To own or not to own? Car ownership and consumer awareness: Evidence from an Italian survey

Burlando, Claudia; Ivaldi, Enrico; Saiani, Paolo Parra; Penco, Lara

doi:10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100435

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a survey of women's carsharing usage, del Mar Alonso-Almeida (2019) attributed the predominance of male carsharing customers to the fact that the mobile technology platforms on which carsharing services are based are less appealing to women than to men. Similarly, the predominance of younger carsharing customers can be attributed to their greater familiarity with technological devices like smartphones (Burlando et al , 2019; Guglielmetti Mugion et al , 2019).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, nonmonetary costs (such as the inconvenience of having to reserve a car each time it is needed) may act as a barrier to carsharing (Duncan, 2011). In a survey to understand the factors that influence carsharing adoption, Burlando et al (2019) found that issues like comfort and independence, which are often associated with private car ownership, may discourage carsharing adoption. Table 4 summarizes the main customer drivers and barriers identified in the literature.…”

Section: Key Barriers To Carsharing Demand and Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…. (2017a), Burlando et al (2019), Carten ı et al (2016), De Luca and Di Pace (2015), Guglielmetti Mugion et al (2019),Hjorteset and B€ ocker (2020),Prieto et al (2017),Shaheen and Martin (2010),Tran et al (2019),Tyndall (2017) Higher demand among single-person households, especially males in their 20s and 30s and city center residents Customers are predominantly young, male, middle class, more highly educated and from a household of below-average size GeographicCsonka and Csiszar (2016), Diana and Ceccato (2019), Jian et al (2016), Juschten et al (2019), Kent et al (2017), Kim et al (2017b), M€ unzel et al (2020), Zhou and Kockelman (2011) Customers who opt for carsharing are encouraged by car availability, reliability and parking conditions Socioeconomic Boldrini et al (2019), Hjorteset and B€ ocker (2020), Clewlow (2016), Coll et al (2014), Chun et al (2019), M€ unzel et al (2020) Higher education levels, moderate upper income levels Population density Becker et al (2017b), Cohen et al (2008), Coll et al (2014), de Lorimier and El-Geneidy (2013) Carsharing scales with population density and social activity in a given area Environmental benefits Kim et al (2017a), M€ unzel et al (2020), Julsrud and Farstad (2020) Environmental benefits are important but are not the sole driver of carsharing service use High service quality Fleury et al (2017) Customers, especially B2B, are attracted by high-quality services such as fleet management, tutorials and ability to access help Barriers Limited availability Shaheen et al (1998), Kim et al (2017a), Kim et al (2019), de Lorimier and El-Geneidy (2013)Likelihood of using carsharing services is reduced by increased waiting time for a shared car Low public awarenessBurlando et al (2019),Duncan (2011),Zhang and Li (2020),Zhou et al (2017) …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Carsharing: a systematic literature review and research agenda

Nansubuga

Kowalkowski

2021

JOSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeFollowing the recent surge in research on carsharing, the paper synthesizes this growing literature to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of research and to identify directions for future work. Specifically, this study details implications for service theory and practice.Design/methodology/approachSystematic selection and analysis of 279 papers from the existing literature, published between 1996 and 2020.FindingsThe literature review identified four key themes: business models, drivers and barriers, customer behavior, and vehicle balancing.Practical implicationsFor managers, the study illuminates the importance of collaboration among stakeholders within the automotive sector for purposes of widening their customer base and maximizing utilization and profits. For policy makers, their important role in supporting carsharing take-off is highlighted with emphasis on balancing support rendered to different mobility services to promote mutual success.Originality/valueThis is the first systematic multi-disciplinary literature review of carsharing. It integrates insights from transportation, environmental, and business studies, identifying gaps in the existing research and specifically suggesting implications for service research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Key Barriers To Carsharing Demand and Usementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carsharing: a systematic literature review and research agenda

Nansubuga

Kowalkowski

2021

JOSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Either financial benefits can simply be increased by making collaborative car use even cheaper, or the level of awareness as to the financial difference between private car use and collaborative car use can be raised. For example, Burlando et al (2019) found that awareness of the actual costs of private car use is low, which might be a reason why convenience and comfort were rated as more important than financial costs in the same study.…”

Section: Financial Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Autonomy Loss, Privacy Invasion and Data Misuse as Psychological Barriers to Peer-to-Peer Collaborative Car Use

Hunecke¹,

Richter²,

Heppner³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed to identify psychological barriers, which potentially prevent people from implementing collaborative car use in their every-day mobility behaviour. We suggested a model consisting of four psychological barriers: Autonomy Loss, Privacy Invasion, Interpersonal Distrust, and Data Misuse. Perceived Financial Benefit was included as a main incentive of collaborative car use. Using two samples, a community (N = 176) and a student sample (N = 265), three forms of peer-to-peer collaborative car use were examined: lending your own car to another private person (Lending To), renting a car from another private person (Renting From) and sharing rides with others (Ridesharing). For all three forms, a standardised questionnaire was developed which included the psychological barriers, self-reported collaborative car use intention and behaviour, and scenario evaluations. The results showed that specific barriers predicted specific forms of collaborative car use: Autonomy Loss was connected negatively with Ridesharing and Privacy Invasion predicted Lending To negatively. Data misuse was connected negatively with Renting From, when the renting was arranged via internet. Interpersonal Distrust showed no predictive value of collaborative car use. Perceived Financial Benefit was a consistent incentive for all forms of collaborative car use. Overall, the results confirm the relevance of psychological barriers to collaborative car use. Practical implications to overcome the psychological barriers are discussed.

show abstract

“…Mobility is one of the pillars in the design of smart city services. The implementation of intelligent transportation systems (ITSs) not only is important to better manage trafficrelated aspects (such as smart parking, car sharing [49,50], speed control systems), but it is functional for a near-to-zero emissions approach [51]. Smart mobility is largely permeated by ICT, used in both backward and forward applications, to support the optimisation of traffic fluxes but also to collect citizens' opinions about liveability in cities or quality of local public transportation services [51].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Partially Non-Compensatory Method to Measure the Smart and Sustainable Level of Italian Municipalities

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A smart sustainable city (SSC) is a paradigm that encapsulates the latest lines of development in multiple fields of research. The attempt to converge towards a model of sustainable urban life, made difficult by increasing anthropic pressure and polluting activities conducted by man, is also reflected in the intentions of public institutions to take measures of environmental risk mitigation. The change towards more liveable cities must also include the adoption of more far-reaching measures in various sectors. The objective of our work was to provide an analysis in order to assess which of the Italian provincial municipalities were most closely related to the paradigm of SSCs. This aim was pursued through a comparison based on the results of a partially non-compensatory quantitative method, known as the Pena’s Distance method (DP2). The smartest and most sustainable cities, such as Siena, Milan and Padua, were not identified on the basis of common urban characteristics but rather derived from the combination of distinctive and functional elements in the pursuit of a strategic approach aimed at fully exploiting the resources of each area. Moreover, at a macro-geographical level, from the analysis emerged the presence of contiguous clusters, i.e., areas in which a major concentration of smart sustainable municipalities tended to form.

show abstract

To own or not to own? Car ownership and consumer awareness: Evidence from an Italian survey

Cited by 20 publications

References 48 publications

Carsharing: a systematic literature review and research agenda

Carsharing: a systematic literature review and research agenda

Autonomy Loss, Privacy Invasion and Data Misuse as Psychological Barriers to Peer-to-Peer Collaborative Car Use

A Partially Non-Compensatory Method to Measure the Smart and Sustainable Level of Italian Municipalities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About