Last-mile travel and bicycle sharing system in small/medium sized cities: user’s preferences investigation using hybrid choice model
Adnan, M.; Altaf, S.; Bellemans, T.; Yasar, A.U.H.; Shakshuki, E.M., 2019, in Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing
doi:10.1007/s12652-018-0849-5
Location |
Belgium |
Population |
General |
Sample size |
321 |
Factor analysis type |
confirmatory factor analysis, nan rotation |
Stepwise regression |
no |
Removal of insignificant variables |
no |
Reviewed by |
LCM |
Abstract
First and last-mile access to and from public transport stations/stops is a major problem for encouraging public transport use. Bicycle sharing schemes have shown potential to fill this gap. Consequently, railway operators in the Netherland and Germany have started their own bike sharing schemes. Majority of the studies examined the preferences for using bike share schemes for larger cities. This study analyses the collected stated preference survey data for the use of bicycle sharing scheme for last mile travel, which is recently launched in small/medium sized cities of Belgium. Within this scheme a single docking station is available and users need to return bicycle at the same station. The survey also includes questions on respondents attitudes towards friendliness-to-cycling. The hybrid choice modelling framework is used to investigate preferences of users. Usual explanatory variables such as temperature, rain conditions, distance, rental cost, gender and age are found significant, which confirms the findings of earlier studies. Along with these; last-mile (to home) and an interaction term between rental cost and duration to keep bicycle are found significant, which indicate the negative effects of having a single docking station. Availability of escorting facility from parents/colleague/friends (a more common phenomenon in small/medium cities) also has a negative effect on the use of the examined bike share scheme. Paper also discusses promotional campaigns and marketing efforts according to the obtained results for making such schemes more successful. © 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Factors
Models
Dependent variable |
Choice of using PBSS |
Model type |
Binary logit |
Sample size |
321.0 |
R2 |
nan |
Adjusted R2 |
|
Pseudo R2
(nan)
|
nan |
AIC |
nan |
BIC |
nan |
Log-likelihood at zero |
nan |
Log-likelihood at constants |
nan |
Log-likelihood at convergence |
nan |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Coefficient |
0.9239
|
0.271 |
Bike rental cost (Euros) |
-0.4368
|
0.0 |
ln(trip duration in minutes) |
NS
|
nan |
Bike rental cost (Euros)*ln(trip duration in minutes) |
-0.006
|
0.0 |
Trip distance < 1 km |
-0.6707
|
0.0 |
Trip distance 1-3 km |
0.4775
|
0.0 |
Trip distance 3-5 km |
0.2357
|
0.0 |
Availability of other modes (car-escort) |
-0.2891
|
0.0 |
Availability of other modes (bus) |
0.362
|
0.0 |
Rainfall (yes) |
-1.2791
|
0.0 |
Bike parking at destination (yes) |
0.6945
|
0.043 |
Segregated bike path (full) |
NS
|
nan |
Segregated bike path (halfway) |
NS
|
nan |
Temperature (0-5) |
-0.3947
|
0.0 |
Temperature (5-15) |
0.1987
|
0.001 |
Last-mile (work to home leg of journey) |
-0.0014
|
0.019 |
Dependent variable |
Choice of using PBSS |
Model type |
HCM |
Sample size |
321.0 |
R2 |
nan |
Adjusted R2 |
|
Pseudo R2
(nan)
|
nan |
AIC |
nan |
BIC |
nan |
Log-likelihood at zero |
nan |
Log-likelihood at constants |
nan |
Log-likelihood at convergence |
nan |
Structural model (DV = FC) |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Coefficient |
0.0512
|
0.0 |
Gender (male) |
0.1333
|
0.021 |
Age (18-30) |
0.3652
|
0.0 |
Age (31-60) |
0.1197
|
0.0 |
Emplyment (student) |
0.2311
|
0.0 |
Employment (full-time) |
-0.0411
|
0.002 |
Education (high school) |
NS
|
nan |
Education (bachelor's) |
NS
|
nan |
Education (master's) |
NS
|
nan |
Driving license (yes) |
NS
|
nan |
Bike ownership |
0.3966
|
0.0 |
Car ownership (yes) |
NS
|
nan |
Car ownership (available in house) |
NS
|
nan |
Knowledge of PBSS (yes) |
NS
|
nan |
Frequent mode for last mile travel in multistage rail trip (car) |
-0.2561
|
0.001 |
Frequent mode for last mile travel in multistage rail trip (bus/train) |
0.1423
|
0.0 |
Frequent mode for last mile travel in multistage rail trip (PBSS/bicycle) |
0.3611
|
0.001 |
Standard deviation-FC |
0.1912
|
0.002 |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Coefficient |
-0.2651
|
0.012 |
Bike rental cost (Euros) |
-0.4312
|
0.0 |
ln(trip duration in minutes) |
NS
|
nan |
Bike rental cost (Euros)*ln(trip duration in minutes) |
-0.0068
|
0.0 |
Trip distance < 1 km |
-0.6598
|
0.0 |
Trip distance 1-3 km |
0.4981
|
0.0 |
Trip distance 3-5 km |
0.2314
|
0.0 |
Availability of other modes (car-escort) |
-0.3181
|
0.0 |
Availability of other modes (bus) |
0.3756
|
0.0 |
Rainfall (yes) |
-1.1342
|
0.0 |
Bike parking at destination (yes) |
0.6867
|
0.021 |
Segregated bike path (full) |
nan
|
nan |
Segregated bike path (halfway) |
nan
|
nan |
Temperature (0-5) |
-0.3676
|
0.0 |
Temperature (5-15) |
0.2154
|
0.0 |
Last-mile (work to home leg of journey) |
-0.0015
|
0.001 |
Friendliness to cycling |
0.9654
|
0.0 |