The shared electric scooter systems: Exploring the behavioural factors effecting the adoption of shared electric scooters

(1)

The shared electric scooter systems:

Exploring the behavioral factors affecting the adoption of shared electric scooters

Iordachescu, Alexandru-Ionut

Master’s programme in Spatial Planning Urban and Regional Mobility

Nijmegen School of Management Radboud University

(2)

Preface

I am grateful to all those who supported me during the process of writing this thesis. The whole adventure of writing it lasted longer than anticipated for various personal and health reasons (COVID-19 crisis).

First of all, I would like to thank my family that supported me both financially and emotionally. On the other hand, I would also like to thank the thesis supervisor, Mr. Sander Lenferink, who was always available and ready to give me feedback or answers to the questions raised by me. Given the conditions for carrying out all educational activities (mainly online) in 2020, I believe that I received a great sense of motivation, constructive directions, and excellent insights through effective communication with him.

Last but not least, I am also grateful to the staff of the Geography, Planning & Environment department for the level of professionalism they have shown during the 2 years I was a student at Radboud University. By coming from an engineering background and not having research skills at all, this paper wouldn’t have been possible to be realized without proper teaching methods offered by them.

(3)

Abstract

Due to the novelty of the topic and the rapid expansion of shared e-scooter systems, at this moment the big urban agglomerations are facing problems expressed in their attempt to regulate this new form of mobility. Even though the concept of shared mobility is a prevailing one, there is a lack of academic evidence about both the users and non-users' perspectives of this transport mean. As a result, this thesis aims to measure the perception of users and non-users of the shared e-scooter system in order to synthesize some conclusions that hopefully will lead to a better undstrandaring of the intention to use this mobility means. The outline and methodology used in this Master thesis are structured considering the following research question: “What is the perception of users and non-users in Bucharest regarding shared e-scooter systems?"

(4)

1. Introduction

1.1 Problem statement

According to Vincent (2009) even though the price of oil has risen, dependence on the personal car has continued to grow exponentially. He attributes this to the fact that the car is perceived by people as an asset and a symbol of freedom. Despite the intense environmental issues debated in the literature, a survey applied to households in Lyon indicates that the average occupancy rate of personal cars is 1.37, a percentage that turns down to 1.03 on the home to work commute. Even though the car is a very attractive means of transport, its mass use can cause many problems such as global warming, local air pollution, and endanger the overall quality of life in urban areas (Garling & Schuitema, 2007). In addition to the environmental problems associated with private car travel, the term congestion is nonetheless important to mention because contrary to initial thinking, it also affects other social categories that do not use such a means of transport. Specifically, congestion can severely affect the urban public transport network or the mobility of people who choose to use active means of transport (Moya-Gómez & García-Palomares, 2017). A good depiction of this fact is the 50% increase in bus journey times in the past 50 years or the decline of bus fleet fuel efficiency by up to 35% (Begg, 2016).

Fortunately, developing countries have come up with numerous strategies to reduce GHG emissions as a result of increasing vehicle ownership. Sperling & Salon (2002) classifies these strategies into several categories, two of which stand out: the ones that aim at restraining the demand and use of privately own vehicles and the ones that make use of new technologies (use of ICT, innovative propulsion systems, smaller vehicles sizes, fuels, etc.).

However, the first category, namely the attempt to curb the private car usage, is not referred to as a successful one in other academic papers. Gardner & Abraham (2010) perceive policies to financially charge drivers (e.g. through congestion charging) or to change road infrastructure as ambitious but with a result that will not change drivers' motivation but will make them relocate to alternative routes. Similarly, Harms (2003) describes the classic push to reduce driving policy initiatives as not the only solution to motivate consumers to use other means of transportation. Innovative technologies are seen as facilitators of the transition to more ecologically mobility standards. These innovations are categorized as technical innovations (electric scooters, e-bikes), service innovations (ride-sharing services), or a mix between both (Harms, 2003). Moreover, a better conceptualization of these new innovations can serve local authorities in their attempt to offer together with the market industry (the service providers) an integrated transport system.

As mentioned before, the shared e-scooters concept - consisting of both the e-scooters as a technological innovation and the fact that they are shared (new service) , is defined as a "hot"

(7)

topic among the policymakers and practitioners who try to develop policies or new sets of rules related to regulating those concerns, the scientists who aim at a better understanding and conceptualization of this concept and the civil society members or NGO's that are interested in new mobility identities and their associated benefits for society and the environment. Even though the concept of shared mobility has received satisfactory attention from academic scholars (Shaheen et al, 2016; Shaheen et al., 2017; Laporte et al., 2015; Machado et al., 2018) , there is still a lack of evidence in regards to who are the users and non-user's of this service and their perception of this specific mobility form, which could set the basis for further in-depth policy research about this micro-mobility novelty.

1.2 Research aim and questions

As mentioned in the previous chapter since the chosen topic is one which about little knowledge currently exists, the main aim of this research project is considered to be an exploratory one (van Thiel, 2014). More clearly, the main objective of this thesis is to explore the perception of users and non-users of the shared e-scooter system to synthesize some conclusions that hopefully will lead to a better undstrandaring of the intention to use this mobility means. Therefore, the main research question and the guiding sub-questions which will define the research process are presented below.

Main research question: What is the perception of users and non-users in Bucharest regarding shared e-scooter systems?

Sub-questions:

a) What behavioral factors influence the choice with regard to using a shared electric scooter system?

b) Which behavioral factors positively influence the choice of users and non-users for the shared electric scooter system?

c) Which behavioral factors negatively influence the choice of users and non-users for the shared electric scooter system?

d) How do users and non-users assess the positive and negative behavioral factors in their choice with regard to shared electric scooter systems?

