How Disruptive Can Shared Mobility Be? A Scenario-Based Evaluation of Shared Mobility Systems Implemented at Large Scale

  • Francesco CiariEmail author
  • Henrik Becker
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)


This paper reports on ongoing work on getting a deeper insight into possible integrations of different shared vehicle systems. It introduces an original methodology in three stages, which helps dealing with the complexity of the problem. Using a simulation tool, different scenarios are assessed. The paper presents preliminary results obtained by simulating two extreme-case scenarios with large-scale car-sharing and bike-sharing schemes. The results suggest that shared mobility, if supplied at large scale and in the right mix, could indeed serve a large share of current travel demand without substantial losses in terms of generalized costs.


Shared mobility Integration Large-scale Car-sharing Bike-sharing Ride-sharing Agent-based simulation MATSim 



This research project is part of the National Research Programme “Managing Energy Consumption” (NRP 71) of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). Further information on the National Research Programme can be found at


  1. 1.
    Horni, A., Nagel, K., Axhausen, K.W. (eds.): The multi-agent transport simulation MATSim. Ubiquity Press, London (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harms, S., Truffer, B.: The emergence of a nationwide carsharing co-operative in Switzerland, report for the EAWAG (Eidgenössische Anstalt für Wasserversorgung, Abwasserreinigung und Gewässerschutz), Dübendorf (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Millard-Ball, A., Murray, G., ter Schure, J., Fox, C., Burkhardt, J.: Car sharing: where and how it succeeds. TCRP Report 108. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shaheen, S.A., Guzman, S., Zhang, H.: Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: past, present, and future. Transp. Res. Rec. 2143, 159–167 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kendall, D.C.: Carpooling: status and potential. U.S Department of Transportation Report DOT-TSC-OST-75-23 (1975)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ben-Akiva, M., Atherton, T.J.: Methodology for short-range travel demand predictions: analysis of carpooling incentives. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 11(3), 224–261 (1977)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giuliano, G., Levine, D.W., Teal, R.F.: Impact of high occupancy vehicle lanes on car-pooling behavior. Transportation 17(2), 159–177 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brownstone, D., Golob, T.F.: The effectiveness of ridesharing incentives, discrete-choice models of commuting in Southern California. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 22(1), 5–24 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rayle, L., Shaheen, S.A., Chan, N., Dai, D., Cervero, R.: App-based on-demand ride-services: comparing taxi and ridesourcing trips and user characteristics in San Francisco. University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rassman, C.L.: Regulating rideshare without stifling innovation: examining the drivers, the insurance “gap” and why Pennsylvania should get on board. J. Technol. Law Policy 15, 81–100 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stillwater, T., Mokhtarian, P.L., Shaheen, S.A.: Carsharing and the built environment, geographic information system-based study of one U.S. operator. Transp. Res. Rec. 2110, 27–34 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grasset, V., Morency C.: Carsharing: analyzing the interaction between neighborhood features and market share. Paper presented at the 89th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Burkhardt, J., Millard-Ball, A.: Who’s attracted to car-sharing? Transp. Res. Rec. 1986:98–105Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kopp, J., Gerike, R., Axhausen, K.W.: Do sharing people behave differently? An empirical evaluation of the distinctive mobility patterns of free-floating car-sharing members. Transportation 42, 449–469 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giuliano, G., Levine, D.W., Teal, R.F.: Impact of high occupancy vehicle lanes on car- pooling behavior. Transportation 17(2), 159–177 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parkany, E.: Can high-occupancy/toll lanes encourage carpooling? Case study of car-pooling behavior on the 91 express lanes. Transp. Res. Rec. 1682, 46–54 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buliung, R.N., Soltys, K., Bui, R., Habel, C., Lanyon, R.: Catching a ride on the information super-highway: toward an understanding of internet-based carpool formation and use. Transportation 37(6), 849–873 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ciari, F., Axhausen, K.W.: Choosing carpooling or carsharing as a mode: Swiss stated choice experiments. Paper presented at the 91st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    DeLoach, S.B., Tiemann, T.K.: Not driving alone? American commuting in the twenty-first century. Transportation 39(3), 521–537 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vanoutrive, T., Van De Vijvera, E., Van Malderenc, L., Jourquinc, B., Thomasd, I., Verhetsela, A., Witlox, F.: What determines carpooling to workplaces in Belgium: location, organisation, or promotion? J. Transp. Geogr. 