Joint Model of Application-Based Ride Hailing Adoption, Intensity of Use, and Intermediate Public Transport Consideration among Workers in Chennai City

被引:19
作者
Devaraj, Aravinda [1 ]
Ramakrishnan, Ganesh Ambi [1 ]
Nair, Gopindra Sivakumar [2 ]
Srinivasan, Karthik K. [1 ]
Bhat, Chandra R. [2 ,3 ]
Pinjari, Abdul R. [4 ]
Ramadurai, Gitakrishnan [1 ]
Pendyala, Ram M. [5 ]
机构
[1] Indian Inst Technol Madras, Dept Civil Engn, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
[2] Univ Texas Austin, Dept Civil Architectural & Environm Engn, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[3] Hong Kong Polytech Univ, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[4] Indian Inst Sci IISc, CiSTUP, Dept Civil Engn, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
[5] Arizona State Univ, Sch Sustainable Engn & Built Environm, Tempe, AZ USA
关键词
CHOICE MODEL; MOBILITY; UBER; COMPETITION; FRAMEWORK; SERVICES; TRIPS; TAXI;
D O I
10.1177/0361198120912237
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
The introduction of mobile application-based ride hailing services represents a convergence between technologies, supply of vehicles, and demand in near real time. There is growing interest in quantifying the demand for such services from regulatory, operational, and system evaluation perspectives. Several studies model the decision to adopt ride hailing and the extent of the use of ride hailing, either separately or by bundling them into a single choice dimension, disregarding potential endogeneity between these decisions. Unlike developed countries, the literature is sparser for ride hailing in developing countries, where the demand may differ considerably because of differences in vehicle ownership, and availability and patronage of many transit and intermediate public transport (IPT) modes (the shared modes carrying 40% shares in some cases). This study aims to bridge these gaps in the literature by investigating three interrelated choice dimensions among workers in Chennai city: consideration of IPT modes, the adoption of ride hailing services and the subsequent usage intensity of ride hailing services. The main factors influencing these decisions are identified by estimating a trivariate probit model. The results indicate that sociodemographic and locational characteristics and the availability of IPT modes influence ride hailing adoption, whereas work-related constraints and perception of other modes affect its frequency. Work and non-work characteristics affect both the dimensions of ride hailing. Further, endogeneity is observed between ride hailing and IPT adoption after controlling for these variables, whereas evidence of endogeneity is absent among other dimensions. Mainly, the model separates the effect of the exogenous influences on the usage frequency level from their effect on the adoption of ride hailing services.
引用
收藏
页码:152 / 164
页数:13
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   What drives the use of ridehailing in California? Ordered probit models of the usage frequency of Uber and Lyft [J].
Alemi, Farzad ;
Circella, Giovanni ;
Mokhtarian, Patricia ;
Handy, Susan .
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART C-EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, 2019, 102 :233-248
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2018, REF 140518
[3]   An expected consequence approach to assessing the viability of multimodal transportation of crude oil in eastern Canada [J].
Basu, Rounaq ;
Verma, Manish .
Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2017, 5 (03) :518-526
[4]  
Cervero R, 2011, URBAN TRANSPORT IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD: A HANDBOOK OF POLICY AND PRACTICE, P488
[5]  
Clewlow R R., 2017, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, V44, P1307, DOI DOI 10.1139/GEN-44-3-401
[6]  
Cohen A., 2018, Planning for shared mobility
[7]   A behavioral choice model of the use of car-sharing and ride-sourcing services [J].
Dias, Felipe F. ;
Lavieri, Patricia S. ;
Garikapati, Venu M. ;
Astroza, Sebastian ;
Pendyala, Ram M. ;
Bhat, Chandra R. .
TRANSPORTATION, 2017, 44 (06) :1307-1323
[8]  
Dosen I., 2016, UBER RIDESHARING
[9]   The French Taxi Case: Where Competition Meets-and Overrides-Regulation [J].
Eskenazi, Liliana .
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN COMPETITION LAW & PRACTICE, 2014, 5 (08) :551-556
[10]  
Feigon S., 2016, SHARED MOBILITY TRAN