Abstract:In recent years, free-floating bike-sharing systems (FFBSSs) have been considerably developed in China. As there is no requirement to construct bike stations, this system can substantially reduce the cost when compared to the traditional bike-sharing systems. However, FFBSSs have also become a critical cause of parking disorder, especially during the morning and evening rush hours. To address this issue, the local governments stipulated that FFBSSs are required to deploy virtual stations near public transit st… Show more
“…The optimization of virtual station locations was addressed in a study of the DBSS of Beijing, China [31]. Although some studies aimed to find virtual stations or zones for new stations, some studies sought to pinpoint exact locations of new stations.…”
Designing or expanding a bicycle-sharing system (BSS) involves addressing the infrastructure’s location of the bicycle stations. Station location is an essential factor for designing and implementing a new system or for its operation. In a complex spatial optimization context, geographic information systems (GIS) can support this decision problem. There are also numerous ways of subdividing the broad spectrum of location-allocation models used in previous studies. However, a station location comprehensive review and systematization with the specific aim of characterizing the state of the art of BSS is missing. The present research aimed to provide a comprehensive systematization for station location problems, criteria, and techniques, seeking to identify the current state of practice. We searched scientific publication databases to collect relevant publications—the final list comprised 24 papers for the literature review. The systematization addresses the two major problems concerning bicycle station location: initial network design and operation improvement (where changes in operating a BSS are implemented). Based on the literature, we propose a set of four main criteria for choosing appropriate places for bike stations (or parking) in a city: “bike network”, “operator”, “user”, and “city infrastructure”. The sub-criteria mentioned in the literature are categorized based on the proposed classification and new sub-criteria are suggested. We also group location modeling techniques into three categories: “mathematical algorithms”, “multi-criteria decision making”, and “GIS”. Combining GIS and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) has received more attention in recent years to locate bike stations, evaluate their operating performance, and have more accurate and practical results.
“…The optimization of virtual station locations was addressed in a study of the DBSS of Beijing, China [31]. Although some studies aimed to find virtual stations or zones for new stations, some studies sought to pinpoint exact locations of new stations.…”
Designing or expanding a bicycle-sharing system (BSS) involves addressing the infrastructure’s location of the bicycle stations. Station location is an essential factor for designing and implementing a new system or for its operation. In a complex spatial optimization context, geographic information systems (GIS) can support this decision problem. There are also numerous ways of subdividing the broad spectrum of location-allocation models used in previous studies. However, a station location comprehensive review and systematization with the specific aim of characterizing the state of the art of BSS is missing. The present research aimed to provide a comprehensive systematization for station location problems, criteria, and techniques, seeking to identify the current state of practice. We searched scientific publication databases to collect relevant publications—the final list comprised 24 papers for the literature review. The systematization addresses the two major problems concerning bicycle station location: initial network design and operation improvement (where changes in operating a BSS are implemented). Based on the literature, we propose a set of four main criteria for choosing appropriate places for bike stations (or parking) in a city: “bike network”, “operator”, “user”, and “city infrastructure”. The sub-criteria mentioned in the literature are categorized based on the proposed classification and new sub-criteria are suggested. We also group location modeling techniques into three categories: “mathematical algorithms”, “multi-criteria decision making”, and “GIS”. Combining GIS and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) has received more attention in recent years to locate bike stations, evaluate their operating performance, and have more accurate and practical results.
“…Since the spatial and temporal imbalance between demand (Gervini and Khanal, 2019;Zhou et al, 2018) and (re)distribution (Ho and Szeto, 2017;Li et al, 2016) of sharing bikes is identified as the key to successful SBP development, some researchers have used different repositioning technologies and models to optimize the station position and address congestion or starvation issues of IT-based SBP (Forma et al, 2015;Ghosh et al, 2017;Szeto and Shui, 2018). This is of particular importance for DSBs due to their flexibility without docking stations, so demand forecasting (Xu et al, 2018), static (Liu et al, 2018) and dynamic repositioning problems (Shui and Szeto, 2018), optimizing location (Sun et al, 2019) and optimizing transportation planning (Sayyadi and Awasthi, 2018) are the key focuses of DSBs research as well in the transportation literature.…”
The booming dockless sharing bikes (DSBs) in China, as a new sharing economy business model, have attracted increasing public and academic attention after 2015. The impact of DSBs development on the stocks and flows of bikes and the resource and climate consequences of shortlived DSBs, however, remain poorly understood. In this study, we characterized the stocks and flows of both DSBs and regular private bikes in China from 1950 to 2020 and evaluated the carbon cost and benefit of booming DSBs. We found China's bike consumption and stock decreased slightly after a fast development from the late 1970s and then a peak in the mid-1990s, resulting in a *Manuscript Click here to download Manuscript: Manuscript -Dockless Bikeshare in China_final_2020_6_27_clean_version.docx Click here to view linked References relatively low ownership of approximately 0.3 unit per person and 70% of production being exported in recent years. Despite a temporal boost, the unsustainable development of DSBs may affect the bike industry in the long term, because of its skyrocketing market share (from less than 1% to 80%) and short lifetime. Nevertheless, DSBs development still leads to an overall climate gain in China, due to its higher stock efficiency and potentials to substitute more carbon intensive trips. We suggest an urgent need for more empirical studies on the use (e.g., substitution ratio for other transportation models) of DSBs in China and a necessity for better management of DSB development with efforts of all relevant stakeholders.
“…These studies may be categorised into three hierarchical levels, including strategic design, tactical development and operations management [9]. In terms of strategic design, research has been aimed to ensure satisfactory levels of service and inventory in bike-sharing networks through rational planning of the location and capacity of the stations and/or parking places, thereby reducing user dissatisfaction, station construction cost, or both, e.g., [10,11,12,13,14,15]. The studies at the tactical level have focused on formulating various user incentive policies in an effort to encourage users to ride shared bikes from oversupplied areas to undersupplied areas, e.g., [16,17,18].…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.