Mode substitution induced by electric mobility hubs: results from Amsterdam

Electric mobility hubs (eHUBS) are locations where multiple shared electric modes including electric cars and e-bikes are available. To assess their potential to reduce private car use, it is important to investigate to what extent people would switch to eHUBS modes after their introduction. Moreover, people may adapt their behaviour differently depending on their current travel mode. This study is based on stated preference data collected in Amsterdam. We analysed the data using mixed logit models. We found users of different modes not only have a varied general preference for different shared modes, but also have different sensitivity for attributes such as travel time and cost. Compared to car users, public transport users are more likely to switch towards the eHUBS modes. People who bike and walk have strong inertia, but the percentage choosing eHUBS modes doubles when the trip distance is longer (5 or 10 km)

eHUBs—Identifying the potential early and late adopters of shared electric mobility hubs

Shared electric mobility hubs, or eHUBs, offer users access to a range of shared electric vehicles on demand. However, little is currently known about what the characteristics of potential users of this novel type of shared mobility are. This makes it difficult to plan the location of hubs and to provide facilities, which ultimately will determine their success. This paper therefore seeks to identify potential users based on an in-depth case study of a representative sample of the Municipality of Amsterdam population. The analysis employed an attitudinal market segmentation approach supported by the Theory of Diffusion of Innovations (DOI). The analysis identified four specific target groups, each with a different propensity to use eHUBs in the future. In our sample, two groups expressed an interest in using eHUBs. The first group consists of highly educated and non-car owning young adults (19% of the sample), whereas the second group shows a higher level of car ownership and a greater number of households with children (69% of the sample). The two remaining groups comprise the majority of laggards (52%), despite only representing 12% of the sample. They tend to be older, less educated, and live in a household without children. The four groups are further distinguished based on their current shared mobility use, traveler identity, and perceived barriers to using shared electric vehicles. Finally, general recommendations to practitioners and policymakers to increase the uptake of shared mobility, including paying attention to the availability, cost, and convenience of shared mobility options, are provided.</p

Data for: Pay more, fly more? Examining the potential guilt-reducing and flight-encouraging effect of an integrated carbon offset

This file contains the coded data for Study 1

eHUBs—Identifying the potential early and late adopters of shared electric mobility hubs

Shared electric mobility hubs, or eHUBs, offer users access to a range of shared electric vehicles on demand. However, little is currently known about what the characteristics of potential users of this novel type of shared mobility are. This makes it difficult to plan the location of hubs and to provide facilities, which ultimately will determine their success. This paper therefore seeks to identify potential users based on an in-depth case study of a representative sample of the Municipality of Amsterdam population. The analysis employed an attitudinal market segmentation approach supported by the Theory of Diffusion of Innovations (DOI). The analysis identified four specific target groups, each with a different propensity to use eHUBs in the future. In our sample, two groups expressed an interest in using eHUBs. The first group consists of highly educated and non-car owning young adults (19% of the sample), whereas the second group shows a higher level of car ownership and a greater number of households with children (69% of the sample). The two remaining groups comprise the majority of laggards (52%), despite only representing 12% of the sample. They tend to be older, less educated, and live in a household without children. The four groups are further distinguished based on their current shared mobility use, traveler identity, and perceived barriers to using shared electric vehicles. Finally, general recommendations to practitioners and policymakers to increase the uptake of shared mobility, including paying attention to the availability, cost, and convenience of shared mobility options, are provided.Accepted Author ManuscriptTransport and Plannin