1. Determinants of Carsharing Usage: The Case of La Rochelle, France Anjali Awasthi, Satyaveer S Chauhan Concordia University CORS-INFORMS, June 09

2. Sustainability Passenger transport – sustainable mobility Freight transport – Sustainable logistics – Sustainable distribution – Sustainable packaging Congestion

3. The three dimensions of sustainability Social EnvironmentalEconomic

4. CIVITAS European CIVITAS (City Vitality Sustainability) Initiatives helps cities to achieve a more sustainable, clean and energy efficient urban transport system by implementing and evaluating an ambitious, integrated set of technology and policy based measures. Project SUCCESS (Smaller Urban Communities in Civitas for Environmentally Sustainable Solutions): Duration 2005-2009, Project Partners: La Rochelle (FR), Preston (UK), Ploeisti(Romania)

5. ECOSYMPA 198 French (PREDIT) research and development project funded on implementing an offer of shared vehicle systems in combination with other multimodal offers of transport in cities of Poitou Charentes region, France. Project Duration : 1 year (2005-2006) ECOSYMPA (Expérimentation COordonnée de SYstèmes de Mobilité Partagée) en Poitou Charentes Cities involved : Poitiers, La Rochelle, Angouleme, Niort

6. What is carsharing ? Carsharing is an alternative system of car ownership, access and use. The carsharing vehicles are available for client’s use at different stations (24 hours a day, seven days a week) just like a private car. The clients reserve the vehicle in advance and get access to the vehicle at the nearest carsharing station. The entry to the vehicle and the car keys are obtained using a smart card and a PIN code. The billing is affected according to the hours of car use and the mileage driven. Different from ridesharing or car rentals.

7. Elements of carsharing

8. La Rochelle Land area28.43 km 2 Population78,000 (2004) Density2,744 /km²

9. Carsharing in La Rochelle: LISELEC  7 stations, fleet of 50 electric vehicles.  Vehicle types: Peugeot 106 et Citroën Saxo.

10. Factors governing carsharing usage

11. Questionnaire Target groups – Students, City Residents, Businessmen, Commerce, Government Offices Four parts – User Details – Travel behavior – Preferences for new carsharing system – Ratings for potential carsharing stations

12. Part A: User Details

13. Part B:Travel behavior

14. Part C: Carsharing Preferences

15. Part D: Preferences for potential stations

16. Responses received

17. User profile  Most of the respondents are from La Rochelle.  More male respondents than female respondents.  Most of the respondents were in age category of 25–40 years.  The common education level is graduate (Bac2-Bac5).  Most of the respondents are students followed by salaried employees.  Majority of respondents own one car.  More driving licence holders than non-owing ones.  Mostly single members type followed by two-person family house.  Most of the respondents have no children (only children < 18 years are counted).  Most of the respondents are active people (either involved in studies or work).The number of persons without activity is almost negligible.  The average number of private vehicle trips made per week is 5–10 trips/week.  Most of the private vehicle trips inside La Rochelle are professional and shopping types.

18. Travel behaviour  La Rochelle is the most commonly visited destination for shopping/vacation/business trips.  The mean distance travelled for grocery shopping, work, study, other shopping and leisure trips is 0–30 km.  The average durations for work/study/grocery shopping trips is 10–30 minutes.  Private car is the most commonly used transport mode followed by walking, bicycling and bus.  Most of the trips take place in evening time during 17–19 pm.  The highest number of trips take place on Saturday.  The number of public transport users in La Rochelle is very low.  Most of the bus stops are located close to residential/work areas and few of them at more than 1 km distance.

19. Knowledge about carsharing  Most of the people did not know about carsharing.  The most common mode of transmitting information on carsharing is from friends, through internet or practical experience with carsharing.  A high percentage of people expressed interest in knowing more about the carsharing system for future usage.  Not much interest in contributing their own private vehicle from users for carsharing.

20. Carsharing preferences  A two-way system was preferred for return of vehicles after usage.  Trips were preferred for home-work/study trips followed by grocery shopping, other shopping and leisure trips.  The sizes preferred for carsharing vehicles are small (2-door).  Users preferred Clean vehicles (Electric/Hybrid vehicles and biodiesel) edge over fossil fuel vehicles.  Users preferred stations accessible within 500 m.  Most of the customers were willing to pay 1–7 Euros for a carsharing trip.

21. Motivations for using carsharing (in decreasing order of preference)  reducing environmental pollution,  reducing transportation costs,  gaining parking benefits,  facilitating urban mobility,  reduction of insurance costs,  less stress for maintenance of vehicle  no toll .. others.

22. Motivations for not using carsharing (in decreasing order of preference)  uncertainty about availability of vehicle at desired time,  difficulty in anticipating the displacements,  high cost of the system and  feeling of loss in freedom of movement.  system complicated to use  impossibility to leave personal things in the vehicle  impossible to privatise the vehicle  long displacement distances  system perceived as gadget.  others

23. Other carsharing preferences  Many users favoured the use of carsharing vehicles at intercity and regional scale due to reduction of environmental costs, facilitation of mobility at regional scale and economy from their occasional use of private vehicles for long distance trips.  Majority of respondents were interested in using carsharing vehicles to access the city centre by leaving their private vehicles in a parking station outside the city centre (Park-and-Ride).  Businessmen were not very interested in providing their business vehicles for carsharing. About 25% of the businessmen were in favour for it due to ease in parking, facilitation of mobility, availability of vehicles and ecological reasons.

24. Potential station – Camping

25. Potential station - Centre Ville

26. Potential station -Centre ville

27. Potential station - Centre Ville

28. Potential station - Centre Commerciale

29. Potential station – Centre Ville

31. Strengths High response rate (81.4%) from two important categories of respondents namely, city residents and users of existing carsharing system (LISELEC). Involvement of city transportation group members and LISELEC project officiels Real data

32. Limitations  La Rochelle is a medium-sized tourist city, therefore cities with identical conditions can mostly benefit from this study.  Time and access to respondents was a big challenge.  Respondents were a mix of experienced users and beginners. Therefore, the responses had to be validated by checking with city transportation experts in terms of feasibility of implementation, costs and resources involved and profitability to the operator.

33. Take-away lessons Pre-implementation studies are important before launching a new carsharing service in the city. The users favoured technologically up-to-date services for carsharing. For e.g. online reservation of vehicles, display of vehicle locations at parking stations in real time and secure parking. There is a need for good marketing strategies to make carsharing more popular. More target groups need to be explored. For example, entreprises, women, elderly people etc.