PL
 |
EN

PL EN

Preferencje help
Polish version English version Język
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
Tytuł artykułu

Bike-sharing-boom – rozwój nowych form zrównoważonego transportu w Polsce na przykładzie roweru publicznego

Autorzy
Kwiatkowski Michał Adam
Treść / Zawartość
Pełne teksty:
04_kwiatkowski_bike_sharing_boom_rozwoj_nowych_form_zrownowazonego_transportu_2018_3.pdf
Identyfikatory
DOI
10.4467/2543859XPKG.18.017.10142
Warianty tytułu
EN
Bike-sharing-boom – development of new forms of sustainable transport in Poland on the example of a public bicycle
Języki publikacji
PL
Abstrakty
PL
System roweru publicznego (bike-sharing system) staje się coraz bardziej powszechnym elementem systemu transportowego w przestrzeni miast w Polsce i na świecie. Do głównych powodów wprowadzania tego rozwiązania na obszarach miejskich zaliczyć można potrzebę zwiększenia wydajności miejskich systemów transportowych oraz dążenie do ograniczenia problemów tworzących się wskutek presji tradycyjnych środków transportu na środowisko. Rower publiczny z powodzeniem staje się także elementem transportu multimodalnego łącząc się z innymi środkami transportu publicznego. W Polsce bike-sharing funkcjonuje od 2008 r. rozszerzając swój zasięg z każdym kolejnym rokiem o nowe miasta, a także obszary wiejskie. W opracowaniu przeanalizowano zmiany liczby systemów w Polsce w latach 2017-2018 – w okresie największego rozwoju tej formy transportu na badanym obszarze. Analizę wykonano w oparciu o wskaźniki liczby stacji roweru publicznego na określonej powierzchni oraz liczby rowerów na tle liczby mieszkańców analizowanych miejscowości. W pracy porównano także cenniki wypożyczeń rowerów dla poszczególnych systemów funkcjonujących w Polsce. Na podstawie przeanalizowanych danych wyznaczono także kierunki rozwoju roweru publicznego w Polsce.
EN
The public bicycle system (bike-sharing system) is becoming an increasingly common element of the transport system in urban space in Poland and in the world. The main reasons for implementing this solution in urban areas include the need to increase the efficiency of urban transport systems and to reduce the problems created by the pressure of traditional means of transport on the environment. Public bike is also successfully becoming an element of multimodal transport by connecting with other public transport. In Poland, bike-sharing has been operating since 2008, expanding its range with each subsequent year for new cities, as well as rural areas. The study analyzed changes in the number of systems in Poland in 2017-2018 – in the period of the greatest development of this form of transport in the studied area. The analysis was based on the indicators of the number of public bicycle stations on a given area and the number of bicycles on the background of the number of inhabitants of the analyzed cities. The work also compared bicycle rental rates for individual systems operating in Poland. On the basis of the analyzed data, the directions of public bicycle development in Poland were also determined.
Słowa kluczowe
PL
EN
Wydawca
Komisja Geografii Komunikacji Polskiego Towarzystwa Geograficznego
Uniwersytet Gdański. Katedra Geografii Rozwoju Regionalnego
Czasopismo
Prace Komisji Geografii Komunikacji PTG
Rocznik
2018
Tom
nr 21(3)
Strony
60--69
Opis fizyczny
Bibliogr. 115 poz., tab., wykr.
Twórcy
autor
Kwiatkowski Michał Adam
kwiat@doktorant.umk.pl
  • Katedra Studiów Miejskich i Rozwoju Regionalnego, Wydział Nauk o Ziemi, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, ul. Lwowska 1, 87-100 Toruń
Bibliografia
  • [1] Aldred R., 2016, Cycling near misses: Their frequency, impact, and prevention, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 90, s. 69-83.
  • [2] Alexandros N., Pontus W., Oskar R., 2016, The paradox of public acceptance of bike sharing in Gothenburg, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Engineering Sustainability, 169, 3, s. 101-113.
  • [3] Bauman A., Crane M., Drayton B.A., Titze S., 2017, The unrealized potential of bike share schemes to influence population physical activity levels – A narrative review, Preventive Medicine, 103, Supplement, s. S7-S14.
  • [4] Behrendt F., 2016, Why cycling matters for Smart Cities. Internet of Bicycles for Intelligent Transport, Journal of Transport Geography, 56, s. 157-164.
  • [5] Bejarano M., Ceballos L.M., Maya J., 2017, A user-centred assessment of a new bicycle sharing system in Medellin, Transportation Research Part F, 44, s. 145-158.
  • [6] Belanche D., Casaló L.V., Orus C., 2016, City attachment and use of urban services: Benefits for smart cities, Cities, 50, s. 75-81.
  • [7] Benevolo C., Dameri R.P., d’Auria B., 2016, Smart Mobility in Smart City [w:] T. Torre, A. Braccini, R. Spinelli (red.), Empowering Organizations, Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, 11, Springer, Cham, s. 13-28.
  • [8] Bordagaray M., Ibeas A., dell’Olio L., 2012, Modeling user perception of public bicycle services, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 54, s. 1308-1316.
  • [9] Böcker L., Dijst M., Faber J., 2016, Weather, transport mode choices and emotional travel experiences, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94, s. 360-373.
  • [10] Böcker L., Meelen T., 2017, Sharing for people, planet or profit? Analysing motivations for intended sharing economy participation, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23, s. 28-39.
  • [11] Brinkmann J., Ulmer M.W., Mattfeld D.C., 2015, Short-term Strategies for Stochastic Inventory Routing in Bike Sharing Systems, Transportation Research Procedia, 10, s. 364-373.
  • [12] Caulfield B., O’Mahony M., Brazil W., Weldon P., 2017, Examining usage patterns of a bike-sharing scheme in a medium sized city, Transportation Research Part A, 100, s. 152-161.
  • [13] Cohen B., Kietzmann J., 2014, Ride On! Mobility Business Models for the Sharing Economy, Organization & Environment, 27 (3), s. 279-296.
  • [14] Cole-Hunter T., Donaire-Gonzalez D., Curto A., Ambros A., Valentin A., Garcia-Aymerich J., Martinez D., Braun L.M., Mendez M., Jerrett M., Rodriguez D., de Nazelle A., Nieuwenhuijsen M., 2015, Objective correlates and determinants of bicycle commuting propensity in an urban environment, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 40, s. 132-143.
  • [15] Cruz F., Subramanian A., Bruck B.P., Iori M., 2017, A heuristic algorithm for a single vehicle static bike sharing rebalancing problem, Computers & Operations Research, 79, s. 19-33.
  • [16] De Chardon C.M., Caruso G., Thomas I., 2016, Bike-share rebalancing strategies, patterns, and purpose, Journal of Transport Geography, 55, s. 22-39.
  • [17] De Chardon C.M., Caruso G., Thomas I., 2017, Bicycle sharing system ‘success’ determinants, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 100, s. 202-214.
  • [18] Dell’Amico M., Iori M., Novellani S., Stützle T., 2016, A destroy and repair algorithm for the Bike sharing Rebalancing Problem, Computers & Operations Research, 71, s. 149-162.
  • [19] DeMaio P., 2009, Bike-sharing: History, Impacts, Models of Provision, and Future, Journal of Public Transportation, 12(4), s. 41-56.
  • [20] Duran A.C., Anaya-Boig E., Shake J.D., Garcia L.M.T., De Rezende L.F.M., De Sa T.H., 2018, Bicycle-sharing system socio-spatial inequalities in Brazil, Journal of Transport & Health, In Press, Corrected Proof.
  • [21] Faghih-Imani A., Hampshire R., Marla L., Eluru N., 2017, An empirical analysis of bike sharing usage and rebalancing: Evidence from Barcelona and Seville, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 97, s. 177-191.
  • [22] Feng C., Hillston J., Reijsbergen D., 2017, Moment-based availability prediction for bike-sharing systems, Performance Evaluation, 117, s. 58-74.
  • [23] Fishman E., Schepers P., 2016, Global bike share: What the data tells us about road safety, Journal of Safety Research, 56, s. 41-45.
  • [24] Fishman E., Washington S., Haworth N.L., 2013, Bike share: a synthesis of literature, Transport Reviews, 33, 2, s. 148-165.
  • [25] Fishman E., Washington S., Haworth N., 2014, Bike share’s impact on car use: Evidence from the United States, Great Britain, and Australia, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 31, s. 13-20.
