How are the regions for operation of bike sharing systems defined?
By Lucas da Silva Pacobahyba, Tembici Urban Planning Coordinator.
There are currently about two thousand bike sharing systems (BSSs) in the world, according to DeMaio (2022). The first system was inaugurated in the 1960s, in the Netherlands, but it was only from the 2000s that the growth in the number of BSS has been skyrocketing — in 2009, one BSS was inaugurated every month somewhere in the world. This growth was only possible thanks to the lessons learned from past systems, especially with regard to their operation and design.
Since the growth of BSS has only occurred in recent years, bike sharing is still a topic with many issues to be explored in the field of studies. In addition, even issues that have already been studied still depend on further maturation, that is, on more studies to feed them, either to corroborate or to counter the narrative that is being built about these issues.
In this regard, the design of BSS is a theme that does not yet rely on a closed and definitive methodology — not only because it is an issue that has been little studied, but also because the design of the systems project also needs to take into account aspects regarding the local reality where the bike sharing service will be deployed. Although this can confer the design process a poorly reproducible aspect, it has been found that some aspects can be relevant indicators for choosing certain regions where the service should initially be designed in cities.
The experience acquired with the design of BSS in large Brazilian cities by Tembici has allowed us to recognize that there is a multiscale approach to the design of the systems project. That is, we start from a macro scale of analysis, surveying general data from the cities, up to the micro scale of the search in the public space for places containing the necessary space for each bicycle station to be installed. In this regard, the choice of the region to be initially contemplated by the service would be the second scale of approach, after the general data survey of the city. These general data also contribute to the approximation scale of the regions and, like the indicators of the regions, they also do not have a closed and definitive set of data that can be obtained. However, it is observed that data related to the social/economic profile of the population, the commuting pattern of the inhabitants, the presence of cycling infrastructure and policies to discourage motorized commuting and encourage active mobility[1] are some of the most relevant data for this first scale of analysis.
Going into more detail on the second scale of analysis under this text, it is observed that the choice of the region to be covered by the BSS service seeks to follow three fundamental pillars: motivation, comfort, and modal integration. Motivation is the destination to which a travel is done, which purpose may be work, study, leisure, shopping, health care, among others. Comfort, on the other hand, is the path to reach the destination, and ought to present safety and environmental conditions that are favorable to the use of bicycle. Finally, the modal integration allows bicycle sharing to have a greater reach and to be a transportation option even for those who come from far away, since most of the times the BSS cannot cover the entire area of a city — and this is the main reason why the choice of the region should be carefully done in order to reach most of the population with a station network that optimizes their arrangement in the urban space.
With regard to motivation, data related to the concentration of destinations help identify the city regions most visited not only by the local population, but also by the floating population — those who do not live in the region, but who travel there regularly. Depending on the purpose of the destination, the frequency of trips to it is higher or lower. The work purpose implies a weekly commute of five times, on average[2]. In addition, the study purpose also assumes an average weekly commute of 5 times, but depending on the rules of bicycle sharing one cannot consider that people who commute for study purpose under the age of 18 can potentially become a service user[3]. The purpose of leisure, on the other hand, may be more related to weekends and holidays (average weekly frequency of 2 times), but may present higher frequencies in regions with a tourist appeal or in places where leisure spaces are considerably large, such as large parks and beach or lake shores with urban development in their surroundings. Other purposes such as health care and shopping may have a variable frequency, and are more frequent in neighborhood centers and in commercial and service centers.
With regard to comfort, it is the data related to the path a bike can ride between the origin and destination that help identify potential regions for the SPBC. Since a considerable portion of bike sharing users are new cyclists — that is, they did not use a bicycle before they started using shared bike –, comfort is a more determining factor of attractiveness to use the BSS. Among comfort elements, the presence of bicycle infrastructure is an attractive factor from the road safety perspective, especially if the bicycle network is arranged on the road network in a way consistent with the type of road. That is, while a bicycle path may be sufficient to ensure a cyclist safety on a residential street with low traffic speed, a large avenue may require segregated circulation spaces between motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians in order to avoid traffic accidents. In addition, the bicycle network should be present in desired routes, because when it is arranged disconnectedly in the city’s roadway network and interrupted, it becomes unattractive to use. In addition to road safety, flat areas are more comfortable and favorable for bicycling because of the less effort it takes when pedaling[4]. On the other hand, areas with steep slopes can be attractive only for rides from the highest to the lowest points, reducing the system attractiveness almost by half. Another factor to be considered concerns the path ambiance,so that shaded paths, whether by buildings or trees, help increase the feeling of comfort on sunny days, and lit streets, whether by sunlight during the day or artificial lighting at night, help to increase the feeling of safety. Although this seems to be a more difficult data to objectively raise, it is an aspect that can be negatively determinant in long paths without any shading[5], or in regions where there is no night lighting.
Finally, regarding modal integration, data related to the city’s public transportation network allow us to identify connecting points and busiest transit stations, which are potential pick-up and drop-off locations for shared bicycles due to the fact that nearly 22% of rides by the Tembici systems are done from a public transport terminal or station. For people whose origin and destination locations are within the most attractive region for the BSS, the bicycle can become the only leg of a ride, being used from start to finish. As to people who live outside this region but commute there, the shared bicycle can be the last leg of the trip when combined with some other mode of transportation — walking, public transportation or even the car. For this combination to occur, it is important that the system contains bicycle stations in the intermodal regions, with stations as close as possible to the access to the means transportation and with the offering of parking spaces that matches the demand. It is also possible to analyze data regarding the cost of the combination of trips, in such a way to identify if not only time savings, but also cost savings, can make the SPBC more advantageous to the user. In places where modal integration is done at no additional cost — such as the integration between trains and subways in São Paulo –, the use of the BSS may represent an additional cost in the last leg of the ride. In places like Rio de Janeiro, where the migration between trains, subways, and buses has an additional cost, migrating the last leg of the trip to the CBS may represent a cost saving, what makes bike sharing even more advantageous.
Gathering the aspects presented here do not end the debate on the attractive factors for a region to receive a BSS operation. In addition, the service implementation in the city’s region that was identified as the most attractive does not mean that other regions do not have the potential to be contemplated in the future. For this to occur, the constant planning of the station network, the follow-up of the transformations the cities are going through and the dialog between the public authority and the operating company allow future expansions of the service to occur, seeking to serve and invite more and more people to use this means of transportation in their daily lives.
[1]Active mobility here is understood as that which is done for short-distance commutes and is done with human propulsion. Among the modes, there is the commutes on foot, by bicycle, skateboard, and even skates.
[2]The pandemic and the increase in remote working have reduced the frequency of face-to-face work, but because it is a very recent scenery, there is still a lack of mature data to estimate more accurately the reduction in the frequency of commutes to face-to-face work.
[3]Some rules for using the BSS include that the user shall be over 18 years old to use a shared bike.
[4]The use of electric shared bicycles helps minimize the impact of discomfort caused by declivity, but this may only be considered in systems that have an electric shared bicycle fleet as prevailing over the conventional bicycle.
[5]Shading is a relevant factor with respect to comfort in warmer climates, such as Brazil in general. In countries with colder climates, the opposite is observed, as places with little shading are seen as comfortable to ride in.
