Key features
In bike share schemes, bicycles are made available for members of the public to use for limited periods, after registration and payment. All systems have bicycles that can be used in return for payment, so a registration and payment system is required, which is increasingly electronic. Most systems also have docking stations or hubs where bicycles need to be or are encouraged to be left, depending on the extent to which the technology is either on the bicycle or on the docking stand. Dockless bike sharing schemes – facilitated by electronic tracking and payment – are becoming popular in some places.
Bicycle rental schemes allow individuals to rent a bicycle for a period of time for a fixed fee. Bicycles are usually rented from, and returned to, the same manned location. However, some larger schemes have a number of collection/drop off points within a city/region. They are aimed primarily at tourists, although can also be used by citizens and commuters.
Bicycle rental schemes differ from bike sharing schemes in that the user typically (but not always) collects and deposits the bicycle from the same location and the bicycle is usually used for a longer period of time (e.g. half a day or a full day compared to the short periods that normally characterises bike sharing). Additionally, one bike is used for the whole rental period, whereas a bike share user could use multiple bikes on a number of one-way journeys in the same time period.
Function and objectives
Bike sharing – and, to an extent, bike rental – are additional ‘mobility service’, one that facilitates a different form of mobility, usually within urban areas, to complement other forms of mobility, particularly public transport and walking. Indeed, if promoted in conjunction with public transport, bike share schemes can enable people to access a much broader area of a city, first using public transport and then a shared bike (or the other way round).
Bike share schemes and bike rental services enable those who are either reluctant to or do not have the means to, buy a bike or do not have the space to store a bike to use to travel around the city. They also provide those visiting a city with access to a bicycle to make local trips or to explore the city (where transporting their own bicycle to the city is difficult, or as part of the tourist experience).
The visibility of bike share schemes – their docking stations and the bicycles being used around the city – also helps to promote cycling in the city and to increase its visibility.
Bike share schemes are relatively cheap to use; bike rental typically costs more (as they are rented over longer periods). Most bike share schemes can be used for a minimal annual subscription. Shorter subscriptions, including weekly and daily passes, can sometimes be bought. While the use of bicycles belonging to some bike share schemes is free for an initial limited period (see the examples of Seville and Ljubljana), others have a ‘pay-as-you-cycle’ option (see Brighton’s example).
Bike sharing schemes range from free-floating services, over which public authorities have minimal control, to services that are fully implemented and operated by public authorities. In between, there are various options for involving the private sector. These include:
- Handing over the responsibility for the development and operation of the scheme to a company as part of a public-private partnership (as in the case of Sevilla and Ljubljana);
- Keeping ownership in the public sector, but contracting out the operation of the scheme (e.g. in Brighton); and
- Undertaking the development and operation of the scheme within the city authority and contracting out only minor elements, such as bicycle redistribution and maintenance (as is the case in Budapest).
The different options are associated with differing degrees of control and responsibility. Taking too much in-house may prevent the dynamic development of the scheme, compared to if it were operated by the private sector; on the other hand, if the private sector has responsibility for the development of the scheme, commercial considerations may act as a barrier to its development.
The type of bicycles that are included in a bike share scheme and bicycle rental services also varies. Most consist predominantly of ‘conventional’ bicycles, i.e. bicycles that are solely ’pedal-powered’ and so have no electric motor. Increasingly, cities are including, or are considering including, electric bicycles in their bike share schemes that have previously consisted only of ‘conventional’ bicycles, e.g. Burgas and Brighton. Some cities, such as Águeda and Slatina, have introduced electric bicycle share schemes as a result of their topography or the type of journey they wanted to promote. If a bike share scheme has electric bicycles, consideration needs to be given to whether or not electric bicycle charging facilities need to be included in (selected) docking stations and if so, where and how many. Bike share schemes and rental services could also include cargo bicycles.
Complementary measures
Bike share schemes should be used in conjunction with other measures to encourage cycling. As the aim of many schemes is to encourage people who do not cycle to start cycling, shared bikes must be safe and easy to use. Consequently, a safe cycling network in the city, which incorporates best practise design of cycle paths (e.g. 1.2 Cycle tracks, 1.1 Cycle lanes, 1.4 Grade-separated crossings) and 1.5 Intersections, will attract more users of bike share schemes. Additionally, push measures ( 4.2 Traffic restrictions and charges ) that increase the attraction of cycling, such as parking restrictions, higher parking charges, speed limit reduction or access restrictions for motorised traffic, should also be considered.
Performance
On their own, the use of shared bikes is likely to be only a small proportion of the cycling undertaken in most cities, let alone the total amount of travel undertaken. For example, in Budapest, it is estimated that the bike share scheme, which has between 1,000 and 4,000 trips a day, accounts for only between 1-2% of the total number of daily cycling trips in the city. Clearly, the extent to which a scheme is used will depend on the scale of the scheme itself and the wider context of the specific city in which it has been implemented. However, a scheme can still generate a significant number of journeys, e.g. Sevilla’s scheme has settled down to four million trips per year – equivalent to 11,000 a day – from its peak in 2009 of over six million trips a year.
On its own, therefore, a public bike sharing scheme is unlikely to have a significant impact in the city. While regular use of a shared bike could have a significant benefit for the health of an individual, a bike share scheme is unlikely to have a noticeable effect on the health of the city’s population more generally. The main impacts, as noted above, are likely to be in relation to improving accessibility and in increasing the visibility of cycling. For example, in Burgas, the increased use of its bike share scheme has been accompanied by an increase in the purchase of bicycles in the city, which has led to a large increase in the number of bicycle shops.
