Based on a survey of 2,106 individuals, this study aims to get a better understanding of the attitudes toward carsharing in Flanders, Belgium. Several drivers and barriers that influence household decisions to participate in a carsharing system are identified. An ordinal logit model reveals that highly educated, younger males with high ecological concerns are more likely to share cars. It is shown that living in a rural environment or owning a company car are important barriers. A parking policy aimed at discouraging private car use while stimulating sustainable mobility choices appears to be an interesting avenue for future research.
CostainC.ArdronC.HabibK. N.Synopsis of Users’ Behaviour of a Carsharing Program: A Case Study in Toronto. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 46, No. 3, 2012, pp. 421–434.
3.
YeJ.WangD.ZhangH.YangH.What Kind of People Use Carsharing for Commuting? Case Study in Shanghai. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2019. 2673: 770–778.
4.
FirnkornJ.MüllerM.What will be the Environmental Effects of New Free-Floating Car-Sharing Systems? The Case of Car2go in Ulm. Ecological Economics, Vol. 70, No. 8, 2011, pp. 1519–1528.
5.
NijlandH.van MeerkerkJ.Mobility and Environmental Impacts of Car-Sharing in the Netherlands. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, Vol. 23, 2017, pp. 84–91.
6.
MünzelK.BoonW.FrenkenK.BlommeJ.van der LindenD.Explaining Carsharing Supply across Western European Cities. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2020, pp. 243–254.
JungJ.KooY.Analyzing the Effects of Car-Sharing Services on the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2018, p. 539.
9.
DingN.PanJ.ZhangZ.YangJ.Life Cycle Assessment of Car-Sharing Models and the Effect on GWP of Urban Transportation: A Case Study of Beijing. Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 688, 2019, pp. 1137–1144.
10.
ChapmanD. A.EyckmansJ.Van AckerK.Does Car-Sharing Reduce Car-Use? An Impact Evaluation of Car-Sharing in Flanders, Belgium. Sustainability, Vol. 12, 2020, p. 8155.
UtriainenR.PöllänenM.Review on Mobility as a Service in Scientific Publications. Research in Transportation Business & Management, Vol. 27, 2018, pp. 15–23.
15.
RodenbachJ. A.MathijsJ. A.ChiccoA. P.DianaM. P.NehrkeG. B.Car-Sharing in Europe. A Multidimensional Classification and Inventory. D2.1. Technical Report. STARS - Shared Mobility OpporTunities and Challenges foR European citieS, 2018. http://stars-h2020.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/STARS-D2.1.pdf. Accessed November 13, 2020.
MünzelK.BoonW.FrenkenK.VaskelainenT.Carsharing Business Models in Germany: Characteristics, Success and Future Prospects. Information Systems and e-Business Management, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2018, pp. 271–291.
19.
PrietoM.BaltasG.StanV.Car-Sharing Adoption Intention in Urban Areas: What Are the Key Sociodemographic Drivers?Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 101, 2017, pp. 218–227.
20.
AcheampongR. A.SiibaA.Modelling the Determinants of Car-Sharing Adoption Intentions among Young Adults: The Role of Attitude, Perceived Benefits, Travel Expectations and Socio-Demographis Factors. Transportation, Vol. 47, 2020, pp. 2557–2580.
21.
HjortesetM. A.BöckerL.Car Sharing in Norwegian Urban Areas: Examining Interest, Intention and the Decision to Enrol. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 84, 2020, p. 102322.
22.
MünzelK.PiscicelliL.BoonW.FrenkenK.Different Business Models – Different Users? Uncovering the Motives and Characteristics of Business-to-Consumer and Peer-to-Peer Carsharing Adopters in The Netherlands. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 73, 2019, pp. 276–306.
23.
MartinE.ShaheenS. A.Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts of Carsharing in North America. Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 12, No. 4, 2011, pp. 1074–1086.
EfthymiouD.AntoniouC.WaddellP.Factors Affecting the Adoption of Vehicle Sharing Systems by Young Drivers. Transport Policy, Vol. 29, 2013, pp. 64–73.
26.
EfthymiouD.AntoniouC.Modeling the Propensity to Join Carsharing using Hybrid Choice Models and Mixed Survey Data. Transport Policy, Vol. 51, 2016, pp. 143–149.
27.
BardhiF.EckhardtG. M.Liquid Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 44, No. 3, 2017, pp. 582–597.
28.
van DrielP.HafkampW.De effecten van autodelen op autogebruik. Tijdschrift Vervoerswetenschappen, Vol. 51, No. 4, 2015, pp. 18–37.
29.
KimD.KoJ.ParkY.Factors Affecting Electric Vehicle Sharing Program Participants’ Attitudes about Car Ownership and Program Participation. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 36, 2015, pp. 96–106.
30.
PucherJ.RenneJ. L.Rural Mobility and Mode Choice: Evidence from the 2001 National Household Travel Survey. Transportation, Vol. 32, No. 2, 2005, pp. 165–186.
31.
BeckerH.CiariF.AxhausenK. W.Comparing Car-Sharing Schemes in Switzerland: User Groups and Usage Patterns. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 97, 2017, pp. 17–29.
32.
LiaoF.MolinE.TimmermansH.WeeB. V.Carsharing: The Impact of System Characteristics on its Potential to Replace Private Car Trips and Reduce Car Ownership. Transportation, Vol. 47, 2020, pp. 935–970.
33.
StegL.Car Use: Lust and Must. Instrumental, Symbolic and Affective Motives for Car Use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 39, No. 2–3, 2005, pp. 147–162.
34.
HawlitschekF.TeubnerT.GimpelH.Understanding the Sharing Economy - Drivers and Impediments for Participation in Peer-to-Peer Rental. Proc., 2016 49th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Koloa, HI, 2016, pp. 4782–4791.
35.
GreeneW. H.Econometric Analysis, 4th ed, International Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2000.
36.
MaierM. J.Companion Package to the Book R: Einführung durch angewandte Statistik, R Package Version 0.9.3. 2015. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=REdaS. Accessed November 13, 2020.
37.
HornJ. L.EngstromR.Cattell’s Scree Test in Relation to Bartlett’s Chi-Square Test and Other Observations on the Number of Factors Problem. Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1979, pp. 283–300.
38.
GrilliL.RampichiniC.Ordered Logit Model. In Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research (A. C. Michalos, ed.), Springer, Dordrecht, 2014, pp. 4510–4513.
39.
YeeT. W.VGAM: Vector Generalized Linear and Additive Models, R Package Version 1.1-2. 2019. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=VGAM. Accessed November 13, 2020.
RimpleM.SrikantM.NaseemA.KumarM. J.A Study of Interaction of Materialism and Money Attitude and Its Impact on Car Purchase. Management & Marketing, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2015, pp. 245–269.
42.
SegalB.PodoshenJ. S.An Examination of Materialism, Conspicuous Consumption and Gender Differences. International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2013, pp. 189–198.
43.
BurkhardtJ. E.Millard-BallA.Who Is Attracted to Carsharing?Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2006. 1986: 98–105.
44.
BoussauwK.VanoutriveT.Transport Policy in Belgium: Translating Sustainability Discourses into Unsustainable Outcomes. Transport Policy, Vol. 53, 2017, pp. 11–19.
45.
MayX.ErmansT.HooftmanN.Company Cars: Identifying the Problems and Challenges of a Tax System. Notes de Synthèse n°113. Brussels Studies, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4000/brussels.2499.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
