Rideshare mode potential in non-metropolitan areas of the northeastern United States
Keywords:Rideshare, Carpool, Behavior, Mode Choice
AbstractThis study focuses on work commuters who currently rideshare, are potential rideshare commuters, or indicated a willingness to use rideshare services. Discrete choice models were developed with survey data of residents in the northeastern United States. Built-environment variables based on home and workplace locations were examined. While the socio-demographic characteristics of rideshare commuters and potential rideshare commuters were similar, characteristics of those indicating a willingness to use rideshare services were dissimilar, specifically women and younger individuals were uninterested in these programs. Those who live in denser areas were more likely to rideshare now, but less likely to indicate rideshare as their alternative to driving alone. Having a rural workplace corresponded to more ridesharing and being willing to use rideshare services, but less likely to indicate rideshare in place of driving alone. Many attitudinal variables were examined in the models; but interestingly most were not useful in explaining potential ridesharers or potential rideshare program participants. This analysis indicates that potential rideshare commuters may be demographically similar to existing rideshare commuters but live and work in more rural areas. Those who would participate in rideshare programs are a different set and should be further defined and targeted separately.
Belz, N., and Lee, Brian H.Y. (2012) Composition of Vehicle Occupancy for Journey-To-Work Trips, Evidence of Ridesharing from the 2009 National Household Travel Survey Vermont Add-on Sample. Forthcoming Transportation Research Record.
Cervero, R. (1996). Mixed Land-uses and Commuting: Evidence from the American Housing Survey. Transportation Research Part A - Policy and Practice, Vol. 30(5), 361-377.
Charles, K., and Kline, P. (2004). Relational Costs and the Production of Social Capial: Evidence from Carpooling. The Economic Journal, Vol. 116(511), 581-604.
Chatman, D. (2003). How Density and Mixed Uses at the Workplace Affect Personal Commercial Travel and Commute Choice. Transportation Research Record No. 1831, Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, pp. 193-201.
Frank, L., and Pivo, G. (1994). Impacts of Mixed Use and Density on Utilization of Three Modes of Travel: Single-Occupant Vehicle, Transit, and Walking. Transportation Research Record No. 1466, Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies , pp. 44-52.
Hartgen, D. (1977). Ridesharing Behavior: A Review of Recent Findings - Preliminary Research Report 130. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Transportation
Hunt, J., and McMillan, J. (2007). Stated-Preference Examination of Attitudes Toward Carpooling to Work in Calgary. Transportation Research Record 1598, Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 9-17.
Hwang, K., and Guiliano, G. (1990). The Determinants of Ridesharing: Literature Review. University of California at Berkeley: The Univeristy of California Transportation Center.
Kaufman, S. (2002). Why People (Don't) Carpool and Change for the Better. 2nd International Conference on Sustainable Campuses. Melbourne: RMIT.
Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel Behavior as a Function of Accesibility, Land Use Mixing and Land Use Balance. Transportation Research Record 1607, Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, pp. 117-125.
Kostyniuk, L. (1982). Demand Analysis for Ridesharing: State-of-the-Art Review. Transportation Research Record 876, Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, pp. 17-26.
Leck, E. (2006). The Impact of Urban Form on Travel Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Berkely Planning Journal, Volume 19, 37-58.
McGuckin, N., and Srinivasan, N. (2003). Journey-to-work in the United States and its Major Metropolitan Areas; 1960 - 2000. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration.
Pisarski, A. (2006). Commuting in America III: The Third National Report on Commuting Patterns and Trends. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes (RUCAs). http://depts.washington.edu/uwruca/ Accessed 10 March 2013
Shiftan, Y., and Barlach, Y. (2012). Effect of Employment Site Characteristics on Commute Mode Choice. Transportation Research Rcord 1781, Journal of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, pp. 19-25.
Silvia, J., and Niemeier, D. (2009). Social Network and Dwelling Characteristics that Influence Ridesharing Behavior of Seniors. Transportatin Research Record 2118, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 47-54.
Teal, R. (1987). Carpooling: Who, How, and Why? Transportation Reserach, Part A, Vol. 21A, No. 3 , 203-214.
Tsao, H., and Lin, D. (1999). Spatial and Temporal Factors in Estimating the Potential of Ridesharing for Demand Reduction. Berkeley: California PATH Program, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California.
Van Lange, P., Ban Vugt, M., Meertens, R., and Ruiter, R. (1998). A social dilemma analysis of commuting preferences: the roles of social value orientation and trust. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 28, No. 9 , 796-820.
How to Cite
Authors who publish with JTLU agree to the following terms: 1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. 3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.