22, 77–86 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Singla, A., Santoni, M., Bartók, G., Mukerji, P., Meenen, M., Krause, A.: Incentivizing users for balancing bike sharing systems. Paper presented at the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lin, J.R., Yang, T.H., Chang, Y.C.: A hub location inventory model for bicycle sharing system design: formulation and solution. Comput. Ind. Eng. 65(1), 77–86 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fishman, E., Washington, S., Haworth, N., Watson, A.: Factors influencing bike share membership: an analysis of Melbourne and Brisbane. Transp. Res. Part A 71, 17–30 (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vogel, M., Hamon, R., Lozenguez, G., Merchez, L., Abry, P., Barnier, J., Robardet, C.: From bicycle sharing system movements to users: a typology of Vélo’v cyclists in Lyon based on large-scale behavioural dataset. J. Transp. Geogr. 41, 280–291 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tran, T.D., Ovtracht, N., d’Arcier, B.F.: Modeling bike sharing system using built environment factors. Procedia CIRP 30, 293–298 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang, D., He, T., Liu, Y., Lin, S., Stankovic, J.A.: A carpooling recommendation system for taxicab services. IEEE Trans. Eng. Topics Comput. 2(3), 254–266 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Martin, E., Shaheen, S.A.: The impact of carsharing on public transit and non-motorized travel: an exploration of North American carsharing survey data. Energies 4(11), 2094–2114 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Millard-Ball, A., Murray, G., ter Schure, J.: Carsharing as parking management strategy. Paper presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2006)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shaheen, S.A., Rodier, C., Murray, G., Cohen, A., Martin, E.: Carsharing and public parking policies: assessing benefits, costs, and best practices in North America. Report CA- MTI-10-2612, Mineta Transportation Institute (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Martin, E.W., Shaheen, S.A., Lidicker, J.: Impact of carsharing on household vehicle holdings, results from North American shared-use vehicle survey. Transp. Res. Rec. 2143, 150–158 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Suiker, S., van den Elshout, J.: Wirkungsmessung Einführung car2go in Amsterdam. Paper presented at Nationaler Verkehrswissenschaftskongress, Amsterdam (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Le Vine, S., Lee-Gosselin, M., Sivakumar, A., Polak, J.: A new approach to predict the market and impacts of round-trip and point-to-point carsharing systems: case study of London. Transp. Res. Part D 32, 218–229 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fishman, E., Washington, S., Haworth, N.: Bike share’s impact on car use: evidence from the United States, Great Britain, and Australia. Paper presented at the 93rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2014)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Martin, E.W., Shaheen, S.A.: Evaluating public transit modal shift dynamics in response to bikesharing: a tale of two U.S. cities. J. Transp. Geogr. 41, 315–324 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Minett, P., Pearce, J.: Estimating the energy consumption impact of casual carpooling. Energies 4(1), 126–139 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shewmake, S.: Can carpooling clear the road and clean the air? Evidence from the literature on the impact of HOV lanes on VMT and air pollution. J. Plann. Lit. 27(1), 363–374 (2014)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Morency, C.: The ambivalence of ridesharing. Transportation 34(2), 239–253 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ciari, F., Bock, B., Balmer, M.: Modeling station-based and free-floating carsharing demand: test case study for Berlin. Transp. Res. Rec. 2416, 37–47 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ciari, F., Balac, M., Balmer, M.: Modeling the effect of different pricing schemes on free-floating carsharing travel demand: a test case study for Zurich, Switzerland. Transportation 42(3), 413–433 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ciari, F., Balac, M., Axhausen, K.W.: Modeling carsharing with the agent-based simulation MATSim: state of the art, applications and future developments. Accepted for publication in Transp. Res. Rec. (2016)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dubernet, T., Axhausen, K.W.: A multiagent simulation framework for evaluating bike redistribution systems in bike sharing schemes. Arbeitsberichte Verkehrs- und Raumplanung, IVT, ETH Zurich, Zurich (2010)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Balmer, M.: Travel demand modeling for multi-agent transport simulations: algorithms and systems. Dissertation, ETH Zürich, Zürich (2007)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Swiss Federal Statistical Office (BFS): Mobilität in der Schweiz – Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus Mobilität und Verkehr 2010, Neuchâtel 2012Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shaheen, S., Sperling, D., Wagner, C.: Carsharing in Europe and North America: past, present, and future. Transp. Q. 52(3), 35–52 (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) ZurichInstitute for Transport Planning and Systems (IVT)ZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) ZurichInstitute for Transport Planning and Systems (IVT)ZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations