Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usage Differences Between Bikes and E-Bikes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
AGILE 2015

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography ((LNGC))

Abstract

A high share of bicycle traffic in urban areas can be advantageous in order to tackle traffic related problems such as congestion, over-crowded public transportation or air pollution. Through an increased dissemination of e-bikes in recent years, cycling has become a viable transportation alternative for an even broader audience. The consequences of this trend on urban mobility are not yet clear. In order to get a clearer picture, one first needs to understand the major usage differences between e-bikers and cyclists. In this paper we demonstrate how a first insight into these differences can be gained by analysing GPS tracking data, recorded within the context of a field study. E-bikers as well as conventional cyclists prefer riding on any kind of bike trail whilst e-bikers rather choose bike trail types with a larger exposure to vehicular traffic. Taking a minimal distance route was the most important route choice factor for both cyclists and e-bikers. E-bikers perceived their rides to be slightly more safe and convenient as compared to conventional cyclists.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.swisstopo.ch/.

  2. 2.

    http://www.maps.google.ch/.

  3. 3.

    http://www.stadtplan.stadt-zuerich.ch/.

References

  • Aultmann-Hall, L., Hall, F., & Baetz, B. (1997). Analysis of bicycle commuter routes using geographic information systems: Implications for bicycle planning. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Record, 1578, 102–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M., Bradley, B., Morikawa, T., Benjamin, J., Novak, T., Oppewal, H., et al. (1994). Combining revealed and stated preferences data. Marketing Letters, 5(4), 335–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohte, W., Maat, K., & Quak, W. A. (2008). A method for deriving trip destinations and modes for GPS-based travel surveys. In J. Van Schaick & S. C. Van der Spek (Eds.), Urbanism on track (pp. 129–145). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brick, E., McCarthy, O. T., & Caulfield, B. (2012). Determining bicycle infrastructure preferences—a case study of Dublin. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(5), 413–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broach, J., Dill, J., & Gliebe, J. (2012). Where do cyclists ride? A bicycle route choice model developed with revealed preference GPS data. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(10), 1730–1740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cellina, F., Förster, A., Rivola, D., Pampuri, L., Rudel, R., & Rizzoli, A. E. (2013). Using smartphones to profile mobility patterns in a living lab for the transition to e-mobility. In J. Hřebíček, G. Schimak, M. Kubásek, & A. E. Rizzoli (Eds.), Environmental software systems. Fostering information sharing, IFIP advances in information and communication technology (Vol. 413, pp. 154–163). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherry, C., Worley, S., & Jordan, D. (2011). Electric bike sharing—system requirements and operational concepts. Paper presented at the 90th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, January 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, E.-H., & Shalaby, A. (2005). A trip reconstruction tool for GPS-based personal travel surveys. Transportation Planning and Technology, 28(5), 381–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalumpines, R., & Scott, D. M. (2011). GIS-based map-matching: Development and demonstration of a postprocessing map-matching algorithm for transportation research. In S. Geertman, W. Reinhardt, & F. Toppen (Eds.), Advancing geoinformation science for a changing world (pp. 101–120). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • De Hartog, J. J., Boogaard, H., Nijland, H., & Hoek, G. (2010). Do the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks? Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(8), 1109–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeMaio, P. (2009). Bike-sharing: History, impacts, models of provision, and future. Journal of Public Transportation, 12(4), 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dill, J. (2009). Bicycling for transportation and health: The role of infrastructure. Journal of Public Health Policy, 30, 95–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dill, J., & Rose, G. (2012). Electric bikes and transportation policy: Insights from early adopters. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2314, 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fajans, J., & Curry, M. (2001). Why bicyclists hate stop signs. Access, 18(1), 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golledge, R. G. (1995). Defining the criteria used in path selection. Paper presented at the international conference on activity based approaches: Activity scheduling and the analysis of activity patterns, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, May 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golledge, R. G., & Stimson, R. J. (1997). Spatial behavior: A geographic perspective. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, F. J., & Krizek, K. (2007). Commuter bicyclist behavior and facility disruption. St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Department of Transportation, Research Services Section.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinen, E., Maat, K., & van Wee, B. (2013). The effect of work-related factors on the bicycle commute mode choice in the Netherlands. Transportation, 40(1), 23–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinen, E., van Wee, B., & Maat, K. (2010). Commuting by bicycle: An overview of the literature. Transport Reviews: A Transnational Transdisciplinary Journal, 30(1), 59–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, J. D., & Abraham, J. E. (2007). Influences on bicycle use. Transportation, 43(4), 453–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroes, E. P., & Sheldon, R. J. (1988). Stated preference methods. An introduction. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 22(1), 11–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menghini, G., Carrasco, N., Schüssler, N., & Axhausen, K. W. (2010). Route choice of cyclists in Zürich. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 44(9), 754–765.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montello, D. R. (2005). Navigation. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkes, S. D., Marsden, G., Shaheen, S. A., & Cohen, A. P. (2013). Understanding the diffusion of public bikesharing systems: Evidence from Europe and North America. Journal of Transport Geography, 31, 94–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popovich, N., Gordon, E., Shao, Z., Xing, Y., Wang, Y., & Handy, S. (2014). Experiences of electric bicycle users in the Sacramento, California area. Travel Behavior and Society, 1(2), 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rondinella, G., Fernandez-Heredia, A., & Monzon, A. (2012). Analysis of perceptions of utilitarian cycling by level of user experience. In Proceedings of Transport Research Board Annual Meeting 2012, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, G. (2012). E-bikes and urban transportation: Emerging issues and unresolved questions. Transportation, 39(1), 81–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaheen, S. A., Guzman, S., & Zuang, H. (2010). Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2143, 159–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinson, M. A., & Bhat, C. R. (2003). Commuter bicyclist route choice: Analysis using a stated preference survey. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1828, 107–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinson, M. A., & Bhat, C. R. (2005). A comparison of route preferences of experienced and inexperienced bicycle commuters. Paper presented at the 84th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, January 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stopher, P., Bullock, P., & Horst, F. (2002). Exploring the use of passive GPS devices to measure travel. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Application of Advanced Technologies in Transportation (pp. 959–967). MA, USA: Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D., & Mahmassani, H. (1996). Analysis of stated preferences for intermodal bicycle-transit interfaces. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1556, 86–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A., & Shalaby, A. (2006). Enhanced system for link and mode identification for personal travel surveys based on global positioning systems. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1972, 38–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2012). World urbanization prospects: The 2011 revision. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, United Nations. Available online: http://de.slideshare.net/undesa/wup2011-highlights. Accessed 15 November 2014.