(8)

1.3 Research relevance

1.3.1 Societal relevance

In terms of the societal relevance of this paper, this study offers a good opportunity for a multitude of shared e-scooter providers to readjust their service features and provide an integrated transport service through collaborations with local governments. As mentioned in the previous subchapter, most areas where this form of mobility has been integrated either as a pilot program (Amsterdam) or as a "self-standing business" (Bucharest), suffer from traffic safety and of understanding the exact purpose of this innovation (Fig. 1). Specifically, public transport companies are interested more and more about integrating shared micro-mobility services, municipalities aim to create integrated transport networks to solve congestion and fairness problems, while commuters are concerned about time and environmental aspects related to CO2 emissions (Zarif, Pankratz & Kelman, 2019; Shaheen & Cohen, 2019)). Therefore, both local governments are sympathetic about the smooth integration of the shared e-scooter system into the current transport network and the market industry is stimulated to adapt services according to the users' perception. Moreover, as Shaheen & Cohen (2019) state, the micro-mobility realm has huge potential to offer society a multitude of potential benefits "such as increased mobility, greater environmental awareness, and increased use of active transportation and non-vehicular modes" (Shaheen & Cohen, 2019). Somewhat similar ideas are presented by Zarif, Pankratz & Kelman (2019) who argue that micro-mobility has the power to help cities and service providers in their attempt to overcome crucial transportation challenges within the urban area and also to assist them in their pursuit to become carbon neutral. Moreover, a key takeaway from the report published by Clewlow, Foti & Shepard-Ohta (2018) is their statement that the new forms of micro-mobility have the potential to help cities progress to an equitable transport system as long as the cities are capable to partner with these service providers. As stated at the beginning of this subchapter, the contribution of the current thesis to this goal is to come up with a pertinent behavioral analysis by investigating the perspective of those who use and those who do not currently find micro-mobility services an attractive alternative to other urban mobility means. The results of this analysis could be used by both the shared e-scooter providers and municipalities.

1.3.2 Scientific relevance

The scientific relevance of this paper consists of developing existing knowledge on regards to shared mobility, especially on a certain aspect, namely the shared e-scooter service. Due to this topic's novelty and thus despite the lack of available academic literature on shared mobility, in his paper, Arendsen (2019) analyzes the willingness to share a diversity of shared

(9)

mobility services but in the end, he comes to a recommendation for further research as future studies should focus on a certain shared mobility form (shared car, bike or e-scooter) which "would allow for including relevant attributes and trip characteristics such as availability of parking systems" (Arendsen, 2019). Perhaps the most relevant argument for proving the scientific relevance of this thesis is again made by Shaheen & Cohen (2019) who claim that scientific studies on the users' perception of micro-mobility are quite limited. While their statement tends to point in the direction of users, this thesis will aim at understanding both the users and non-users of this mobility mode as the almost non-existing research has been carried out on users only.

In the world of innovation and development, making several milestones to improve service delivery in the transport sector is a priority. In improving mobility and solving mobility related problems, economic and reliable means exist. Shared e-scooters are services that provide dockless electrically motorized scooters to where they are required to serve for short term renting (Allem and Majmundar, 2019). Over the years, companies have embraced this idea by improving the accessibility of services by technology. Creating applications for renting and paying for them has expanded this business locally and internationally. Currently, these services are found all across Europe, Asia, and South America. They have solved traffic problems, solving the last-mile mobility frustrations and are easy to sustain (Allem and Majmundar 2019). These services have grown to be more popular over recent years, and there is a need to gather information about the behavioural factors that encourage and sometimes discourage the public from using these services. Thus, this Master's thesis will try to build on top of the existing theoretical knowledge by using the Theory of Planned Behavior, which is a widely used theory in social research because of its capability to investigate an individual's intention to engage in certain behaviors.

(10)

Figure 1_{. Parked shared e-scooters on the pedestrian sidewalk in Bucharest, Romania} (own photo). March 12th, 2020

1.4 Thesis structure

Chapter 1: This chapter describes the problem statement and implicitly the reasons and the main drivers behind the decision to perform an analysis on this topic. Afterward, the research aim, questions, and relevance are formulated.

Chapter 2: In the second chapter, the results of the literature review are presented regarding the achievements of the theoretical framework. Also, the chapter contains various theories and concepts related to the thesis topic in order to outline the subject of the thesis. Consequently, in addition to the introduction of smart and shared mobility theories, the concept of shared electric scooters is presented and the fundamental theory underlying the current work, namely the Theory of Planned Behavior.

Chapter 3: This chapter aims to present and argue the authors choice of the methodology used in this thesis. Thus, the used research philosophy, strategy, and methods are described in detail. Also, issues related to the limitations of the current study are discussed.

Chapter 4: Chapter 4 provides a brief overview of the current context in which the study is taking place.

Chapter 5: Chapter 5 tries to answer the main research questions and the 2 research sub-questions presented in the introductory chapter by analyzing the data obtained using the methodology mentioned in the previous chapter. Therefore, it analyzes what is the respondents' psychological perception of this transport mean.

(11)

Chapter 6: Last but not least, Chapter 6 encapsulates the main ideas and conclusions formulated up to this point and provides a brief summary of the current knowledge. Also in this chapter, based on the conclusions of the study, the author tries to formulate suggestions and recommendations for both the scientific community and practice.

(12)

2. Literature review and theoretical framework

Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is one of the most widely used in the literature and suitable theories for studying pro-environmental behaviors such as travel mode choice or recycling. Evidence points to an approximate number of 154 different contexts in which this model has been successfully applied (Armitrage & Conner, 2001).

The Rational Choice Theory (RCT) also offers a good starting point for analysing travel mode choice as it is based on the principle of utility maximization. But, as this theory is based on economic concepts, a travel mode choice analysis using this concept would not be good enough for coming up with relevant behavioral factors; by assessing individual’s transport choices through the lens of RCT one could only measure their personal utility, as an individual mainly mitigates or performs for his own benefits (total costs and benefits of choosing one mode over another) (Javaid, Creutzig & Bamberg, 2020). As stated by these authors, monetary costs and time savings are the key takings when studying travel mode choice using RCT. Similarly, (Garcia i Sierra, 2014) says that most travel choices are guided by the principle of habitual choices. These habitual choices are specific actions performed by individuals, with “low information processing”, having the purpose of achieving immediate rewards (e.g. the fastest or cheapest route back home, no matter what).

Although similar in some respects to RCT, TPB is considered a more practical method in the social sciences because it contains clear standardized measurement models so researchers can easily measure what they intend to measure, which Rational Choice Theories lack (Opp, 2019). Moreover, Opp (2019) suggests that the 4 pillars of TPB (attitude, perceived behavior control, social norms, and intention) which are critical for analyzing human behavior are not present at all in any of the RCT. If one wants to measure behavior by using an RCT model, they have to empirically determine the measuring variables whereas with TPB is strongly advised to at least start with perceived behavior control & social norms as major variables and further extend these (Opp, 2019).

