Multimodal mobility system and the user acceptance

By Madlen Günther, Sebastian Müller-Blumhagen, and Josef F. Krems,
(Chemnitz University of Technology)
Intelligent mobility concepts including sharing systems, and alternative means of transport such as battery electric vehicles (BEVs), electric bicycles (pedelecs), and public transport, are promising solutions for sustainable future mobility, given their reduced emissions. Moreover, in recent years, car-sharing popularity is growing rapidly worldwide. In 2014 nearly 5 million people used such a service compared to 0.67 million in 2008. Low-income people Car-sharing leads to a reduction of travelled kilometers and emissions. Due to the combination with other means of transport an efficient land use and multimodal transportation (i.e. having access to different means of transport in making a trip) is favoured. These changes in transport behaviour are thought to be attributable to a positive attitude towards alternative and sustainable means of transport. Studies show, that alternative mobility systems (i.e. electric driven) have higher acceptance values compared to conventional combustion systems. Positive environmental effects of car-sharing systems may be further increased by the incorporation of BEVs in this context, due to their potential to run without emissions. The integration of bicycles and public transport use into a multimodal mobility behavior provide additional sustainable and pro-environmental benefits. Despite the known positive environmental effect of multimodal sharing systems, such services are relatively novel and often not comparable, due to city-specific solutions, even within a single nation. Research examining the acceptance of such a multimodal system is lacking. However, user perspective is a key element for market penetration of new mobility systems, with acceptance being an important indicator for the usage of alternative mobility systems and means of transport. Furthermore, acceptance is the pre-condition for making use of an alternative mobility system, and improves the likelihood of a successful adoption process. Previous research has shown that experience is a relevant moderator for acceptance and evaluating BEVs. Several studies focusing on user acceptance of BEV-sharing systems, have shown influencing factors, such as individual (e.g., income and education), and service-related factors (e.g., price and type of car). A reported barrier to car-sharing adoption is insurance coverage.
These economic barriers pose a confounder in the study of user acceptance. Compared to personal car-sharing users, corporate car-sharing users consider handling-related factors more important for acceptance of a system. Corporate car-sharing refers to a free of charge car pool used by employees for business travel. In a study of Fleury, Tom, Jamet, and Colas-Maheux (2017), ease of use (i.e. effort expectancy) was the primary factor in acceptance of this service. Thus, acceptance in corporate transportation is uninfluenced by economic therefore provides a better model to investigate users’ acceptance of multimodal sharing systems.
To better understand the adoption process of a new mobility system, we evaluated changes in user acceptance by employing multi-point data collection on the same participants, over a longitudinal study. This investigation in the context of multimodal sharing systems and corporate usage is still missing in the literature.
Read the full study at: http://abstracts.aetransport.org/paper/index/id/5555/confid/24