Bike sharing: Regulatory options for conflicting interests – Case study Vienna

Barbara Laa and Günter Emberger

Transport Policy, 2020, vol. 98, issue C, 148-157

Abstract: Bike sharing schemes (BSS) have become popular around the globe. However, new schemes often cause issues due to conflicting interests. In recent years, this was the case with free-floating bike sharing schemes (FFBSS). This paper analyzes the situation of bike sharing (station-based and free-floating) in Vienna with a focus on regulations. Solutions of past problems and present challenges are presented. Additionally, the situation is compared to selected cities around the world (Tianjin, Singapore, Melbourne, Seattle, Amsterdam and Oxford).

Keywords: Micromobility; New mobility; Sharing economy; Transport policy; Cycling (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X19308881
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:trapol:v:98:y:2020:i:c:p:148-157

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
https://shop.elsevie ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.03.009

Access Statistics for this article

Transport Policy is currently edited by Y. Hayashi

More articles in Transport Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().