation in preferences among cyclists underscores the importance of considering the heterogeneity of cyclists when planning parking facilities to optimize their utility.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\"191 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104298\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585642400346X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585642400346X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cyclists’ heterogeneous parking preferences and their implications for bicycle parking facilities
Understanding bicycle parking behavior is essential when planning bicycle parking facilities. This is necessary in order to meet the needs of cyclists, to effectively promote cycling, and to prevent fly parking of bicycles. Therefore, this paper analyzes cyclists’ parking preferences regarding the type and placement of bicycle parking facilities. The study is based on a stated preference experiment (n = 2,960) on the bicycle parking choice behavior of university students and employees of RWTH Aachen University, one of the largest universities in Germany. The analysis employs a mixed logit model to estimate the influence of facility type and user-specific factors, the willingness to pay for parking facilities, and the relevance of cycling detours and walking distances. The results indicate that cyclists are more than twice as sensitive to walking distances than to cycling detours. Furthermore, they have a general preference for bicycle parking stations and covered versus uncovered parking racks, as well as a reluctance to use informal parking facilities. While previous research has shown that groups of cyclists have different preferences and parking behaviors, it has been unclear what factors influence group membership. This paper shows that student and employment status and the resale value of the bicycle are important user-specific factors influencing the choice between parking facilities. Furthermore, there is a notable willingness to pay for bicycle parking, especially among those with expensive bicycles. The considerable variation in preferences among cyclists underscores the importance of considering the heterogeneity of cyclists when planning parking facilities to optimize their utility.
期刊介绍:
Transportation Research: Part A contains papers of general interest in all passenger and freight transportation modes: policy analysis, formulation and evaluation; planning; interaction with the political, socioeconomic and physical environment; design, management and evaluation of transportation systems. Topics are approached from any discipline or perspective: economics, engineering, sociology, psychology, etc. Case studies, survey and expository papers are included, as are articles which contribute to unification of the field, or to an understanding of the comparative aspects of different systems. Papers which assess the scope for technological innovation within a social or political framework are also published. The journal is international, and places equal emphasis on the problems of industrialized and non-industrialized regions.
Part A''s aims and scope are complementary to Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Part C: Emerging Technologies and Part D: Transport and Environment. Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. The complete set forms the most cohesive and comprehensive reference of current research in transportation science.