1. Breaking Down the Barriers of Bike Shares:
An examination of Bike Share Operations
Emily Hentz Leister, Nicole Vairo
Advisor: Melissa Bopp, Ph.D.
Department of Kinesiology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
Background
Current guidelines recommended by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services suggest 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity every week for adults ages 18 to 64 years of age.1
Physical inactivity is associated with many of the leading causes of death, chronic diseases and disability.2
11.4% of all trips are taken by bicycle or on foot, however, only 2.1% of federal transportation funding goes to bicycling and walking projects.3
Encouraging active travel may provide a realistic approach to increasing physical activity rates in the general population.4
The purpose of this study was to examine factors affecting the operation of bike share systems
Table 1. Perceived Barriers and Motivators for Bike Shares
Residents
Visitors
Mean
Std. Deviation
Barriers
Cost of use
2.78
1.00
1.88
0.78
Awareness of the bike share
3.61
0.85
3.88
Knowledge about how to use bike share
4.00
0.48
4.12
0.33
Lack of confidence in biking skills
3.44
1.29
3.41
1.06
Biking is not a normal transit option for them
3.72
1.32
3.59
0.79
Placement of the bike share options
0.98
2.82
1.07
Lack of Infrastructure to support biking
3.78
1.21
3.53
1.18
Lack of maintenance of bike infrastructure in poor weather
2.50
1.54
2.71
1.53
Difficult terrain
2.39
1.09
2.41
1.12
Poor weather
2.67
1.24
1.26
Motivators 
Economical method of travel
3.83
0.71
3.50
1.10
Traffic congestion in your community
1.11
2.94
1.16
Easy access to stations
4.11
0.90
4.44
Easy to use checkouts and returns
4.06
0.94
More interaction with environment/neighborhood
0.81
4.33
Methods
This was a cross sectional online survey with a volunteer convenience sample representing 23 bike shares from 4 countries.
Recruitment and Participants
Representatives from bike shares were ed an invite to participate in an online survey.
Measures
Description: Number of bikes, number of stations, and average number of minutes bikes were checked out were reported.
Reach: Participants were asked to estimate what percent of trips were taken by women, older adults, children/youth, older adults, and racial/ethnic minorities. They were also asked to describe any special programs offered to these groups.
Perceived Barriers and Motivators: Participants were asked to respond to 10 potential barriers for community residents and visitors on a scale of 1 (not really a barrier) to 5 (very much a barrier). Participants responded to 5 possible motivators for community residents and visitors from 1 (not at all motivating) to 5 (very motivating).
Goals: Participants were asked to group possible goals of the bike share into categories of short term goals, long term goals, and not a priority.
Analysis
Survey analyzed using frequencies and descriptive statistics.
Discussion
The present study analyzes barriers, motivators and goals of bike shares in order to provide researchers and bike share operators with information on how to increase use and reach of bike shares.
Although there was programming for minorities and low income groups, much of the programming offered was through low income housing and not specifically targeted to minorities. More specific targeting for minorities could help increase the reach of bike shares.
According to the goals of the bike shares, rider and driver safety was of lowest priority. In order to improve bikeability of communities it is important to provide safe cycling conditions. Prioritizing safety could help increase ridership and consequently provide major health benefits.7,8
A top barrier for both residents and visitors of bike share communities was knowledge about how to use bike shares. Increasing knowledge of how to use bike shares in the general public could have a large impact on bike share use.
Another common barrier was biking was not a normal transit option for residents and visitors. Disseminating information on the benefits of biking could help make biking a more normal transit option for residents and visitors.
Lack of infrastructure was a noted barrier among residents of bike share communities. Biking infrastructure has been shown to increase both biking and overall health status of a community.5,6
Limitations: Cross sectional survey design, self-report measures, and limited sample size.
Conclusion: Developing better programming, safety consideration, and infrastructure for biking can assist in increasing ridership and reach of bike shares. These changes can have a widespread impact in improving the health of these communities. Collaboration between bike shares and researchers may assist in increasing biking, facilitating in the primary goal of increasing rates of active travel among all populations.
References
1. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. (2008). Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, Washington DC: US Department of Health and Human Services.
2. Bull, F. C., Armstrong, T. P., Dixon, T., Ham, S., Neiman, A., & Pratt, M. (2004). Physical inactivity. Comparative Quantification of Health Risks Global and Regional Burden of Disease Attributable to Selected Major Risk Factors. Geneva: World Health Organization,
3. Alliance for Biking & Walking. Bicycling and Walking in the United States 2014 Benchmarking Report. Washington DC: Alliance for Biking & Walking; 2014:268.
4. De Nazelle, A., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Antó, J. M., Brauer, M., Briggs, D., Braun-Fahrlander, C., ... & Hoek, G. (2011). Improving health through policies that promote active travel: a review of evidence to support integrated health impact assessment. Environment international, 37(4),
5. Winters, M. L. (2011). Improving public health through active transportation : understanding the influence of the built environment on decisions to travel by bicycle (T). University of British Columbia. Retrieved from
6. de Hartog, J. J., Boogaard, H., Nijland, H., & Hoek, G. (2010). Do the Health Benefits of Cycling Outweigh the Risks? Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(8),
7. J Pucher, L Dijkstra. Promoting safe walking and cycling to improve public health: lessons from the Netherlands and Germany. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(9):1509–1516.
Results
Respondents were primarily from the United States (87%, n=20)
The average number of bikes was 591.2± and the average number of stations was 73.2 ±
Bikes were checked out for an average of 30.8 minutes.
Table 1 shows barriers and motivators of bike shares.
Many of the same barriers were common in both residents and visitors of bike share communities with the top barrier being Knowledge about how to use bike shares.
Goals of bike shares are shown in Figure 1
The most urgent goals were increasing users and increasing trips. Increasing helmet use and improving driver and rider safety were not seen as priorities for most of the bike shares.
The estimated demographics of users was % women, 18.13% minorities, 8.8% children, 10.4% adults age 65+, and 12.67% low income.
None of the bike shares in the sample had special programs for women, 25% had programming for minorities and 38.7% had programming for low income.