In conclusion, both theories have the "behavior" as a dependent variable but Rational Choice Theories being developed on economic considerations are mainly based on utility maximization, a concept that does not exist in TPB. This means that an individual will make rational choices based on which he will try to create an advantage and reduce possible financial/social losses (Ganti, 2020). Therefore, this thesis is considering the Theory of Planned Behavior as a better fit given that it is more suited for studying social behavior compared to the Rational Choice Theory which is not that specific (covering topics such as economics behavior as well).

(13)

2.1 Theory of Planned Behavior

In this dissertation paper, the main purpose of the theoretical chapter is to analyze the theories which can help identify the main factors that lead to the use and non-use of e-scooter sharing systems by users and non-users. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is a very popular one in behavioral research, its key paper published by Ajzen reaching around 54.000 citations at the end of year 2017 (Conner, 2020). According to Conner (2020), the main purpose of this theory is to “explain and predict people’s intention and behavior”. Given the scope of this paper, it is considered that TPB is an adequate and matching choice regarding the creation of a theoretical framework.

Consequently, the behavioral attitude refers to an individual positive or negative perception towards a certain behavior (the reasons for (not) using the shared e-scooter system). The social norms refer to the social pressure perceived by the individual while performing or not a certain behavior (eg. the number of acquaintances using this mobility form) and the perceived behavioral control which relates to the difficulties encountered while performing the behavior (eg. level of perceived safety riding the e-scooters).

Different occurrences in life are usually linked to a certain theory. In that case, a theory is defined as generally accepted scientific principles or beliefs that explain a given phenomenon. Theories are meant to give explanations, predict, and get an understanding of a phenomenon under study. Human behaviors are a diverse study area, and explaining it may prove to be difficult. Some attempts have tried different approaches like individual attitude, traits, cognitive capacity, and social influence. It helps the researcher to understand and explain why. For example, transportation behavior links to a theory of planned behavior to make future predictions on automobile designs. Therefore, the behavior of sharing within the using transport mechanisms like cars, scooter, and motorbikes can be explained.

Planned behavior theory is a scientifically accepted principle stating that controlled perceived behavior, attitude, and subjective norms jointly influence an individual’s behaviors (Ajzen, 2019). This theory dates back in the year 1980 introduced by Icek Ajzen, where it was then known as Reasoned Action Theory. This model's efficiency is supported by a meta-analysis that indicates a 39% intent variance, 25% perceived behavior control, and 27% behavior (Armitage & Conner, 2001). While these values might seem low compared to the ideal 100% explained variance, according to Sutton (1998), in behavioral sciences a 100% model explanation within a study is unlikely to achieve but a 10% threshold can be extremely worthwhile.

The main intention of coming up with this theory was to aid in the understanding of why individuals could be engaged in certain behaviors during a given period at a given place. It was proposed to give reasons for all kinds of behaviors that individuals were able to exercise

(14)

self-control. This theory tends to prove that intent of behavioral actions can be predicted based on individuals' subjective norms, attitudes, and perceived control of behavior (Ajzen, 1991).

Generally, intentions always attract inner motivation that enables a person to put effort into achieving the intentions. This phrase can be an explanation as to why someone chooses to behave in a certain way. If there is little motivation, then an alternative behavior is adopted. However, some behaviors are influenced by how opportunity presents itself when action needs to be taken. It can also be due to the availability of resources. The assumption behind the Theory of Planned Behavior is that intentions always determine the actions that lead to the ability to control behavior (Ajzen, 1991).

TPB has gained recognition as one of the best theories in understanding human behavior in different areas: transportation, food, hospitality, tourism, and technological acceptance (Ajzen, 1991). The transportation industry is applied to understand passengers' behavior concerning cost, sharing of facilities, comfort, and safety needs. TPB can help in understanding the sharing of transportation modes in this study. The sharing involves customers considering value and quality. It is applied in the healthcare industry to understand behaviors concerning family planning, birth control methods, vaccines, and treatment methods.

The key elements of this theory are the subjective norm, behavioral control, and attitude (Fig. 2). TPB has certain limitations that include the assumptions that availability of resources and opportunity may make someone behave in a particular manner regardless of their objective. Another limitation is its inability to address the timing between intent and action. It also presumes that behavior comes because of the linear process of decision-making and ignores the fact that behaviors do change with time. Additionally, this theory does not consider the other normative factors that can influence behavior, including mood or threat. This theory does not explain the way a person can control their behavior. Given that this Master thesis is only trying to understand the users / non-users current perception on riding the shared e-scooters - without going deeper into a more extended behavior analysis, these limitations are not considered to be significant drawbacks in the current context. However, the first stated limitation (related to availability of resources) has somehow been overcome by the inclusion of some monetary variables in the online questionnaire (see Annex A, Q9 & Q11).

(15)

Figure 2._{Ajzen, I. (1991). Theory of Planned Behavior framework}

This theory's attitude can be expressed as the likeness to evaluation degree, whether favorable or unfavorable outcome to particular behavior to determine its possibility to lead to a negative or positive outcome. It involves performing a behavior by considering the related possible results. Generally, people have attitudes based on known knowledge about the thing or experience in the past. If one has a likely positive perception of an occurrence, he/she will have a good attitude on the behavior. On the contrary, if there is a negative perception, the individual is likely to resist taking related actions.

For instance, those who have a positive attitude of sharing cars and its importance, such as conservation of environment and cost reduction, will willingly share cars (Zhang et al., 2018). Attitude alone has proved to be insufficient in determining behavior, and therefore other components such as intent and behavior control are used. In the current state, it is notable that many people are now unwilling to share transportation mode with the attitude that they might contract the coronavirus. These kinds of behaviors are based on the measure of expected outcomes.

Subjective norm is a person’s tendency to act according to the expectation of those who influence him/her. According to Ajzen (1991), this influential social circle is represented by “important referent individuals or groups of people”. It means that an individual behaves in a way that he/she has been taught or rather what he learns. These influencers can be injunctive normative or descriptive normative. Injunctive are beliefs that are considered by certain persons while descriptive are those performed, whether important or not. According to Kim and Lee,

(16)

'Understanding the repurchase intention of premium economy passengers using an extended theory of planned behavior (2019), the subjective norm impacted the passengers' intention to use the B2C airline websites. The subjective norm, subject an individual to think first of what people he or she identifies with will say if a certain behavior is performed.