  • Van der Spek, S. (2008). Tracking pedestrians in historic city centres using GPS. In S. Van der Spek, F. D. Van der Hoeven, & M. G. J. Smit (Eds.), Street level desires (pp. 86–111). Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology Urbanism.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Spek, S., Van Schaick, J., De Bois, P., & De Haan, R. (2009). Sensing human activity: GPS tracking. Sensors, 9(4), 3033–3055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Evert, H., Brög, W., & Erl, E. (2006). Survey design: The past, the present and the future. In P. Stopher & C. Stecher (Eds.), Travel survey methods—quality and future directions (pp. 75–93). Amsterdam, Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinert, J. X., Ma, C. T., Yang, X. M., & Cherry, C. (2008). The transition to electric bikes in China: Effect on travel behavior, mode shift, and user safety perceptions in a medium-sized city. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2038, 62–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, J. (2006). Application of new technologies in travel surveys. In P. Stopher & C. Stecher (Eds.), Travel survey methods—quality and future directions (pp. 531–544). Amsterdam, Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We like to thank Moritz Meenen and Pratik Mukerji from the ETH spin-off company ElectricFeel Mobility Systems GmbH for supporting the field study with two-wheelers, tracking devices, and funding. The insightful comments from four anonymous reviewers helped to improve the final version.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Cartography and Geoinformation, ETH Zurich, 8093, Zurich, Switzerland

    Dominik Allemann & Martin Raubal

Authors
  1. Dominik Allemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Raubal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominik Allemann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. NOVA IMS, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

    Fernando Bacao

  2. School of Engineering, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal

    Maribel Yasmina Santos

  3. NOVA IMS, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

    Marco Painho

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Allemann, D., Raubal, M. (2015). Usage Differences Between Bikes and E-Bikes. In: Bacao, F., Santos, M., Painho, M. (eds) AGILE 2015. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16787-9_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation