Article Information

DEMAND FOR CARSHARING IN RUSSIA: A PORTRAIT OF POTENTIAL USERS

Alena Nefedova (anefedova@hse.ru),

Konstantin Fursov (kfursov@hse.ru)

National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow, Russia

Citation: Nefedova A., Fursov K. (2019 Spros na karshering v Rossii: portret potentsial'nykh pol'zovateley [Demand for Carsharing in Russia: A Portrait of Potential Users]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 22(6): 150–171. https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2019.22.6.9 (in Russian).

Abstract. Attractiveness of technology model of car rental where people rent cars for short periods of time (car sharing) is increasing among users across the globe. Aimed at solving the problem of road congestion, it has already gained substantial support from national governments as well as from the Millennials, who accepted the idea of shared economy. However, the range of potential users of car sharing is much wider. This raises the question of the people’s readiness to adopt not only the newest technology, but also the model of social relations that it brings in. Scholars have been addressing the issue in relatively few studies, paying closer attention to the analysis of social and demographic characteristics of potential users. At the same time, the question of value attitudes of the respondents, defining their further behavioral patterns, often remains untouched. The purpose of this paper is to eliminate the gap. A suggested answer to the question of who are potential users of carsharing technology in Russia is based on the results of the all-Russian representative population survey conducted in 2015. In addition to variables that demonstrate the social and demographic profile of respondents interested in this technology (similar to previous research), our analysis includes public attitudes to science and technology and the propensity to consume technological innovations. As additional explanatory variables we considered values shared by potential cars haring users. The overall level of interest in technology was assessed as high — 29,5 % of the respondents expressed a desire to try it. It was found that the tendency to use car sharing, in addition to age, availability of a driver’s license and the fact of living in a big city, is positively influenced by the respondents’ values shared by the group of “early adopters” of technological innovations, i.e. the propensity for self-expression and positive attitudes towards science and technology.

Keywords: car sharing in Russia, demand for technology, potential users, new transport technologies, cost-sharing economy, diffusion of innovations.

References

Abou-Zeid M., Ben-Akiva M. (2012) Well-being and activity-based models. Transportation, 39(6): 1189-1207.

Anable J., Gatersleben B. (2005) All work and no play? The role of instrumental and affective factors in work and leisure journeys by different travel modes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(2–3): 163–181.

Baptista P., Melo S., Rolim C. (2014) Energy, environmental and mobility impacts of car-sharing systems. Empirical results from Lisbon, Portugal. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 111: 28–37.

Becker H., Ciari F., Axhausen K.W. (2017) Comparing car-sharing schemes in Switzerland: User groups and usage patterns. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 97: 17–29.

Beirão G., Cabral J.S. (2007) Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study. Transport policy, 14(6): 478–489.

Botsman R., Rogers R. (2011) What's mine is yours: how collaborative consumption is changing the way we live. Vol. 5. London: Collins.

Burghard, U., Dütschke, E. (2019) Who wants shared mobility? Lessons from early adopters and mainstream drivers on electric carsharing in Germany. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 71: 96-109.

Burkhardt J.E., Millard-Ball A. (2006) Who is attracted to carsharing? Transportation Research Record, 1: 98–105.

Clewlow R.R. (2016) Carsharing and sustainable travel behavior: Results from the San Francisco Bay Area. Transport Policy, 51: 158–164.

Coll M.H., Vandersmissen M.H., Thériault M. (2014) Modeling spatio-temporal diffusion of carsharing membership in Québec City. Journal of Transport Geography, 38: 22–37.

Correia G., Viegas J.M. (2011) Carpooling and carpool clubs: Clarifying concepts and assessing value enhancement possibilities through a Stated Preference web survey in Lisbon, Portugal. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 45(2): 81–90.

Davis F. D., Bagozzi R.P., Warshaw P.R. (1989) User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8): 982-1003.

De Luca S., Di Pace R. (2015) Modelling users’ behaviour in inter-urban carsharing program: A stated preference approach. Transportation research part A: policy and practice, 71: 59–76.

Dowling R., Maalsen S., Kent J.L. (2018) Sharing as sociomaterial practice: Car sharing and the material reconstitution of automobility. Geoforum, 88: 10–16.

Edler J., Georghiou L. (2007) Public procurement and innovation — Resurrecting the demand side. Research policy, 36(7): 949–963.

Efthymiou D., Antoniou C., Waddell P. (2013) Factors affecting the adoption of vehicle sharing systems by young drivers. Transport policy, 29: 64–73.

Enoch M.P., Taylor J. (2006) A worldwide review of support mechanisms for car clubs. Transport Policy, 13(5): 434–443.

Ferrero F., Perboli G., Rosano M., Vesco A. (2018) Car-sharing services: An annotated review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 37: 501–518.

Firnkorn J., Müller M. (2011) What will be the environmental effects of new free-floating car-sharing systems? The case of car2go in Ulm. Ecological Economics, 70(8): 1519–1528.

Goldman T., Gorham R. (2006) Sustainable urban transport: Four innovative directions. Technology in society, 28(1–2): 261–273.

Goodwin K.J. (2010) Reconstructing automobility: the making and breaking of modern transportation. Global Environmental Politics, 10(4): 60–78.

Graham-Rowe E., Gardner B., Abraham C., Skippon S., Dittmar H., Hutchins R., Stannard J. (2012) Mainstream consumers driving plug-in battery-electric and plug-in hybrid electric cars: A qualitative analysis of responses and evaluations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(1): 140-153.

Hinkeldein D., Schoenduwe R., Graff A., Hoffmann C. (2015) Who Would Use Integrated Sustainable Mobility Services–And Why? Sustainable urban transport, 7: 177–203.

Kawgan-Kagan I. (2015) Early adopters of carsharing with and without BEVs with respect to gender preferences. European Transport Research Review, 7: 33.

Koftunkin D. (2011) Razvitiye obshchestva potrebleniya v Rossii: kreditnyy faktor [Development of a consumer society in Russia: a credit factor]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 14(5): 99–107 (in Russian).

Kyriakidis M., Happee R., De Winter J.C. (2015) Public Opinion on Automated Driving: Results of an International Questionnaire among 5000 Respondents.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 32: 127–40.

Le Vine S., Lee-Gosselin M., Sivakumar A., Polak J. (2014) A new approach to predict the market and impacts of round-trip and point-to-point carsharing systems: case study of London. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 32: 218–229.

Metz D. (2012) Demographic determinants of daily travel demand. Transport Policy, 21: 20–25.

Miller D. (2005) Materiality: an introduction. Materiality, 1: 1-50.

Miller J.D. (2010) The conceptualization and measurement of civic scientific literacy for the twenty-first century. Science and the educated American: A core component of liberal education, 136: 241-255.

Miller J.D. (2004) Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13(3): 273-294.

Paundra J., Rook L., van Dalen J., Ketter W. (2017) Preferences for car sharing services: Effects of instrumental attributes and psychological ownership. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 53: 121–130.

Plötz P., Schneider U., Globisch J., Dütschke E. (2014) Who will buy electric vehicles? Identifying early adopters in Germany. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 67: 96–109.

Prieto M., Baltas G., Stan V. (2017) Car sharing adoption intention in urban areas: What are the key sociodemographic drivers? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 101: 218–227.

Rödel C., Stadler S., Meschtscherjakov A., Tscheligi M. (2014) Towards autonomous cars: the effect of autonomy levels on acceptance and user experience. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: 1–8.

Rogers E. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations. The Free Press.

Schwartz S. H., Bilsky W. (1987) Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53(3): 550-562.

Shaheen S.A., Cohen A.P., Chung M.S. (2009) North American carsharing: 10-year retrospective. Transportation Research Record, 2110(1): 35–44.

Shuvalova O.R. (2010) Indikatory innovacionnogo klimata v Rossii (po itogam massovyh oprosov naseleniya) [Indicators of Innovation Climate in Russia (Results of Mass Population Surveys)]. Foresight, 4(1): 38-52 (in Russian).

Siegrist M.A. (1999) Causal Model Explaining the Perception and Acceptance of Gene Technology. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(10): 2093-2106.

Skippon S., Garwood M. (2011) Responses to battery electric vehicles: UK consumer attitudes and attributions of symbolic meaning following direct experience to reduce psychological distance. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(7): 525-531.

Steg L. (2005) Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(2–3): 147–162.

Urry J. (2012) Mobilnosti [Mobilities]. M.: Praxis (in Russian).

Van Wee B. (2009) Self-selection: a key to a better understanding of location choices, travel behaviour and transport externalities? Transport reviews, 29(3): 279-292.

Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. (1996) A model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test. Decision Sciences, 27(3): 451-481.

Zoepf S.M., Keith D.R. (2016) User decision-making and technology choices in the US carsharing market. Transport Policy, 51: 150–157.