With transportation, one may not wish to use public transport to believe that others will consider him or her as poor. Many consumer-purchasing behaviors are linked to the subjective norm. This behavior is observed, especially with those new products such as organic foods. There has been a reduction in the consumption of such goods with the fear of contracting diseases. In the transportation sector, individuals engage in the car and bike-sharing because many people do the same. De Geus et al. (2008) states that the social circle has a strong influence on using more sustainable means of transport, the main conclusion of their study being that more social campaigns should be organised to encourage cycling because living in a “cycling” environment could indirectly influence others to cycle more.

Perceived behavior control (PBC) is the degree of difficulty or ease of acting in a particular way. It comprises elements such as information, time, and money (Ajzen, 1991). In this case, the control influencers include personal skills and abilities and the willingness of other people to cooperate. Perceived behavior is defined as a belief that limits a person's behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Favorable attitudes plus positive subjective norms lead to favorable intentions. This element of TPB is applied in cases where the behavior is partly controlled. For example, there are certain behaviors that, despite having a subjective norm or positive attitude, one can only perform it with the availability of money. This element of the theory is what was added to the Theory of Reasoned Action and led to the new Theory of Planned Behavior. Bandura’s (1977) self-efficiency theory is somewhat similar to controlled behavior. It supports the assumption according to which an individual believes that he / she has the ability to perform a specific performance, taking into account some constraints. For instance, an individual may be willing to share a motorbike ride with a total stranger as an art of sharing resources in society but, if she/he lacks the required share cost, they will be forced to seek alternatives (Zhang et al., 2018). In the psychological view, control alone cannot predict behavior. Experience and positive participation contribute towards increasing perceived control behavior. PBC can also be observed in educational contexts where students assume that their efforts will lead to higher grades.

The behavioral intention explains that motivating factors can influence behavior. It also depends on the willingness to put more effort and dedication. The strength of intention depends on the ability to control, normative beliefs, and attitude (Ajzen, 1991). In this study, to understand travellers ‘behavioral intention on sharing, it is appropriate to perform a quick answer session on what mode they prefer. From the responses, it is easier to determine who is willing to share and who is not.

First of all, this theory is useful because it comes as a good framework for analyzing non-users' reasons for not using the shared e-scooter systems. For instance, the intention or

(17)

intention to use these dockless systems, according to this theory, is placed on their perception of social acceptability or whether it is advantageous for them as individuals to use it . Milković & Štambuk (2015) argue that Ajzen's theory is one of the most common when it comes to disseminating the intention of using different modes of transport. Moreover, as a reinforcement of the argument for using this theory, in Chen & Lu's (2016) paper The Theory of Planned Behavior is used to analyze users' perceptions of bike-sharing systems in order to inform the local governments about them resulting in creating policies that will increase the number of users benefiting from this system. Consequently, the behavioral attitude refers to an individual positive or negative perception towards a certain behavior (the reasons for (not) using the shared e-scooter system). The social norms refer to the social pressure perceived by the individual while performing or not a certain behavior (eg. the number of acquaintances using this mobility form) and the perceived behavioral control which relates to the difficulties encountered while performing the behavior (eg. level of perceived safety riding the e-scooters).

In conclusion, the planned behavior theory is important in this study, and it will help those in the transportation sector to make informed decisions. It is widely applicable and accepted by many researchers. There is a continuous study on this theory, and other elements might be added to make improvements in determining human behavior.

2.2 Smart Mobility

Smart mobility is a new concept encountered in the transport and land use literature. This concept derives from the paradigm of conventional mobility planning that mainly aims at improving mobility through the predominant development of road infrastructure (Papa & Lauwers, 2015). Overall, conclusive in order to understand this paradigm, it should be mentioned that it is based on the development and application of technology for optimizing urban infrastructure. However, these digital networks have the power to influence human behavior and therefore the smart mobility innovations do not only translate into technology deployment but it also takes into account the society’s needs (Batty et al., 2012).

Smart mobility is an important dimension of Smart city concepts and plays a vital role in the development of contemporary cities. According to some studies, the main difference between smart mobility and other paradigms is the accessibility of citizens to information, which subsequently has positive implications on reducing CO2 emissions or time savings (Aletà, Alonso & Ruiz, 2017). As there is no official definition of this term, Lam & Head (2012) perceive smart mobility as having a potential similar to the concept of sustainable mobility because through the physical and digital opportunities offered by it can influence the need to drive privately owned vehicles and implicitly lower the level of greenhouse gases. It is also possible to conclude a fusion of these two terms (Smart and Sustainable) in terms of the fact that ICT technologies influence environmentally positive people's behavior resulting in better integration of transport networks in urban living environments (Battarra et al., 2018).

(18)

2.3 The Shared Mobility concept

2.3.1 Definition of shared mobility concept

The shared economy principle (through the lens of shared mobility) will be used in this thesis because the e-bike, car sharing, shared e-scooters are all part of the shared means of transport sphere. Due to the scope of this thesis, the e-scooters will be addressed as a shared means of transport only. However, this does not mean that e-scooter ownership is non-existent; according to Barber & Klein (2019), by 2025 the e-scooter ownership will reach a milestone of 48%. Access-based consumption is a concept that is part of the shared economy family. Access-based consumption is defined as a term which entails transactions that help consumers have access to products or services that they cannot afford to own or which for ethical reasons they decide not to own (Bardhi & Eckhardt, 2012). According to Bardhi & Eckhardt (2012), this access is possible without at any time claiming the ownership of the respective product by the consumer. Instead, the consumers do have to pay a premium price to benefit from it for a certain time frame.

