674
R. H. de Ruiz and L. E. R. C. Rielli
measuring and evaluating the relationships with urban planning, the associated risks
and social and environmental impacts of BSS (Rielli et al. 2019). Therefore, while
the new transport modal brings benefits to cities and people, it can generate negative
social and environmental impacts so far unknown or irrelevant.
The allocation of bicycles must be actively managed by the BSS operator to ensure
efficient system operation (Caggiani et al. 2019). Therefore, in order to actually
reduce emissions, bicycle travel must necessarily replace trips that would be made in
other modals, specially cars. If a BSS cannot replace the use of vehicles at a sufficient
rate to compensate for the extra travels for bike redistribution, the system is causing
additional environmental impacts and congestion (Luo et al. 2019). In London, for
example, the adoption of BSS registered an additional nearly 800,000 km of motor
vehicle usage in the city, due to the low replacement rate of cars and the high use of
trucks for bicycle relocation (Fishman et al. 2014).
In addition, the manufacture of bicycles and electronic components and the sharing
infrastructure demand resource and energy use that generates waste and emissions.
Production above demand can also lead to the waste of resources and waste management issues (Luo et al. 2019), as happened in Shanghai, a case that will be discussed
later in this paper.
2 Brief History of Bike Sharing Systems (BSS) Worldwide
Bike sharing systems (BSS) are a set of stations spread throughout the urban network,
containing bicycles available for the users to travel (Saraiva et al. 2019).
The evolution of bike sharing is usually divided into four generations. The
first generation of BSS, called “White Bikes” or “Free Bike Systems”, started in
Amsterdam in 1965. Ordinary bicycles were left around the city unlocked and could
be used for free. Constant thefts, however, motivated the emergence of the second
generation of BSS, the “Coin-Deposit Systems”. So, in 1995, the city of Copenhagen
launched the first large-scale BSS, which had bikes placed in stations around the city
that were unlocked by a coin deposit of approximately US$ 3, refunded upon bicycle
return. These systems did not have a time limit, which often resulted in long-term use
or bikes not being returned, a fact commonly attributed to the anonymity of program
users (Shaheen et al. 2010; Si et al. 2019; Scott et al. 2019).
These two generations were considered unsuccessful, but their shortcomings
served as learning for the next generation of BSS, the “IT Based Systems”, which use
advanced technologies for bicycle reservations, pick-up, drop-off and information
tracking and popularized bike sharing throughout the world. The use of technology
information has helped prevent bicycle theft by removing anonymity and allowing
fines to be charged if the bicycle is not returned. The success of the third generation has
increased the number of providers of this service and, consequently, developed new
business models and specific technologies. Operators range from local governments,
transportation agencies, advertising agencies, and for-profit or non-profit entities.
BSS are funded through advertisements, user fees, city halls and/or public–private
R. H. de Ruiz and L. E. R. C. Rielli
measuring and evaluating the relationships with urban planning, the associated risks
and social and environmental impacts of BSS (Rielli et al. 2019). Therefore, while
the new transport modal brings benefits to cities and people, it can generate negative
social and environmental impacts so far unknown or irrelevant.
The allocation of bicycles must be actively managed by the BSS operator to ensure
efficient system operation (Caggiani et al. 2019). Therefore, in order to actually
reduce emissions, bicycle travel must necessarily replace trips that would be made in
other modals, specially cars. If a BSS cannot replace the use of vehicles at a sufficient
rate to compensate for the extra travels for bike redistribution, the system is causing
additional environmental impacts and congestion (Luo et al. 2019). In London, for
example, the adoption of BSS registered an additional nearly 800,000 km of motor
vehicle usage in the city, due to the low replacement rate of cars and the high use of
trucks for bicycle relocation (Fishman et al. 2014).
In addition, the manufacture of bicycles and electronic components and the sharing
infrastructure demand resource and energy use that generates waste and emissions.
Production above demand can also lead to the waste of resources and waste management issues (Luo et al. 2019), as happened in Shanghai, a case that will be discussed
later in this paper.
2 Brief History of Bike Sharing Systems (BSS) Worldwide
Bike sharing systems (BSS) are a set of stations spread throughout the urban network,
containing bicycles available for the users to travel (Saraiva et al. 2019).
The evolution of bike sharing is usually divided into four generations. The
first generation of BSS, called “White Bikes” or “Free Bike Systems”, started in
Amsterdam in 1965. Ordinary bicycles were left around the city unlocked and could
be used for free. Constant thefts, however, motivated the emergence of the second
generation of BSS, the “Coin-Deposit Systems”. So, in 1995, the city of Copenhagen
launched the first large-scale BSS, which had bikes placed in stations around the city
that were unlocked by a coin deposit of approximately US$ 3, refunded upon bicycle
return. These systems did not have a time limit, which often resulted in long-term use
or bikes not being returned, a fact commonly attributed to the anonymity of program
users (Shaheen et al. 2010; Si et al. 2019; Scott et al. 2019).
These two generations were considered unsuccessful, but their shortcomings
served as learning for the next generation of BSS, the “IT Based Systems”, which use
advanced technologies for bicycle reservations, pick-up, drop-off and information
tracking and popularized bike sharing throughout the world. The use of technology
information has helped prevent bicycle theft by removing anonymity and allowing
fines to be charged if the bicycle is not returned. The success of the third generation has
increased the number of providers of this service and, consequently, developed new
business models and specific technologies. Operators range from local governments,
transportation agencies, advertising agencies, and for-profit or non-profit entities.
BSS are funded through advertisements, user fees, city halls and/or public–private