  • [26] Fricker C., Gast N., 2016, Incentives and redistribution in homogeneous bike-sharing systems with stations of finite capacity, Euro Journal on Transportation and Logistics, 5, 3, s. 261-291.
  • [27] Ganapati S., Reddick C.G., 2018, Prospects and challenges of sharing economy for the public sector, Government Information Quarterly, In Press, Corrected Proof.
  • [28] García-Palomares J.C., Gutiérrez J., Latorre M., 2012, Optimizing the location of stations in bike-sharing programs: A GIS approach, Applied Geography, 35, 1-2, s. 235-246.
  • [29] Gast N., Massonnet G., Reijsbergen D., 2015, Probabilistic Forecasts of Bike-Sharing Systems for Journey Planning, The 24th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM 2015), Oct 2015, Melbourne, Australia, Proceeding of the 24th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM 2015).
  • [30] Geels F.W., 2012, A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies, Journal of Transport Geography, 24, s. 471-482.
  • [31] Godelnik R., 2017, Millennials and the sharing economy: Lessons from a ‘buy nothing new, share everything month’ project, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23, s. 40-52.
  • [32] Jappinen S., Toivonen T., Salonen M., 2013, Modelling the potential effect of shared bicycles on public transport travel times in Greater Helsinki: An open data approach, Applied Geography, 43, s. 13-24.
  • [33] Jin S.T., Kong H., Wu R., Sui D.Z., 2018, Ridesourcing, the sharing economy, and the future of cities, Cities, In Press, Corrected Proof.
  • [34] Kaplan S., Manca F., Nielsen T.A.S., Prato C.G., 2015, Intentions to use bike-sharing for holiday cycling: An application of Theory of Planned Behavior, Tourism Management, 47, s. 34-46.
  • [35] Kaspi M., Raviv T., Tzur M., 2016, Detection of unusable bicycles in bike-sharing systems, Omega, 65, s. 10-16.
  • [36] Kaspi M., Raviv T., Tzur M., 2017, Bike-sharing systems: User dissatisfaction in the presence of unusable bicycles, IISE Transactions, 49, 2, s. 144-158.
  • [37] Kim K., 2018, Investigation on the effects of weather and calendar events on bike-sharing according to the trip patterns of bike rentals of stations, Journal of Transport Geography, 66, s. 309-320.
  • [38] Klein N.J., Smart M.J., 2017, Millennials and car ownership: Less money, fewer cars, Transport Policy, 53, s. 20-29.
  • [39] Lin J.R., Yang T.H., 2011, Strategic design of public bicycle sharing systems with service level constraints, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 47, 2, s. 284-294.
  • [40] Midgley P., 2009, The Role of Smart Bike-sharing Systems in Urban Mobility, Journeys, 2, 2, s. 23-31.
  • [41] Mugion R.G., Toni M., Raharjo H., Di Pietro L., Sebathu S.P., 2018, Does the service quality of urban public transport enhance sustainable mobility?, Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, s. 1566-1587.
  • [42] Newbold K.B., Scott D.M., 2018, Insights into public transport use by Millennials: The Canadian experience, Travel Behaviour and Society, 11, s. 62-68.
  • [43] Papagiannakis A., Baraklianos I., Spyridonidou A., 2017, Urban travel behavior and household income in times of economic crisis: Challenges and perspectives for sustainable mobility, Transport Policy, In Press, Corrected Proof.
  • [44] Raux C., Zoubir A., Geyik M., 2017, Who are bike sharing schemes members and do they travel differently? The case of Lyon’s “Velo’v” scheme, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 106, s. 350-363.
  • [45] Raviv T., Kolka O., 2013, Optimal inventory management of a bike-sharing station, IIE Transactions, 45, 10, s. 1077-1093.
  • [46] Regue R., Recker W., 2014, Proactive vehicle routing with inferred demand to solve the bikesharing rebalancing problem, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 72, s. 192-209.
  • [47] Ricci M., 2015, Bike sharing: A review of evidence on impacts and processes of implementation and operation, Research in Transportation Business & Management, 15, June 2015, s. 28-38.
  • [48] Roh T.H., 2016, The Sharing Economy: Business Cases of Social Enterprises Using Collaborative Networks, Procedia Computer Science, 91, s. 502-511.
  • [49] Schneider O., 2015, Wypożyczalnia rowerów w polityce transportowej miast, Przegląd Komunalny, 3(282), s. 44-47.