Starting from these definitions and from the fact that the shared e-scooter services are part of the sharing economy, for the future survey in the continuation of this thesis, the factors that motivate people to participate in access-based consumption will be investigated. For instance, Bardhi & Eckhardt (2012) in the case of car-sharing identify the main motivation of consumers as "increasing their own personal utility, rather than because it contributes to a collective utility". This motivation is similar to that proposed by Hamari, Sjöklint & Ukkonen (2016), who state that in addition to the individual economic benefits (time and money), consumers are also among the environmentally concerned citizens. Similarly, Lou & Koh (2018) say that an important motivation for participating in commercial bike-sharing programs is the perceived ease of use of mobile platforms that allow users to perform the procedures required for bicycle rental and financial rewards.

With the evolution of technology, shared mobility began to play an increasingly important role in travel in urban or rural areas, improving access to jobs, education, or other services.Also, some studies presented the capability of shared mobility to help the environment with better resource allocation, decreased greenhouse gas emissions, increased accessibility, or long-term sustainable behaviors (Wu & Zhi, 2016). Kodransky & Lewenstein (2014) attribute this to a cultural shift in which access to capital is valued over ownership. That being said, owning a private car is no longer perceived by a large majority of young people as an asset, the preferences being to pay, and use a shared vehicle. Despite a not very publicized start at the beginning, the economic, environmental, or social benefits brought by shared mobility turned this subject into a prominent one. Shaheen, Cohen & Zohdy (2016) say that the widespread use of ICT, especially smartphones, has led to an optimization of the interaction between the user

(19)

and the services offered, which improves the efficiency of using the assets present on the market. According to a research study intended to measure smartphone utilization in the United States, 74% of respondents stated that they have used their smartphones for location-based services or to get directions (Pew Research Center, 2014). The attractiveness of using smart or shared mobility transportation by citizens is due to the increased availability of using shared data or cloud technologies in order to satisfy their mobility needs (Shaheen, Cohen & Zohdy, 2016). Relevant in this respect is again the previously mentioned Pew Research Center study, which also reflects the fact that in 2012 a percentage of 20% of smartphone users benefited from public transport real-time information or turn-by-turn navigation in the last 30 days.

ICT in general or smartphone usage is higher among young people, which was confirmed during interviews with local authorities and operators in an attempt to conceptualize the governance process of shared mobility systems in London. Thus, Akyelken, Banister & Givoni (2018) reach a common denominator, this being "young professionals". After summarizing the interviews, it was observed that from the perspective of car sharing operators the main consumers are people aged 25-35 years and without children. Also, the marketing strategy adopted by these operators aims to attract young people to the habit of sharing. Similarly, Clewlow (2016) identified a significantly lower average age among car sharing users in the San Francisco Area compared to the higher average age among non-users, arguing that this difference is even more pronounced among free -floating schemes than in station-based ones.

Another important factor affecting the use of shared mobility services is captured by Circella et al. (2018), namely the degree of knowledge of users regarding technology or other transport services based on ICT. The same study also indicates that the use of Uber services is used in the United States by environmentally concerned citizens who live in suburban areas and need to access public transit stations. There is evidence that the concept of electric vehicles used in different sharing systems is engaging and appropriate for those who are already familiar with using multi-modal transport means in order to satisfy their needs (Dutschke, Schneider & Peters, 2013). Moreover, these consumers are also interested in traveling cheaper, independently, and by achieving a decrease in their environmental footprint. Another important subjective variable in deciding to use shared mobility means is the economic benefit because assets might be expensive to own (Mattia et al., 2019).

2.3.2 Potential barriers which might affect the shared mobility services usage

Despite the shared mobility benefits presented above, of course, there are certain drawbacks perceived by users or potential users when they decide to adopt a service in this category. Shared mobility is not in itself a self-standing service but is a concept, as a result, it includes a wide range of services (see Chapter 2.3.2) which in turn presents each "weaknesses" or "barriers" subjectively perceived by each individual. As has been mentioned several times so far in the literature and during this paper, the shared e-scooters service can be similar in terms of benefits or barriers in most respects to the bike-sharing service.

(20)

Extreme weather conditions such as showers or snowfall are negatively correlated with cycling usage. Gebhart & Noland (2014) also point out that high humidity or gusts of wind lead to decreases in cycling levels. In a study of cycling behavior conducted in the Chinese city of Suzhou, this level of use of e-bikes decreases by up to 81% on rainy days compared to days with average weather conditions (Du et al., 2013). Unsurprisingly, Zhao et al. (2018) state that private vehicles and public transport become people's first choices during bad weather days. The authors also claim that people with a higher income will mainly choose the private vehicle option whereas people with lower incomes would continue cycling in bad weather.

The next factor that influences the use or abandonment of shared mobility services is the level of pollution. The risks of long-term exposure to pollution caused by the use of personal cars are generally known, the most affected categories being paradoxically people who use active means of transport (Raza et al., 2018). This means higher doses of inhaled pollution among cyclists and as a result a new obstacle to the decision to adopt this clean mode of transport. As a concluding remark of this factor is that the degree of pollution can be insensitive for most people but vulnerable people (e.g. asthmatics) can be significantly discouraged from using a bike-sharing service again (Jarjour et al., 2013); so, a reduction in pollutant exposures would increase the total number of users.

Even though the concept of shared mobility is a new one and there are many discussions related to safety and the lack of clear guiding policies, there are still some regulatory issues. For example, bike-sharing services must meet certain standards related to passenger safety such as minimum dimensions of forks and frames (Halfon, 2019). However, the same author states that despite the shared e-scooters operators publicly state that the safety of their consumers is their top priority, there is still a lack of concrete measures in this regard. Evidence to support this can be found both in scientific articles and in everyday newspapers; for instance, serious accidents occurred in major European capitals since their introduction, Paris or Barcelona assisting at the death of several elderly people hit by scooters whereas in Brussels an e-scooter user died after falling from it (Uyttebroeck, 2019). These outcomes advocate for an improved overall design through bigger wheels implementation, equipping these vehicles with reflective elements or even child seats and helmets. Besides the technical elements, educational and informational policies should arise to prevent these problems. Here it is worth mentioning both user's educational campaigns implemented in the service provider applications (Turon et al., 2019) and governmental policies to regulate the road-pedestrian pavement usage in places where there is little or no sustainable mobility infrastructure (Perry, 2020).

