 Who should not share? The merits of withholding unused vehiclesRoman Zakharenko Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2025, vol. 193, issue C Abstract: People repeatedly demand travel, using available vehicles scattered around space. What can justify vehicle withholding (i.e. preventing others from using it, for own future use) from the social welfare perspective? This paper investigates heterogeneity in the potential cost of search for alternative vehicles as such justification. It is shown that travellers whose search cost is substantially higher than that of others (e.g. limited-mobility people) can optimally withhold a vehicle. The heterogeneity of search costs should be sufficiently strong, e.g. a uniform distribution is not variable enough to justify withholding by anyone. In an example calibrated for car use in London, it is shown that at most 39% of car users should withhold their vehicles under the most extreme modelling assumptions, while all others should share. An extension of the model rules out some other justifications for withholding, such as short duration of stay and aversion of risk of having to search for another vehicle. Keywords: Vehicle sharing; Transportation demand; Spatial search frictions (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:transb:v:193:y:2025:i:c:s0191261525000086 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2025.103159 Access Statistics for this article Transportation Research Part B: Methodological is currently edited by Fred Mannering More articles in Transportation Research Part B: Methodological from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.