  • [50] Shaheen S., Guzman S., Zhang H., 2010, Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, Present, and Future, Transportation Research Record, 2143, s. 159-167.
  • [51] Sierpiński G., 2012, Zachowania komunikacyjne osób podróżujących a wybór środka transportu w mieście, Prace Naukowe Politechniki Warszawskiej, 84, Transport, s. 93-106.
  • [52] Tran T.D., Ovtracht N., d’Arcier B.F., 2015, Modeling Bike Sharing System using Built Environment Factors, Procedia CIRP, 30, s. 293-298.
  • [53] Vogel P., Greiser T., Mattfeld D. C., 2011, Understanding Bike-Sharing Systems Using Data Mining: Exploring Activity Patterns, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, s. 514-523.
  • [54] Wang M., Zhou X., 2017, Bike-sharing systems and congestion: Evidence from US cities, Journal of Transport Geography, 65, s. 147-154.
  • [55] Werneke J., Dozza M., Karlsson M., 2015, Safety-critical events in everyday cycling – Interviews with bicyclists and video annotation of safety-critical events in a naturalistic cycling study, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 35, s. 199-212.
  • [56] Zalewski A., 2009, Modele ruchu rowerowego w miastach i aglomeracjach, Zeszyty Naukowo-Techniczne SITK RP, Oddział w Krakowie, 148, s. 263-274.
  • [57] Zhang L., Zhang J., Zheng-Yu D., Bryde D., 2015, Sustainable bike-sharing systems: characteristics and commonalities across cases in urban China, Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, s. 124-133.
  • [58] Zhang Y., Brussel M.J.G., Thomas T., Van Maarseveen M.F.A.M., 2018, Mining bike-sharing travel behavior data: An investigation into trip chains and transition activities, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, In Press, Corrected Proof.
  • Źródła internetowe:
  • [59] https://bdl.stat.gov.pl/BDL/start [28.11.2018].
  • [60] https://bikerbialystok.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [61] https://bikes-srm.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [62] https://kajteroz.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [63] https://rower.czestochowa.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [64] https://ciechanowskirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [65] https://citybybike.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [66] https://gliwickirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [67] https://rowery.grodzisk.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [68] https://rowerjastrzebie.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [69] https://kaliskirowermiejski.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [70] https://okbike.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [71] https://koninskirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [72] https://konstancinskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [73] https://kolobrzeskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [74] https://koszalinskirowermiejski.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [75] https://rower.legnica.eu [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [76] https://lubelskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [77] https://lodzkirowerpubliczny.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [78] https://kolomarek.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [79] https://nextbike.pl/miasta/opole-bike [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [80] https://ostrowskirowermiejski.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [81] https://otwockirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [82] https://pruszkowskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [83] https://piaseczynskirower.pl [10.12.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [84] https://piotrkowskirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [85] https://plockirowermiejski.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [86] https://pszczynskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [87] https://rowery.pobiedziska.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [88] https://nextbike.pl/miasta/poznanski-rower-miejski [.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [89] https://radomskirowermiejski.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [90] https://rower.michalowice.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [91] https://rowery.pielgrzymka.biz [28.11.2018].
  • [92] https://siemianowickirowermiejski.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [93] https://stalowawolamiastorowerow.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [94] https://sosnowieckirowermiejski.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [95] https://swietochlowickirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [96] https://szamotuly.bike [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [97] https://rower.tarnow.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [98] https://tychowskirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [99] https://tyskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [100] https://wroclawskirower.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [101] https://zielonogorskirowermiejski.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [102] https://zyrardowskirower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [103] https://veturilo.waw.pl [08.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [104] https://bikeu.pl/gdzie-jestesmy [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [105] https://polskirowermiejski.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [106] https://rowerzgierz.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [107] https://wavelo.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [108] https://bra.org.pl [8.11.2017, 28.11.2018].
  • [109] https://geovelo.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [110] https://krotower.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [111] https://krotoszyn.pl [8.11.2017].
  • [112] https://chromek.pl [28.11.2018].
  • [113] https://grom.gizycko.pl/grom [28.11.2018].
  • [114] https://brom.bike [28.11.2018].
  • [115] https://orm.bike [28.11.2018].
Uwagi
PL
Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2019).
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.baztech-d1b53ec7-72e4-4b7e-a260-983e68efca1d
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.