Another factor that can influence the decision to take part in the concept of shared mobility is the general attitude towards the personal car. Numerous studies have attempted to identify the psychological factors that influence a person's decision to use a car on a daily basis. Among the most relevant for the current research can be mentioned the study conducted on the motivation to give up the car to the detriment of the bike-sharing service in which Efthymiou et al. (2013) identify a 90% correlation between car-ownership and the perceived feeling of

(21)

convenience. In other transport behavioral evaluations, Bamberg & Schmidt (2003) conclude that perceived outcomes of car use (speed, flexibility, efficiency) positively influence the intention to choose this travel mode. Likewise, the positive attitude towards car use can be attributed to the feeling of safety, freedom, and superiority (Steg & Tertoolen, 1999). Moreover, through a grounded theory analysis Gardner & Abraham (2007) discover that the choice of a personal car is also caused by economic factors, one of the five reasons identified by them being the minimization of financial expenditure.

According to the presented evidence, it is outlined that the weather, the level of pollution perceived by users, the attitude towards the personal car, the quality of the infrastructure for non-motorized travel and the safety of trips are the main factors recognized by citizens when it comes to their adoption decision on shared mobility in general.

2.4 Shared Electric Scooters

2.4.1 Definition of shared electric scooters

To avoid the confusion between shared e-scooters and motorized scooters, it is worth mentioning from the beginning that the term e-scooter refers to "a battery powered device" which is equipped with "a long, narrow platform where riders stand, two small in-line wheels at the front and back, and a vertical pole at the front with handlebars, a throttle, and brake controls" (Fang et al, 2018). For further reference, Figure 3 shows an actual representation of this shared electrical powered transport mean.

Figure 3. RentConnect (n.d) [Picture of woman riding a shared e-scooter]. Most popular Electric Scooter (E-scooter) Rental Ride Sharing Apps in Amsterdam.

(22)

am

Although the shared e-scooter concept is an emerging concept, almost anyone who has had the opportunity to travel in a medium to large sized urban agglomeration could notice the presence of this micro-mobility form. This does not come as a surprise due to the dockless e-scooters potential to achieve an equitable transportation network for all by creating opportunities to reach underserved areas through its first or last-mile capability (Stowell, 2020). However, it's fast expansion led to unanswered questions that are consequently translated into further problems expressed by local authorities in their attempt to regulate this new form of mobility (data & privacy, pedestrian safety, speed regulations, parking dilemmas, conflicts with car or bike users, etc.).

The first dockless scooter sharing system was launched in the USA in the year 2017. One year later, from June 2018 (Paris), the European market industry saw an increased demand for this shared micro-mobility form and by the year 2030 is expected to reach a worldwide market value of about $ 400 billion. Having said that, it can be concluded that this problem is not a limited one to a certain geographical area or time frame but it represents only the beginning of the expansion of this urban mobility mode. As a strengthening of this argument and according to Choron & Sakran (2019), existing market players aim to expand soon in more than 50 US cities and other international areas.

2.4.2 Benefits and impacts of shared e-scooters

Starting from the general definition of accessibility and relating it to the concept of transport justice, it can be stated that a physical distance from a point of interest can often be perceived as a transportation barrier. The concept of transport justice is a new paradigm in the world of transport planning and refers to the fact that until recently, despite different voices expressing dissatisfaction of current approaches, the traditional transport planning practice was oriented towards increasing mobility without taking into account the needs of users who benefit from it (Martens, 2016). The term “transport justice” is defined as the ability of future policy interventions to improve accessibility to various destinations while also prioritizing individuals rights who belong to disadvantaged groups (Pereria, Schwanen & Banister, 2017). As mentioned before, this debated planning practice is especially felt among disadvantaged social groups, such as people with disabilities, people without a car license, youngsters, who do not have their private car and face difficulties even when it comes to access to public transport stations - these being located at a distance not exactly convenient to cross without a means of electrical or mechanical transport (Shaheen et al., 2017). According to the same authors, in addition to the fact that micro-mobility has the potential to address this transport inequality by offering car alternatives for short distances (also called first or last mile trips), it can also be a strong alternative for longer distances at the expense of public transport networks. Being similar to scooter rental schemes, public bike-sharing schemes are suggested as a substitute for short

(23)

journeys normally made with the tram in urban heavy congested areas (Martin & Shaheen, 2014). Nevertheless, according to this study, in suburban areas of Washington DC where distances are longer, micro-mobility does not necessarily act as a competitor to public transportation but as a substitute for it. When it comes to mobility in congested urban areas, this dockless rental system does not involve additional stress on the part of the user in finding a parking space (in case of car trips) or folding and carrying a private bicycle/scooter inside a building (Planing et al., 2020). Another study conducted in Chicago by Smith & Schwieterman (2018) analyzed 30,000 random e-scooter hypothetical trips, the outcome being similar to other papers: for trips shorter than 2 miles, shared e-scooters could eventually be the best mobility mean for parking constrained environments due to their last-mile capability - by parking the vehicle right next to the destination without further walking to access a vehicle and then walk again to the destination.

Although very similar in many ways, some evidence suggests that using the shared e-scooter rental system is much more attractive and fun compared to the bicycle rental system (Tuncer & Brown, 2020). The authors of this statement attribute this remark to the lower effort required to travel on an e-scooter as well as the enjoyable experience of "feeling the air breeze" and traveling around other infrastructure users. Other research also identifies the keyword fun and practical; According to Schellong et al. (2019), the practicality of this new innovative way of traveling can be more like unique inclusiveness because e-scooters are ready to serve both "students in jeans" and "executives in a suit", making social differences almost invisible. In regards to its usage, McKenzie (2019) says that currently bicycle rental systems are used more for work commuting than scooter-sharing systems which would aim for relaxing trips. However, worth mentioning here is the reason for his conclusion, namely the novelty of the e-scooters and therefore the lack of trust the residents currently have in them.

According to current scientific evidence, one of the purposes and advantages of using electric scooters is the ability and convenience of its use over short distances, especially in areas underserved by public transportation (Shaheen et al., 2017) or in congested central areas and constrained parking (Planing et al., 2020). This conclusion is also drawn by Tice (2019) who states that micro-mobility represents an “unprecedented” potential to replace short trips by car and “enable functional transit systems”.