Parameters of success or failure
Shared and rented bikes provide people with the opportunity to use bicycles without the burden of ownership, and the accompanying concerns with storage, theft prevention and maintenance.
While a bike share scheme is potentially beneficial in a city with any level of cycling, introducing a bike share scheme in a city with low levels of cycling is a potentially useful way of increasing the visibility of cycling and of signalling the city authority’s intention to support cycling in the city. Two of the European cities that are now well known for their high levels of cycling, Amsterdam and Copenhagen, both introduced bike share schemes early on in the development of cycling in their cities.
Other measures are also important. For example, the development of safe cycling infrastructure is important to encourage the use of shared bicycles, as well as to encourage others to cycle. Measures to make car use more difficult in certain areas, for example, speed reductions, parking and/or access restrictions, will also help encourage the use of the bike share scheme.
Resources will be needed to set up the scheme and potentially to operate it, although there are models where the scheme is operated privately as part of a partnership with the private sector (see the examples of Seville and Ljubljana).
The location of docking stations is of fundamental importance (see NACTO, 2016). These need to be located where people would potentially cycle to and from, i.e. at the main centres of attraction in the city, and also at public transport nodes to support intermodal integration. Within these locations, docking stations also need to be in positions that are safe and secure, so not putting users in danger from motorised traffic, for example. Even with the best allocation of docking stations, it is likely that there will be a need to redistribute some bicycles at some point, so provision needs to be made for this. Consideration could also be given to integrating the scheme’s registration and payment systems with other similar systems in the city, including the public transport payment system.
Consideration also needs to be given to the space that is used. Finding the necessary space, particularly in historic centres, can be a major challenge. Docking stations could be placed in pedestrian zones, or may need to use space that was previously used for car parking. Hence, the scheme needs to be implemented with the necessary consideration of, and integration with, these other modes.
In order to be attractive to, and safe for, a wide range of users, the bicycles in a bike share scheme need to be designed to ensure that they are easy to use in urban areas. Their design should take into account that they will be used by people of different cycling abilities. The bikes also need to be of a design that people will be happy to use, but not necessarily own. Registration – either physically at a docking station, or online or via a phone app – also needs to be quick and simple. It is important to keep schemes simple so that their design is not a barrier to their use.
A bike share scheme could also be used as a means of introducing users to different types of technology in the transport context, such as the use of apps, smart cards and travel planners. In this way, a bike share scheme potentially provides a starting point to roll out such technologies in the wider transport system and to also prepare the population for the development of other mobility services, including car sharing.
When a bike share scheme has electric bikes, attention needs to be paid to how to ensure that an electric bike is suitably charged for the needs of the next user. An option might be to ensure that the information on the battery level is made accessible to potential users. It will also be important to consider providing electric bicycle charging points in (at least some of) the docking stations, depending on the number of electric bicycles that are available.
Key lessons for transferability
- Ensure good cooperation with bike share provider, regardless of the type of bike sharing scheme introduced (fixed docking stations or free-floating service) or who operates it. Schemes with fixed docking stations require a close working relationship between the city’s authorities and the scheme’s operator, both for day-to-day operations and for the future development of the scheme. Feedback from the operator is important to enable the city to monitor the performance of the scheme and to plan its development. For free-floating services, it is important for a city administration to work with operators to agree on a basic set of rules to govern their operation.
- Branding is important to help engage locals with the scheme - the naming and branding of a bike share scheme are important to help locals accept and use the scheme. Schemes usually include a reference to the city in their names, for example, SEVici in Sevilla, BICIKE(LJ) in Ljubljana, Velo Burgas, BeAgueda, MOL BuBi (from ‘Budapest’ and ‘Bicikli’) and BTN BikeShare (Brighton). The bikes in the BTN BikeShare scheme have the same distinctive colours as much of the city’s other city infrastructure, e.g. taxis and the railings within the city. All this helps residents to feel that the scheme is being developed for them by their city.
- Engagement, promotion and communication are important: A bike share scheme is usually implemented in a city that has not previously had such a scheme. The technology for docking the bikes, and the systems used for registration and payment, will also be new, and possibly different to schemes that people may have used in other cities. Hence, when developing the scheme, it is important to engage with the city’s stakeholders, including its various major landowners, such as shopping centres, and public transport operators. Once implemented, the scheme needs to be promoted. The way to use the scheme must also be communicated using a range of different methods in simple and accessible language.
- Take time to learn from the experience of other cities: An ever-increasing number of cities have implemented a shared bike system. Each will have implemented it slightly differently, using different models of ownership and operation, as well as different fare structures and technology. In doing so, these cities have developed a wealth of experience. Cities that are considering implementing a bike share scheme can learn from this experience to find out what type of scheme is right for them. They can also learn what cities would, in hindsight, have done differently.
- Enforcement of free-floating bike share systems can be a challenge for cities: As noted above, good cooperation with the operators of free-floating bike shares is important to agree on a set of operating rules for the city. However, the enforcement of these rules is still a challenge and tends to rely on complaints from members of the public. Otherwise, enforcement falls to other parts of the public sector, which already have many demands on their limited resources.
