Comparing Car-Sharing Schemes in Switzerland: User Groups and Usage Patterns

313 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Electric carsharing and micromobility: A literature review on their usage pattern, demand, and potential impacts (2020, background): “However, in contrast to the above findings regarding shared e-mobility, a study on conventional carsharing (Becker et al., 2017) found that proximity to public transport is a negative predictor for demand, which calls for further examination.”
Modelling the determinants of car-sharing adoption intentions among young adults: the role of attitude, perceived benefits, travel expectations and socio-demographic factors (2019, background): “Car-sharing could also reduce private car-ownership (Liao et al. 2018; Becker et al. 2018), reduce emissions, vehicle mile travel, per capita fuel consumption and demand for parking, thereby reducing travel-induced impacts on the environment and society (Cervero et al.”
Assessing the welfare impacts of Shared Mobility and Mobility as a Service (MaaS) (2018, background): “Indeed, differences observed between 30 Uber riders and taxi customers or users of different car-sharing schemes indicate that even small changes in the service types may attract different customer segments [8, 9].”
Measuring the car ownership impact of free-floating car-sharing – A case study in Basel, Switzerland (2018, methodology): “Data collection was partly shared with [2], who use the 2015 cross-section of the question235”