2.4.3 Related work

As mentioned in the introductory chapter, the e-scooter sharing system is a mobility mode situated in the realm of micro-mobility services. According to evidence from scholarly literature, there are many studies related to various concepts of shared mobility, notably e-bikes or carpooling, but not much about e-scooters (Aguilera-Garcia, Gomez & Sobrino, 2020). Also, although it is an element with increasing popularity, the role of e-scooters in urban mobility is a poorly conceptualized one and has not been analyzed in-depth (Espinoza, Howard, Lane & van

(24)

Hentenryck, 2019). According to Clewlow, Foti & Shepard-Ohta (2018) understanding the frequency or users of such means of transport is a difficult thing to do because the demographic data of the users are in most of the times a piece of privacy-sensitive information and therefore it cannot be accessed without their consent. However, despite this, following their study, Espinoza et al (2019) were able to identify major travel reasons through e-scooter sharing systems.

To the authors knowledge, there are only two academic researches conducted on users of shared e-scooters. The first study is the one by Degele et al (2018) in which authors using clustering methods try to fill the customer knowledge gap by identifying four user categories but without further analysis of their perception about this urban mobility form. The second and most relevant study for this Master's thesis is represented by the work of Aguilera-Garcia, Gomez & Sobrino (2020) illustrating the explanatory factors which influence the use and adoption of scooter-sharing services by individuals in the cities from Spain. This research manages to answer the question related to the individual motivations to use such a means of transport and to give up, for example, the personal car to its detriment. As for these research limitations, it can be said that a recommendation made by the authors themselves is "to extend the current research to other countries where scooter-sharing still has a lower presence or is currently at an upcoming stage of implementation" or to simply expand the data sample in order to achieve a higher level of representativeness.

In his paper, Gössling (2020) presents the challenges and implemented policies from 10 cities associated with the introduction and pre-introduction of shared e-scooter systems. As a conclusion of this study, he states that integrating e-scooters as urban travel forms is an attractive practice but the results indicate that more research is needed both for understanding the involvement of e-scooters in the urban transport system and for understanding users' preferences to prevent accidents or vandalism. Similarly, Zagorskas & Burinskiene (2020) address safety problems because most European cities are currently relying on "old school" e-scooter rules which were initially developed for bike users, not taking into account that electric-powered scooters have some different characteristics.

Other academic pieces of evidence related to the e-scooter sharing systems refer to the potential benefits of these, relevant in this regard is the paper of Smith & Schwieterman (2018) in which the two authors developed a tool to measure the performance of different mobility options present in a neighborhood in the city of Chicago. Among other results, they found that on distances within the 2-mile range, the e-scooters are a competitive means of transport to personal cars which require extra time to find a parking spot. Similarly, Moreau et al (2020) conclude that the environmental impacts of shared e-scooter use in Brussels “are higher than those of the modes of transportation they replace or in comparison to the use of the personal e-scooters''. Also, problems related to pedestrian conflict or pedestrian safety are addressed in Fang et al's (2018) study, which answers the question "Do parked scooters block pedestrians?".

As a personal remark of this brief review of current studies, it can be said that during the analysis of the existing literature there is a single study that approaches the problem raised in the

(25)

current research. However, regardless of the aspect referred to in most of the other articles, the authors tend to emphasize that more research is needed in the direction of shared e-scooters to provide a more accurate illustration of this transport mode.

2.5 Conceptual framework

The elements of the theories presented above will be used for creating an online questionnaire. Specifically, the corresponding analytical framework below (Fig. 4) shows how the two previously mentioned theories will be used (Theory of Planned Behavior with the aid of Shared Economy principles) to answer the sub-questions derived from the main research question and to further complete the questionnaire which will later be applied on the population sample. Consequently, through the aid of the 3 TPB constructs (perceived behavior control, subjective norms, and attitude) the framework in the figure below will support this research in trying to understand the motivation and factors that influence the intention and actual usage of the micro-mobility service. Also, considering the purpose of this paper, it is assumed that the three above mentioned elements should be adjusted and adapted properly in order to come up with very accurate conclusions. The adequate variables appear in the current conceptual framework (Fig. 4) as a result of the literature review on the concepts of Shared Mobility and Shared Electric Scooters, observing their influence on the decision to use certain shared mobility services.

(26)

2.5.1 Proposed hypotheses

On the basis of the literature review and the conceptual model presented before, the following hypotheses will be tested:

H1: Perceived behavioral control of shared e-scooters positively influences the future intention of using the shared e-scooters.

H2: Subjective norm of the traveler positively influences the future intention of using the shared e-scooters.

H3: Attitude towards traveling using shared e-scooters positively influences the future intention of using the shared e-scooters.

(27)

3. Methodology

3.1 Research philosophy

Research philosophy is an assumed belief that data about a particular subject should be collected, analyzed, and applied in developing knowledge (Blackstone, 2018). The data is collected to provide a logical explanation about a specific existing problem. Data is mostly about things known to be accurate, and items and one is required to make assumptions. It helps in understanding how the world works focusing on the available knowledge; individual perspectives affect the knowledge we acquire. For the usage of shared e-scooters, hypotheses can be made depending on its daily usage generally before gathering information about how behavioural character encourages or discourages their usage containing assumptions like: "behavioural factors do not impact the use of shared e-scooters." By using hypotheses which are part of the positivist philosophy, this Master thesis will entail a positivist approach.

All research philosophies can be classified according to the following elements: Ontology

These are assumptions made about a particular nature of some reality. They shape your views about the research you are undertaking (Hancock et al., 2018). For instance, if more people believe E-scooters are suitable for a long time, you research why it is not the other way of reality instead of following the primary assumption. People who believe in the existence of only one single truth are positivists; they believe the truth to every problem exists. However, some people think that there is no other truth other than the one living, the fact we know. These people are called constructivists.

Epistemology

This class concerns itself about assumptions made regarding knowledge, what makes it valid, acceptable, and legit and how it passes to other people (Hancock et al., 2018). Mostly, this knowledge can be gathered from archives and can help a researcher determine the most appropriate method to use. However, everybody has opinions about various subjects, so it is upon the researcher to choose what he/she should consider legitimate. If we perceive the existence of universal truth, research needs to be done, and the study should not interfere with the research outcome.

Axiology

This class expresses the function of some values and ethical behaviours within the process of research (Hancock et al., 2018). It focuses on the individual costs of the researchers and the people participating in the study. It makes the outcome of that research credible since all values are considered—the values aid in decision making, especially about the topic of study to

(28)

use. For instance, the use of online questionnaires as a method shows the researcher dramatically values the participants' thoughts (Blackstone, 2018).

The philosophical approaches of ontological and epistemological considerations can be summarized as follows:

The positivist approach involves gathering knowledge from an existing social reality that is observable. The data collected is most likely to be more accurate since the objective stance is maintained and deals with scientific evidence (Padilla-Díaz, 2015). Existing knowledge or theory makes the hypothesis confirmed or rejected after testing; it should not influence the results. As a positivist, the researcher should remain on neutral ground for accurate results. Manipulation of the inquirer’s research is consequential in that; the results will not solve the raised research problem.

A hypothesis is an idea assumed to be valid until it's tested. The positivist approach uses known statistical figures and scientific facts for testing (Davies, 2018). The assumption exists before the research begins.

The critical realism approach: With this approach, what we use our senses to discover, is what exists accurately, hence we get what we see. This approach explains what is known as it is the reality. The reality is independent, what the researcher feels has to be processed and later portrayed, and it should always be looked at a bigger picture than what is visible (Padilla-Díaz, 2015). The approach focuses on providing explanations to why things exist as they do; this is by looking at the mechanisms through which these things operate, the social and cultural world. Therefore, one should understand how the socio-cultural world operates around the research work to avoid any biases.

The interpretivism approach shows that the difference between human beings from other things is the unique ability to process what we have seen. The primary role is to create more understanding of absolute reality (Padilla-Díaz, 2015). People have different social and cultural values, people view a particular phenomenon at different times and their perspectives may vary from one another. This approach can be useful because interpretivism believes if such complexity is reduced, humans can finally have the same view about a particular phenomenon. They overcome this complexity by collecting the social and cultural data from the participants. Their main aim is to create a deeper understanding of reality and interpret social interactions.

The postmodernist approach shows the purpose of language about its power to question conventional thinking ways and to give power to other possibilities (Padilla-Díaz, 2015). For research, there is a need to deconstruct dominant assumptions to provide room for other options. Postmodernists show the importance of language, they believe language is inadequate and partial, and so, they have to ensure the possibility to have a universal language when approaching things. They question powers that dictate some realities, they bring along excluded ideas on the existing reality. One should always challenge that current theory, ready to deconstruct believed facts and prepared to do more in-depth research on the subject.

(29)

Pragmatism approach, this approach depicts that only when concepts support action can be considered relevant (Padilla-Díaz, 2015). One identifies a problem, looks at the assumed solution, develops doubts on it, carries out an inquiry about that reality, and finally credits it.

3.2 Research strategy

A research strategy represents an entire plan for conducting specific research. Its primary purpose is to help plan, execute, and monitor the investigation (Blackstone, 2018). To make a research strategy, one has to find a topic and do literature reviews about the research before proceeding to the entire course of action. Several research strategies include policy descriptions, critical policy analysis, quantitative surveys, and policy implementation evaluation, and their implications (Hancock et al., 2018). In a research paper, the information contained within it can come from both primary and secondary sources. For the collection of information and data from this Master thesis, the adopted research strategy is the survey. Also, being a deductive study aimed at testing hypotheses formed based on existing knowledge, I consider that desk research (content analysis) should be mentioned as an important element.

Critical policy analysis strategy

Various policies set over the years assess each to see how they work or have worked. Some considerations have to be put in place depending on the policy's aim, assumptions made about it, policy implementation procedures, policy beneficiaries, and policy effectiveness (Blackstone, 2018). For me, this is the best strategy because It assesses policy realism by providing other alternative policies; it helps in analyzing ideological perspectives, analyses all assumptions and justifications made, it helps in showing the aims of the strategy, easy to estimate the cost and easy to predict the outcome of the research

Quantitative methods

Quantitative methods are a set of questions structured and administered to a large number of people through questionnaires or interviews (Retracted, 2019). Surveys are questions aimed at mainly helping capture the respondent's answers through data collection. Items can be administered randomly or by representational sampling so that at least the entire population is covered. Questionnaires are the most popular method; the surveys can be open-ended or closed-end questions or forced-choice (Retracted, 2019). Most of them answer a range of items about a particular phenomenon, and one is supposed to come up with questions or choices for accuracy and fast results. They can take place face to face, on the internet, or by mail through self-administration or being performed by the researcher.

(30)

3.3 Research methods

3.3.1 Data collection

According to van Thiel (2014) and considering this research strategy, the data collection methodology should be related to it. Therefore, taking into account that the current research problem entails a behavior and perception analysis with a large number of variables and a large population sample, it is considered that the appropriate method for collecting primary data is the online questionnaire. The online questionnaire will be realized through the Qualtrics software which is made available to Radboud University students.

The appropriate sample for this study consists of any respondent who has or does not have experience with scooter-sharing systems and who wants to complete the questionnaire. Since nowadays most people have access to the internet and smartphone applications, anyone who can contribute to this study is a potential user. However, as will be seen in the first question of the questionnaire, the location (living in or within Bucharest Metropolitan Area) and the age of the respondent (younger or older than 18 years old) are disseminated in order to allow the respondent to further complete the questionnaire or not. The condition for displaying the following questions of the questionnaire is that the answer to the previously mentioned question should be “Yes, I live in or within the Bucharest Metropolitan Area and I’m 18 years old or older”. The part related to the respondent's location is addressed for obvious reasons of the current research, in order to limit the non-revealing answers of the respondents who do not know or do not have sufficient relevant knowledge of the study area. The age-related part is attributed to the current legislation in Bucharest, where the operators of e-scooter rental systems do not allow the use of their service by persons under the legal age (<18 years old).

To have a representative sample and a reliable sample size, the current paper will use the population sample equation proposed by Taro Yamane (1967):

, where:

“n” is the sample size, “N” is the population size and “e” is the level of precision or the error coefficient. According to the latest official update from January 1, 2020, of the National Institute of Statistics, the population of Bucharest is 2,151,665 people. Of these, 1,808,868 residents are over the age of 18. Considering a confidence level of at least 85%, the formula can be interpreted as follows:

The shared electric scooter systems: Exploring the behavioural factors effecting the adoption of shared electric scooters